Become Feminists or Starve! The UN Pushes Girls Education in Afghanistan

The liberal world is, again, crying for Muslim women.

No, not for those who have been killed by the millions thanks to the post-9/11 War on Terror, but for the little Muslim girls who might never be able to discover gender fluidity.

The link between feminism and liberal imperialism is well-attested. Take Joseph Massad’s Islam in Liberalism. Massad does a whole study on liberalism’s historical enmity toward Islam, and the second chapter is all about feminism.

Take also Christine Delphy, an influential French feminist, once a comrade to the late Simone de Beauvoir, the main figure of modern feminism in Europe, who also criticizes the weaponization of feminism for the War on Terror.

One of the main points of this feminist narrative against Islam has been girls’ education. Consider a recent article published in the Wall Street Journal by two “eminent” female writers with Muslim names: Amina Mohammed, deputy secretary-general of the UN, from Nigeria, and Lana Zaki Nusseibeh, the UAE’s permanent representative to the UN.

They wrote this article about girls’ education following the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan on the 15th of August.

Of course, such takes on Afghanistan are inherently hypocritical in nature, but let’s analyse their discourse. We will see that it is not so much about girls’ education (obviously), but more about how education can be used as an instrument for the demonization of Islam and the promotion of liberalism.

Girls have an intrinsic right to education. This simple truth should be abiding and nonnegotiable. Yet reactionary forces, warping Islamic teaching, too often limit or deny girls their education. This is cruel and defies the core tenets of the world’s second-largest religion.

“Abiding and nonnegotiable” sounds like something one would hear in a declaration of war, while “reactionary forces” is an odd word choice, as it reminds one of the socialist-communist revolutionary terminology against the “bourgeoisie.” This sets the tone.

RELATED: The Perils of “Educating” Our Daughters

Educating girls enables them to realize their aspirations and fulfill their potential to society. United Nations reports consistently show that societies in which women are full, equal and meaningful partners are safer, better run and more productive. Every year, they also tell us that societies that deny women agency over their private and public lives are more likely to regress into violence, instability and poverty.

The UN is obviously one of the main supranational organizations safeguarding the liberal international order that promotes, even through coercion, liberal norms and feminist dogmas. There’s a lot of literature on the subject of liberalism and the UN’s “New World Order.” So, whenever someone summons the UN as a sort of authority, it should be seen as a red herring. In this case, both authors are directly involved with the UN, so no surprise.

The authors call women to be “full, equal and meaningful partners” so societies are “safer, better and more productive.” This fetish for “productivism” betrays a materialistic approach to societal life. Who says productivity is the end all, be all for society? Maybe productive societies are sick societies? What about other health indicators for society, such as ethics, morality, high character, strong family, and other Islamic norms?

Should we ignore how the West itself is a laboratory for feminist machinations, making women full, equal, and meaningful (?) partners, but that leading to an epidemic of female misery? Should we ignore the “full” and “meaningful” experience of Western women and their “empowering” jobs leading them to a miserable and lonely life of infertility and depression?

We have repeatedly witnessed extremists who, when they gain a modicum of power, immediately target women and girls. Education is often the first target. They violently attack students and terrorize teachers, parents and communities to shut down schools and libraries. This is a deliberate, precise and defensive tactic born out of their fear of “a girl with a book,” as Pakistani education activist Malala Yousafzai said. Extremists know that one educated girl is an obstacle to their warped intentions, and generation of girls is an impenetrable wall.

No one knows what “extremists” means here, and the whole rant about “education” being their “first target” (?), the “terrorizing” (?) of teachers and so on sounds like an Orientalist trope, a fantasy with no real factual grounding.

As for Malala, she’s a well-known Western puppet, not some Islamic authority to be taken seriously.

RELATED: Dalia Mogahed vs. The Taliban: Who Understands Islam Better?

The starting point must be that the right to a full, equal and high-quality education is nonnegotiable. The international community must hold everyone, including the Taliban, to account for denying or limiting girls’ education. Donor countries should marshal resources to ensure that all girls everywhere have access to a classroom, and they should consider making aid conditional on the protection of local voices speaking out against attacks on women and girls.

This is the most interesting part, as it reveals the psychotic nature of feminist frenzy. Afghanistan is going through what the UN itself calls possibly the worst humanitarian crisis ever seen, with nearly the whole of the country going into extreme poverty and enduring famine, mainly due to the tolerant West freezing the country’s assets.

And what do these “Muslims feminists” have to say about that? They say that any aid should be “conditional,” it should be conditioned on giving to the little girls of Afghanistan “full, equal, and high-quality education,” i.e., degenerate gender studies, LGBT, feminist programming. In case anyone has forgotten, the US government report says that some $787 million was mobilized for gender programs during the American-liberal occupation.

Isn’t liberal feminism so tolerant and peaceful? Muslims in Afghanistan –whether male or female — should be starved to death until they accept our feminist directives! Obey or die!

RELATED: Is Feminism the Cause of Women Leaving Islam?

MuslimSkeptic Needs Your Support!
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
5 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
akh

Educating girls enables them to realize their aspirations and fulfill their potential to society. United Nations reports consistently show that societies in which women are full, equal and meaningful partners are safer, better run and more productive. Every year, they also tell us that societies that deny women agency over their private and public lives are more likely to regress into violence, instability and poverty.”

What passes for education in the West today is nothing more than brainwashing. Pushing women into prolonged “education” and paper pushing careers might temporarily increase GDP, in the long run you’re goig to destroy the birth rate and get stuck with a rapidly ageing population. Which is the case today in the West. The social situation in the West is also abysmal. Huge tension between every demographic: the young do not like the old, the old do not like the young. Black is suspicious of white, white is scared of black. A terrible gender war between males and females. A record number of singleness, debt, mental health problems and substance abuse and on and on. This all resulting in a society with little social cohesion. And there where there is little cohesion and care for each others wellbeing crime spikes.

If Muslim nations have any sense they’ll look at the West….and do the exact opposite: teach your kids the religion as soon as possible, teach proper gender roles, encourage early marriage, emphasize males role as providers and prioritize their employement so that they can marry and start families, encourage women to become mothers and wives early and teach them how to fulfill these roles well.

Baz (SL)

The author of this article only focuses on criticising the content of Western girls’ school education such as teaching liberalism/feminism/LGBT. This author has totally missed out on challenging the very basic idea of having a system where all girls nationwide in every country are forcibly conscripted into a daily indoctrination camp for 7 hours every day. This is an idea that was invented in the 18th century west and forcibly imposed on the rest of the world at gunpoint. It has become so ingrained everywhere that hardly anyone, including even the Muslim skeptic, questions this idea.

Earlier, on October 31, Muslim skeptic published an article titled “Rural Afghan Women Speak, Bleeding-Heart Warmongers Can’t Hear” which linked to an article from The New Yorker magazine. I quote here something interesting from that article which you may have missed out.

“In the villagers’ retelling, the traditional way of life in Sangin was smashed overnight, because outsiders insisted on bringing women’s rights to the valley. “Our culture could not accept sending their girls outside to school,” Shakira recalled. “It was this way before my father’s time, before my grandfather’s time.” When the authorities began forcing girls to attend classes at gunpoint, a rebellion erupted, led by armed men calling themselves the mujahideen. In their first operation, they kidnapped all the schoolteachers in the valley, many of whom supported girls’ education, and slit their throats. The next day, the government arrested tribal elders and landlords on the suspicion that they were bankrolling the mujahideen. These community leaders were never seen again.”

In the 20th century, long before LGBT and extreme feminism, When Saudi started introducing girls schools for the first time, and when Pakistanis first tried to introduce girls schools in their tribal areas, there was a huge social and cultural backlash from the people. This is not because of the schools teaching about feminism or liberalism or LGBT or Darwinism. But rather this is because girls schools are challenging the deep-rooted traditional Muslim culture of “purdah nasheen” where females always live a full-time home isolation lifestyle (similar to covid-era quarantine or lockdown) based on Quran 33:33 and the Sunnah of Resoolullah PBUH wives living in full-time home isolation. This is also the reason why TTP attacked Malala in 2014 long before she became famous or a western puppet.

