OPPapers.com

Iraqi Women: Bodies And Identities

Both sides have their own ideas of the war. Even before terrorist became an everyday word, the media differentiated the Middle Eastern world from the western; dominated by religion opposed to a separation of church and state; sectionalist opposed to a worldview; archaic notions of women's place opposed to advanced in women's rights. Americans used their "innate rightness" and fear of the other to preemptively strike at a nation, which was felt to be full of named yet unidentified enemies.
The insurgents' view, rooted in the historical framework of colonialism, seems to be a bit more realistic in context. Iraq gained full sovereignty in 1932, only 71 years before the American invasion. Iraq has been constantly fighting for its rights as a country and for freedom from tyranny throughout that time and before. Many things contribute to the feeling of a second colonization; the sanctions that over thirteen years cost the innocent lives of 1.5 million, the 2003 war that began without enough proof of Iraq having weapons of mass destruction or that it had any links to Al-Qaeda, troops allowing the looting of the museums and libraries and an unguarded border, yet maintaining a tight protection over the oil fields, and the $9 billion for the reconstruction of Iraq that disappeared under Bremer's authority.
In this war of ideas, the strength of arms becomes a measure of the strength of ideology. The war in Iraq has become about competing ideologies. Both sides see themselves as fighting for freedom, freedom from tyranny and dictatorship and freedom from corruption by immoral infidels. Nevertheless, arms will never win this war; it will be decided on the bodies of women. "The ideal of woman has fueled the ideal of "authentic" national cultures, "indigenous" religions, and "traditional" family forms… such usage have meant the imposition of bodily discipline and behavior controls in the name of nation, progress and god."(Siad 9) Impositions on the bodies and identities of...