you did this to yourself
-
Sunera Thobani’s chapter about why imagining cultural communities as “neatly distinguishable” highlights how this view oversimplifies complex identities into one stereotype of “traditional practices” rather than lived experiences, ignoring intersectionality and important differences like class, gender, and age. She argues that non-white people are often seen as “backward” or intolerant or stuck in the past because this way of thinking makes white people seem more progressive and open minded, shifting the focus away from their own injustices.
This stereotyping becomes particularly evident in how the rights of women are framed in the West versus the Middle East. In Western media, practices like women wearing abayas or hijabs are often highlighted as evidence of the “backwardness” of those cultures. In the West’s eyes, the entire Middle East becomes oppressive to women, painting women as brainless followers of men. While there are cases where such practices are forced (cases that do demand attention) this focus on MENA as “backward” ignores systemic violence against women in the West, such as the high rates of domestic abuse and homelessness that disproportionately harm women. For instance, domestic abuse remains a leading cause of death for women in many Western countries, and countless women are pushed into homelessness after fleeing violence. What’s often left out of the conversation is that homelessness disproportionately affects women of color due to the structural racism and economic inequality in the West, which means that women of color are more likely to experience poverty, housing insecurity, and domestic violence, putting them at even greater risk of homelessness. By ignoring these realities, Western narratives paint violence against women as a uniquely “Arab” or “Muslim” issue while overlooking the systemic barriers faced by marginalized women in their own societies. Like Thobani argued, framing issues as unique to certain groups makes it so the white people are seen as the progressive ones.
The same reductive framing is also evident in how Western people discuss LGBTQ+ rights in the context of Palestine. Pinkwashing is often used to position Israel as progressive and tolerant while framing Palestinians as inherently homophobic or intolerant. This tactic distracts from all the violence occurring under Israeli occupation, where Palestinians are killed or oppressed not for their sexual orientation, but for their very existence as Palestinians. The whole “homophobic Arab” ideology reinforces harmful stereotypes about Arab culture while diverting attention away from Palestinian voices and struggles for liberation. It makes white people feel better to support the killing of a group they deem homophobic. But the truth is, Palestinians are killed simply for being Palestinian, and other aspects of identity, such as sexuality, become irrelevant in the face of this reality. The West’s performative activism fails to address the root causes of inequality and injustice. It is hypocritical to claim solidarity with marginalized groups, such as queer people, while ignoring or undermining the liberation of Palestinians, whose oppression is deeply tied to systems of colonialism and white supremacy. As Thobani emphasizes, framing non-Western communities as inherently backwards or stuck in tradition only serves to distract from the structural inequalities perpetuated by white people.
Overall, Thobani’s chapter shows these aspects of “backwardness” are used to avoid accountability. The false narrative of distinct and unchanging communities misrepresents the lived reality and prevents progress, shifting all the blame onto marginalized groups themselves, essentially saying, “you did this to yourself.”
-
To continue the discussion of these ideas, it's remarkable how much dissonance there is in "Western" (especially Canadian) society when breaching the topic of multiculturalism, specifically in the picking-and-choosing of parts of cultures that are accepted and rejecting the rest. An example of such, as discussed above, is the hijab. As has been discussed in our class before, the cognitive dissonance between "women are forced to wear the hijab" and the resulting "in order to prevent the oppression of women we should ban the wearing of the hijab" which only succeeds in further oppression is boggling. The idea of Canada as a mosaic, as opposed to America as a melting pot, might make Canada seem like a more accepting and multi-cultural society, but when aspects of immigrant cultures are only accepted if they coincide with pre-existing values of Canadian society and are suppressed if not, all you have is a melting pot with extra steps. The examples Thobani gives relating to cultural/religious dress are a fantastic example of this: you can dress and worship however you want, as long as it doesn't actually impact any aspect of the Greater Canadian Society.