Muslim Women in a rickshaw, Varanasi India, 2018. Credit: Adam Cohn/Flickr (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)
 
The United Nations will commemorate International Women’s Day (IWD) on 8 March.

By Mariz Tadros
BRIGHTON, UK, Feb 17 2023 (IPS)

Since researching the experiences of gender discrimination against women in poverty who belong to religious minorities, many fellow feminists have turned their back on me.

The inherent assumption among some of my feminist critics is that by defending women who are targeted on account of their religious affiliation, I am defending their religions. Yet defending the rights of a Hindu woman in Pakistan or Muslim woman in India do not constitute defending Hinduism or Islam.

Defending a woman’s right not to be discriminated against because of her identity and challenging religious bigotry both go hand in hand. We need to challenge all political projects that seek to homogenize people while simultaneously defending women, minorities, artists and others whose positioning accentuates their experiences of inequality.

Feminist reluctance to address injustices experienced by women who belong to religious minorities is also driven by concern that we end up empowering religious movements whose ethos is against women’s equality.

Again, we need to distinguish between women who are the targets of hate because they do not share the same faith as the majority, and anti-feminist movements who often are from the majority. We need to show solidarity with the former while challenging the latter.

Well-meaning progressive, feminists based in the West are reluctant to openly advocate for the rights of religious minority women living in Muslim majority contexts because of legitimate concerns that this would feed into orientalist (racist) representations of radical militant Islamist groups or by intolerant sections of society.

Yet can we be inadvertently reproduce a colonialist mindset when we decide to omit the experiences of minority women out of fear of misappropriation in the west?

Why should women who have experienced genocide be denied transnational feminist solidarities because it would be more progressive to focus on the Muslims who were against the genocide.

Research undertaken by the Coalition for Religious Equality and Inclusive Development, shows that in countries including Iraq, Pakistan and Nigeria, experiences for women are made worse where their experiences of gender inequality, religious marginality and socio-economic exclusion intersect.

For example, women belonging to religious minorities become easy targets of vilification and assault because of the visible manifestation of difference through what they wear. Yazidi, Sabean or Christian women are exposed to harassment in disproportionate levels in Iraq because they do not cover their hair while in Pakistan, Hindu women dressed in Sari are subject to ridicule and targeting because their middle bodies are said to be ‘exposed’.

Even if you belong to the majority religion, and you cover up more than the others, this still means exposure to harassment for being seen to practice the religion differently, as experienced by Ahmediyya women in Pakistan and the Izala Sufi women in Nigeria.

Women from religious minorities can also be at significant risk of sexual assault. While all women in patriarchal societies are exposed to sexual harassment independently of their religious affiliation, women affiliated to religiously marginalized communities are targeted because of the circulation of stereotypes that they are more available or ‘fair game’ or that men are not obligated to respect them the same respect as those from the majority religion.

While all women living in poverty suffer the impact of gender, caste and socio-economic exclusion combined, the experiences of discrimination become more acute and severe when shaped by ideological prejudice.

In our research in the aftermath of covid, Muslim women spoke about being denied health care because of the scapegoating of Muslims for the spread of the pandemic, while in Iraq Yazidi women spoke of how despicable stereotypes of Yazidi women not washing meant doctors denied them treatment.

The feminist movement cannot continue to represent itself as committed to inclusivity through intersectionality (the recognition of and redress to- interface of gender, race, class, ableism and so forth in shaping and influencing power dynamics) while turning its back on women who come from a religious minority background where their rights are denied.

A review by doctoral researcher Amy Quinn-Graham of UN Women’s website and publications related to intersectionality and/or ‘minorities’ from 2014 – 2019, showed that compared to indigenous women, migrant women, women with disabilities, women and girls living in rural localities, older women, and women and girls of African descent, all of which were accounted for in the UN’s Commission on the Status of Women agreed conclusions from 2017 onwards, concerns for the vulnerabilities facing “ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities” were raised only once and for the first time in 2019, by the EU.

Certainly, there are feminist movements, scholars and those engaged in policymaking who recognize and seek redress for discrimination on grounds of religion experienced by socio-economically excluded women, but it seems they are the exception, rather than the norm.

It is not too late for us to be inclusive, and this International Women’s Day we should recognize and show solidarity with women who belong to religious minorities living on the margins. We just have to start by not making excuses for their omission from our “intersectional lens”.

