Blog #2: Modernity

In "(Un)veiling Feminism", Afsaneh Najmabadi historicizes women's influences in Iran with regard to secularism, modernity, nationalism, and feminism. Prior to the rule of Riza Shah, many feminists and activists in Iran fought for "women's education, and next the reform of marriage and divorce laws" (Najmabadi, 36). Rhetoric by certain revered leaders argued that God did not want women educated, a fallacy which Iranian feminists aptly disproved by questioning where this was discussed (Najmabadi, 35-36). However a huge shift occurred in the 1930's when Riza Shah's regime pushed for what was described as 'modernity' of Iran and Iranian women through anti-chadur policies. These new laws prohibited women from dressing in this apparel and led to female teachers losing their jobs and girls being removed from schools. The backlash of these new policies not only led to a means of division of women in society during this time period, it also lead to many anti-foreign policies in Iran which can be seen today. Furthermore, the shift in what was viewed as modernity vs secularism began to only be focused on whether a woman was pro or anti veiling. There was a huge backlash around this as a division between secular and Islamist feminists was created around views of unveiling as the ultimate sign of modernity.

"Unholy Matrimony? Feminism, Orientalism, and the Possibility of Double Critique" by Juliet A. Williams discusses temporary marriage in Iran and Shiite dominant parts of Iraq. In her research, Williams finds many issues with how U.S. reporting of temporary marriage relies heavily on orientalist ideals which essentially portray Middle Eastern men as desiring harems of subordinate women who they can take advantage of sexually. These western reports portray these arrangements as not only being traditional/backwards, but also as exploitative of women and oppressive of people's sexuality through Islam. However, temporary marriage is not as simple as these Western reports would like to have readers believe. Temporary marriage can be viewed as being similar to western engagements, but better to some extent as well. Any critique of temporary marriage relies on Western standards of moral marriage, and often sensationalizes what temporary marriages actually are. Temporary marriages are a sign of modernity as they allow for individuals to experience a sexually intimate relationship without "the 'decadent' Western style of 'free' sexual relationships" (Williams, 626). Often reasons behind Western critiques of temporary marriage are reflective of issues around marriage in the U.S. as temporary marriages are very similar to western marriage.

Both pieces are reflective of notions of what modernity looks like in Iran through Western and non-western eyes. Both authors are attempting to break apart racist generalizations often stipulated in orientalist views of the Middle East as these are not only harming but dehumanize women and feminists in this part of the world. By doing this, these authors are creating a way to view the similarities in the world through factual dialogues around the histories and practices in Iran. It is extremely important to not believe sensationalism around practices in Iran as it has a rich history which cannot be over simplified as just being a debate over veiling or temporary marriages. The only way for an end to injustice in a real way is to unite and stop othering people through means of cultural difference.