[R-G] The Bouchard-Taylor Commission's Hijacking of 'Gender Equality'

[Macdonald Stainsby]

Gender, Race, and Religious Freedom
The Bouchard-Taylor Commission's Hijacking of 'Gender Equality'

by Anna Carastathis

The Dominion - http://www.dominionpaper.ca

Immigrant rights activists and community members demonstrate during a 
Montreal stop of the Bouchard-Taylor commission in late November. Photo: 
CMAQ

Last November, the West Coast LEAF (Legal Education and Action Fund) 
issued a report based on its Women's Equality and Religious Freedom 
Project (WERF). Some of the overarching questions that the Project 
explored were “What is the nature of religious discrimination 
experienced by women of faith? What are the ways in which women balance 
and navigate the experiences of discrimination and interlocking systems 
of oppression in their daily lives?” The report also addresses specific 
areas such as same-sex marriage; polygamy; use of religious arbitration 
in family law; and immigration law. The full report can be found here.

The Taylor-Bouchard Commission on "reasonable accommodation" in Québec 
has prompted a great deal of commentary on the relationship between 
gender equality and freedom of religion. For instance, the Conseil du 
statut de la femme du Québec (CSF) has recommended that the Québec 
Charter of Rights and Freedoms be amended so that gender equality is 
given relative priority over the right to religious expression.

In light of these developments, the Dominion interviewed Harsha Walia, 
who authored the report based on Advisory Committee discussions, to get 
an anti-racist and feminist perspective.

The Dominion: Why is religious freedom a feminist issue?

Harsha Walia: This is an important issue because the “religious freedom 
debate” actually has less to do with religion or secularism than it does 
with race. Particularly in the post 911 climate, religion is a highly 
politicized, racialized, and publicly constructed identity. For example, 
invoking a Muslim identity is not about defining the beliefs of a person 
of Muslim faith; rather, it is a euphemism for Arabs, Middle Easterners, 
and South Asians (who may not actually be Muslim). In the context of the 
“War on Terror” this racialized imagery is very important, as there is a 
need to have an identifiable ‘enemy’ who is supposedly threatening 
Western values. The use of such language and imagery is rooted in a 
colonial legacy; therefore fighting patriarchy is intrinsically linked 
to fighting colonization and racism.

This is also an issue for feminists because feminism is currently being, 
as it historically has been, co-opted by imperial and colonizing forces. 
Historian Leila Ahmed has written, “Whether in the hands of patriarchal 
men or feminists, the ideas of western feminism essentially functioned 
to morally justify the attack on native societies and to support the 
notion of the comprehensive superiority of Europe.” An increasing number 
of feminists have expressed concerns regarding various state 
interventions on behalf of the “disempowered foreign woman”. For 
example, feminists have questioned the use of “protecting women” as a 
rationale for the occupation of Afghanistan. Similarly, the discourse 
surrounding human trafficking taps into notions of victimized Third 
World women and justifies restrictive border controls.

Dominion: What do you think about the discourse of "reasonable 
accommodation" that has come to dominate public discussions in Québec?

HW: It is astounding how many people who identify themselves as 
pro-feminist are expressing the need to ‘save women from the hijab’ and 
how there needs to be ‘limits to multiculturalism.’

First, it is hypocritical to talk about Canada’s “over-tolerance” of 
multiculturalism when the very nature of the debate positions racialized 
immigrant communities as not ‘belonging’ to Canadian society; as
Outsiders” who need to be accommodated. It reveals the shallow 
self-congratulatory nature of Canadian multiculturalism under which 
rests a fundamentally white national consciousness. Second, such a 
debate aims to portray a sense of victimization where Canadian culture 
is being violated by “Outsiders.” This process of demonization, 
‘othering’ and racism that targets particular communities for greater 
scrutiny has very real consequences in the present day context, being 
used to sell illegal wars and occupations across the globe, and 
restricting the rights and civil liberties of migrants within these borders.

It is also problematic to talk about secularism in a seemingly neutral 
way as it ignores the foundations of Christianity within the Canadian 
state and the violent role that Christianity has played in colonizing 
and assimilating indigenous peoples for example. It is also ironic that 
many of those rejecting the “authority” of religion so readily accept 
the authoritative ideologies of capitalism, consumerism, and liberal 
secularism, which are far more normalized in Western societies.