The modern Western civilization has brainwashed the entire world (including it seems even the new Afghan rulers) into thinking that girls schools outside their homes are the ONLY way for girls to get an education, and that not supporting girls schools is an unethical evil crime. But we know from history that Sohabiyaat such as Aisha were educated without ever going to school or university outside their home. There are still a few Islamic mullahs today who declare that girls schools are haram, because they violate the traditional Islamic purdah system of females living in full time home isolation quarantined from the men-filled outside world.

The Haqiqatjou family is educating their daughters in a way that does not involve the girls violating the purdah or going outside the home (i.e. Through Homeschooling). This is why I suggest that you can challenge secularism/liberalism/feminism better than you do now, by challenging the very idea that all girls in the entire population should be forcibly conscripted into school every day, and instead promote the idea that girls can receive alternative forms of education that are based inside their homes. I am not saying that girls schools are haram or should be banned, but rather I’m saying that schools outside home should be OPTIONAL and not mandatory for all girls in the population.

Baz (SL)

I’m sure the Talibs are not dumb enough or treacherous enough to allow teaching creepy things like LGBT, feminism and Darwin monkey evolution in their new girls schools. They will most likely do what Saudi used to do in the old days, by letting mullahs dictate the curriculum, and heavily editing and moderating the girls schools curriculum to teach only Islamic religious beliefs and practices, patriarchal ideas and very little else.

However the fact is that this same self-proclaimed “Islаmic emіrate” has totally surrendered and bent over backwards to accept and import the Western imperialist idea of breaking the traditional purdah-nasheen harem lifestyle to conscript all girls into daily indoctrination camps outside the home or harem even if against their will. Back in the old days (1990s) they used to fiercely resist against this imported western imperialist idea to protect their women’s traditional sunnah purdah nasheen harem lifestyle, and to maintain the traditional cultural concept that the public sphere belongs to males more while private sphere belongs more to females.

But now with their new girls schools (especially if they make it mandatory for all girls nationwide) they have totally sold out that traditional sunnah culture to appease the “International community” and maybe try get foreign money, including from their new Chіnese cоmmie friends. If Tali-BAN want to resist the feminazi imperialism in a more meaningful way, they could have responded by aggressively promoting “alternative education systems for girls” such as homeschooling and harem-based private female home tutors, and criticising foreign countries for forcing all girls up to age 18 years to go to schools outside the comfort of their homes, even if against the will/consent of the girls. The fact is that there have been educated women in history who never went to school or university outside houses or harems.

Baz (SL)

All over the pre-modern world before the 19th century, all the countries, governments and societies did not support a nationwide system of forcibly imposed mandatory schooling in the public sphere outside the house for all girls. Does that mean that those pre-modern societies were cruel and evil? No of course not, because modern people don’t judge those pre-modern societies by 21st century standards! And likewise, there are isolated and uncontacted tribes in the Amazon jungle and Sentinel Island still living like the stone age even today, including hunting with Bow and arrow and not wearing clothes. They don’t have girls schools either, so does that mean that they are evil?

However, the rest of the entire world today judges the 1990s version of Tali-BAN to be evil, just because those old generation Talibs wanted to live like the pre-modern era or like the 18th century, or like those Amazon jungle or Sentinel Island primitive tribes in terms of how they organise their society and culture. If 18th century people and modern primitive tribes in the Amazon jungle and Sentinel Island are not evil for not having girls schools, then modern Afghans should not be judged as evil for wanting to live like 18th century people (like how the Amish do in America today) or like the 7th century or like the primitive tribes in the isolated island or rainforest.

Shaquille Shiddiq Priata

Daniel’s wife already wrote an article about this