Professor Mariz Tadros is a Research Fellow at the Institute of Development Studies; a professor of politics and development and an IDS Research Fellow specialising in the politics and human development of the Middle East. Areas of specialisation include democratisation, Islamist politics, gender, sectarianism, human security and religion and development. Prof Tadros has convened the Coalition for Religious Equality and Inclusive Development (CREID) since November 2018.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

A flooded village in Matiari, in the Sindh province of Pakistan. Credit: UNICEF/Asad Zaidi

By Mariz Tadros
BRIGHTON, UK, Nov 14 2022 (IPS)

Climate change reductionism – assuming the causes and the redress for those suffering the worst impacts of extreme weather lies with climate change alone – undermines the rights of religiously marginalised persons, but broadening whose rights are being advocated for in climate change can offer redress.

As COP27 negotiations continue, we must be alive to the widespread discrimination behind why some face more devastation than others, and pursue climate justice policies sensitive to the religiously marginalised and to the freedom of religion or belief (Forb).

Climate change and religion

In response to the devastating floods in Pakistan, a top political leader in the Sindh province of Pakistan attributed the destruction caused as a punishment by God, and added that the situation will improve if the people turn away from their sins.

This is just one example of how across the globe now power holders are weaponising religion to cover up unaccountable governance. But power holders’ use of religion to cover up for their failures only worsens the situation for the vulnerable, many of whom happen to be religious minorities.

Sindh province has one of the largest concentrations of people living in extreme poverty in Pakistan, and one of the highest religious minority populations (Hindu and Christian), in the country. This religious minority population also happen to be among the poorest, especially since they belong to the scheduled castes.

Secretary-General António Guterres (right, back to camera) along with Prime Minister Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif of Pakistan visit the National Flood Response and Coordination Centre in Islamabad. Credit: UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe

Like other Pakistanis in Sindh, the religiously marginalised poor have lost everything due to the unprecedented monsoon floods but they experience an added vulnerability: systemic discrimination on account of their religious identity.

This is manifest in their exclusion from large scale poverty alleviation programmes as found in recent research. This underlying vulnerability and discrimination is why it is wrong to attribute the devastation that religiously ‘otherised’ people experience in the face of natural disasters to climate change alone.

Climate change reductionism

A recent report by the UK’s International Development Committee argues that climate change is also a driver of religious discrimination and mass atrocities because of competition to control natural resources and wealth in conditions of scarcity.

The recognition the report gives to the interconnections between environmental, political, economic and social phenomena is very much welcome, but attributing the causes of atrocities or religious cleansing to climate change alone is anathema to the protection of persons’ freedom of religion or belief.

Climate change reductionism in this way assumes the causes – and therefore redress – of all evils lie with climate.

As Rigg and Mason suggest, climate science reductionism omits the role that structural factors such as “market forces, discriminatory policies, state corruption and inefficiency, and historical marginality play in people’s lived experience”.

Climate change may in some circumstances accentuate the impact of religious inequalities but we need to press on for accountability of power holders who deliberately exclude and ‘otherise’ those who are different through their discourses, policies and practices.

Religious and cultural beliefs benefiting the environment

In the name of countering climate change, we should also never pit sustainability against inclusivity in development policies and practices. Highlighted by an Amnesty International warning ahead of COP27, there are risks from climate protection strategies that exclude indigenous people, whose norms and beliefs are held sacred, even if it is not termed “religion”.

Research from the Coalition for Religious Equality and Inclusive Development (CREID) showed how the Uganda Wildlife Authority forbade indigenous people access to particular territories containing religious shrines, out of the belief that they were destroying the flora and fauna.

When the Bamba and Bakonjo people of Uganda were allowed to practice some of the religious and customary knowledge, this actually led to greater protection of the biodiversity and integrity of the habitat.

This shows that when people experience intertwining inequalities, including marginalisation based religion or belief, it’s not only that they become vulnerable to prejudice, but opportunities for building resilience to the effects of climate change are missed.

This does not mean that all expressions of people’s religious practices or beliefs are conducive to preserving the environment, we know this is not the case. However, another example can be found in the Middle East where extreme weather events have wreaked havoc on crops.

Here, the Copts – the largest religious minority in the region – have developed a system of how the land is to be harvested to remove social stigma and make sure that no one – Muslim or Copt- goes without.

While we know a multitude of measures are needed to minimize the impact of climate change on crops, the benefits of adapting the knowledge and heritage practices of those whose religious heritage has been side-lined are for everyone- not just the members of the religious minority.

So, whether it is powerful leaders wrongly weaponizing religion in order to avoid accountability and when climate change-related disasters strike, discrimination against religious minorities driving greater vulnerability to its impacts, or beliefs and knowledges of the land – prejudice against the religiously marginalized actually has a great deal to do with climate change.

Therefore, during this month’s COP27 climate summit (which concludes November 18) , freedom of religion or belief must be considered in policies to redress climate inequalities if we are serious about going beyond climate change reductionism and truly advancing climate justice.

Professor Mariz Tadros is Research Fellow at Institute of Development Studies (IDS) and Director of CREID

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau