There is a reason why Muslim women across the globe were incensed after firebrand activist group Femen wrote slogans like, "Fuck your morals" across their bare chests and shouted outside of mosques across Europe last month. This "topless Jihad" protest and the discourse packaged with it denigrates Muslim women and their belief system -- the same women Femen claims to be defending. Jeffrey Tayler, in his piece endorsing Femen's protests, claims Femen faced a backlash because their Western roots disqualify them from speaking on Islam and the treatment of Muslim women. As a Muslim woman and an American, I support Femen's right to protest whatever the hell it wants and however it chooses to do so. The reason that I and other Muslim women were turned off by Femen, however, was because their motivations and methods reeked of a pervading and deep-rooted ignorance of Islam itself. Any group with a similarly disengaged and seasonal interest in "saving" Muslim women from their personal beliefs would also be met with a collective groan of frustration.
Femen did not spark a much-needed discussion on human rights violations against women in the Muslim world, as Tayler claims. Instead, it ignited a number of incendiary attacks on the beliefs and autonomy of Muslim women; first in Muslim-majority countries, and later, the global community. The protest prompted Muslim women to speak up -- not just because they took particular offense to the tired notion they are gagged and rendered mute, but because they felt the need to defend their faith and their right to choose how they practice it. This meaningful response undercut Femen's core, flawed presumption, that Muslim women are oppressed because Islam is inherently oppressive. To defend Femen's protests, then, is to defend this line of thinking -- a dangerous, caustic, and inept approach in tackling issues of gender inequality in the Muslim world today.
Perhaps Femen's protest was effective in drawing worldwide media attention to the plight of Amina, a woman who was, at the time, under duress and in need of recourse and protection. But this protest does not extend into any grander aspirations to understand all Muslim women, and it dismisses those who have asserted -- in pictures, editorials, and tweets galore -- that not all Muslim women need saving. Femen may have stood up for one woman's right to bare her body, but they denounce my right and choice to cover mine, however I see fit. The discourse that Femen brought to the floor is not one that will allow us to progress as a society, but it is one that will pigeonhole all Muslim women as oppressed victims, frame the discussion within the bounds of the stereotypes that exist about Muslim women, and will relegate Muslim women to constantly defending their faith rather than discussing the larger issues at hand.
And then there is the hijab, the iconic piece of cloth that Femen has deemed a symbol of oppression. Wearing the hijab, to be clear, is a sacred act of worship that many Muslim women practice voluntarily. In fact, I have friends who cover their hair against the will of their husbands and fathers who, ironically, fear for their safety in an increasingly Islamophobic climate. In a sorely misinformed and cruelly inimical statement, Femen's leader Inna Shevchenko equated the hijab with "the blood and all the crimes that are based on your religion," and called for Muslim women to remove it in solidarity. And what if the Muslim woman she was debating had complied? She'd be doing it as an act of coercion. When Femen's free speech thwarts a woman's freedom of religion, then they have become no better than the abusers they are protesting.