The most damaging consequence of this debate is that it removes the 
capacity for women’s agency by reinforcing the idea that being a ‘Muslim 
feminist’ for example is impossible; forcing women to accept narrower 
definitions of self, despite occupying multiple locations across 
citizenship, religion, class, sexuality, and race. Furthermore, 
discussions of gender inequality ‘within’ certain religions or cultures 
renders invisible the universal systems of patriarchy that all women 
contend with, while homogenizing and fossilizing religions in definitive 
ways.

Dominion: In the report, I found your critique of the distinction 
between polygamy and polyamory compelling. Can you elaborate?

HW: One of the major problems with the distinction between polygamy and 
polyamory is that it relies on and perpetuates racist assumptions. While 
polyamory is used to define a relationship based on mutual negotiation 
between “independent people,” polygamy refers to a “cultural practice.” 
Such a dichotomy reinforces assumptions that women in racialized 
cultures are being more exploited and less independent than “autonomous 
women” from dominant white cultures.

This is not to suggest that polygamy cannot be critiqued; it is to 
highlight this double standard and how such differentiations are based 
on the premise that racialized cultures are inherently more hostile to 
women. The reality is that the practice of both polygamy and 
heterosexual polyamory exist within a global context of systemic 
discrimination against women and girls. The current-day reality is that 
99% of polygamous marriages are characterized by men having multiple 
wives. But it is dangerous to suggest that the roots of polygamy lie in 
‘religious culture’ because cultures and religions do not offer 
homogenous narratives. Various conservative ideologies are on the rise 
across the globe because that is the socio-political context within 
which we are operating. Religion can be used to justify polygamy, but if 
we recognize that the current practice of polygamy is not about a 
particular religion or culture (which reinforces racism) -- it is, 
rather, a manifestation of a universal system of patriarchy -- then we 
can more readily reject those “freedom of religion” arguments that are 
used to prevent discussion about the effects on women in an anti-racist 
manner.

Dominion: How should feminists be addressing the issue of religious 
freedom as it intersects with the marginalization of racialized, 
immigrant, and indigenous women?

HW: We must contend with the reality that culturally-imperialist 
feminisms are being forced upon women across the world and the narrative 
of women’s rights serves as a crucial tool in the pro-war and 
anti-immigrant propaganda machine. Such a theft of feminist principles 
is advancing everything but genuine equality for women. Instead, we must 
choose a path that is feminist as well as anti-racist, anti-militarist, 
pro-immigration, queer- and trans-positive, and class-conscious. This 
includes questioning and challenging the legitimacy given to state-based 
responses such as prisons as a solution to violence, border controls as 
a solution to trafficking, child apprehension as a solution to women and 
child poverty, and militarization as a solution to third world women’s 
liberation.

It is important to avoid falling into the racist traps that infantilize 
racialized women, while at the same time maintaining a basic commitment 
to gender and sexual equality that cannot be breached by religious or 
cultural justifications. We must avoid a culturally imperialist feminism 
that seeks to impose Western notions of gender equality and ‘sameness’ 
onto other women. This does not imply that we become culturally 
relativist and begin to support any unjust practice. Cultural diversity 
or freedom of religion should not serve as a shield to scrutinize 
against gender-oppressive practices.

Walking this line requires us to pay attention to specific contexts, to 
listen to those women whose rights we purport to stand for, and to 
understand that we occupy different relationships of power and 
privilege. All oppressed women equally deplore sexism and misogyny, but 
women’s liberation movements must be culturally sensitive and relevant 
so as to oppose patriarchal elements without attacking or destroying 
non-white cultures, religions, or identities. Women of colour and 
indigenous women have consistently pointed out that reducing their 
oppression to their ‘culture’ represents deeply colonial attitudes. The 
greater oppression that some women face is directly linked to policies 
of the state, histories of colonization, the nature of capitalism, and 
the powerful rise of global conservative ideologies. Most importantly, 
we must walk alongside those women who are on the front lines of their 
own struggles and who are agents of their own transformation. They do 
not need pity or charity, but solidarity and our respect for their 
leadership and agency.

All opinions expressed are of Harsha Walia alone and do not imply 
endorsement by West Coast LEAF or other participants in the Project.
-- 
Macdonald Stainsby
Coordinator, http://oilsandstruth.org
--
moderated radical news & discussion list:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green

In the contradiction lies the hope.
    --Bertholt Brecht.