New York Times: Islam is a Last Resort
by Racialicious Special Correspondent, Fatemeh Fakhraie
The New York Times has an article about the frustrations of Egyptian youth.
It opens with a profile on one Mr. Sayyid:
Once, Mr. Sayyid had a decent job and a chance to marry. But his fiancée’s family canceled the engagement because after two years, he could not raise enough money to buy an apartment and furniture.
Mr. Sayyid spun into depression and lost nearly 40 pounds. For months, he sat at home and focused on one thing: reading the Koran.
The NYT piece makes a direct connection between Mr. Sayyid’s loss of a chance to marry (like he’ll never ever get another one) and his interest in the Qu’ran. Enter the idea that Muslims are only Muslim because they’re sexually (or politically or socially) frustrated.
Then we meet Ms. Ashour, a 22-year-old university graduate. She wears the niqab. Why? Because she couldn’t get married, of course!
There was a time she dressed and acted like her friends, covering her head with a scarf but wearing blue jeans and bright shirts […]
She was engaged to Mustafa, whose last name she will not disclose, for more than two years….But Mustafa’s father had no money left after setting up two older sons, and the young man was unable to raise enough money to finish the construction. Ms. Ashour wanted to help, secretly, but she has been unable to find a paying job. When her mother told her to end the engagement, something snapped, and she sought solace in increasingly strict religious practice.
So, according to the NYT, she couldn’t get married, so she went crazy and covered her face!
The idea that we’re all devout Muslims because we can’t get a piece of ass is insulting. It feeds into this idea that devotion is an all-or-nothing game: you’re either a Muslim who always prays five times a day, always fasts during Ramazan, and never has sex before marriage…or you’re not “really” Muslim. Muslims aren’t allowed to just be, to struggle with things like enjoying a glass of wine even though most interpretations of Islam forbid alcohol. We’re not allowed to have grey areas like every other religion. Most people won’t look at a Catholic who doesn’t eat fish on Friday as not really Catholic.
But wait, it gets better:
Here in Egypt and across the Middle East, many young people are being forced to put off marriage, the gateway to independence, sexual activity and societal respect. Stymied by the government’s failure to provide adequate schooling and thwarted by an economy without jobs to match their abilities or aspirations, they are stuck in limbo between youth and adulthood.
…
In their frustration, the young are turning to religion for solace and purpose, pulling their parents and their governments along with them.
We’re “stuck in limbo between youth and adulthood” if we’re not married. And here I was like a sucker, feeling all grown-up because I had reached a certain age, had accomplished certain life goals that are important to me…but since I’m not married, I must be some sort of girl-child.
I won’t argue with the fact that marriage has a definite societal weight, both in Muslim communities within the U.S. and in other predominately Muslim parts of the world: there are many in the Muslim community who look sideways at those who aren’t married after reaching a certain age. Sociologist Azza Korayem says this herself in the NYT article.
I also won’t argue that weddings in the Middle East and South Asia are expensive and can even cross over into exorbitant, and that probably has something to do with some weddings being postponed or canceled. But the NYT assumes that’s the only reason for not getting married:
But marriage is so expensive now, the system is collapsing in many communities….The result is delayed marriages across the region. A generation ago, 63 percent of Middle Eastern men in their mid- to late 20s were married…That figure has dropped to nearly 50 percent across the region, among the lowest rates of marriage in the developing world, the report said. In Iran, for example, 38 percent of the 25- to 29-year-old men are not married, one of the largest pools of unattached males in Iranian history. In Egypt, the average age at which men now marry is 31.
So people are getting married later now. That’s happening in the west, too. In the west, higher ages for first marriages are attributed to high education levels, high literacy rates, and changing values. Countries in the Middle East have these things, too. But if we as Muslims or Middle Easterners get married later, it’s just because we’re poor?
This builds onto the idea that Muslims and people in the Middle East are radically different from western non-Muslims. This difference hinges on the Orientalist idea that we’re “backward,” that our reasons for not getting married can’t possibly have anything to do with increased literacy and higher education levels. Despite several references to university graduates in the article, the NYT assumes we don’t have these things, and so we’re not getting married because we’re just plain poor.
So what’s a poor, sexually frustrated Muslim to do? Buy a Qur’an, I guess.
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of 
Cynthia C wrote:
How is this different from a Catholic girl running away to a convent after a tough break up?
Posted 21 Feb 2008 at 10:22 pm ¶
AmirT wrote:
You wrote:
“So people are getting married later now. That’s happening in the west, too. In the west, higher ages for first marriages are attributed to high education levels, high literacy rates, and changing values. Countries in the Middle East have these things, too. But if we as Muslims or Middle Easterners get married later, it’s just because we’re poor?”
In saying this, you conveniently ignore the huge difference there is between unmarried people in the West (and their multitude of options to “relieve” themselves, emotionally as well as physically) and the poor Egyptians who are either scared to have some premarital fun or sincerely believe it’s a sin.
NYT’s piece doesn’t say, or even imply in any way, that some people are muslims simply because they’re sexually frustrated, but it makes a connection between such frustrations and the rise of Islamism in countries such as Egypt and perhaps Turkey. The youth are looking for answers. and for a decent life. If they can’t find it in this world, they’ll seek it in the afterlife.
Posted 22 Feb 2008 at 3:47 am ¶
Ms. Four wrote:
As an American (non-Muslim) expat in Cairo, I read this article completely differently. Lately the Times and other papers have been focusing on the very rough economic situation in Egypt, where, bread prices have doubled in the past year and doctors may make as little as $45 a month. Unemployment is high, even for college graduates, a privileged class.
Here’s a recent LA Times article on the same topic (you have to register to read it though):
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-fg-busdriver15feb15,1,6228569.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
There are many devout Muslims in Egypt. What the article is saying is not that people are turning to Islam out of desperation. It’s that in times of particular desperation, they have nothing except their religion–when they themselves would choose more if they could.
Being married and having a family is the cornerstone of self-identity for many Egyptians, old and young. If that isn’t open to you because you can’t afford it, you may feel like a non-person.
You dismissed Sayyid’s frustrations about not being able to marry by saying, “Like he’ll never get another” chance. Indeed, that’s the whole point: in a place where an regular person may make $50-$100/month, a $20,000 price tag for a wedding IS out of reach and may mean that you CAN’T get married. That’s perhaps easily dismissed for a western woman with many options and choices in life, but things are very different in Egypt.
Fatemeh, I understand you feel defensive about Islam, but I think you are dismissing the concerns of very poor Egyptians from a place of extreme privilege and a real lack of understanding about the challenges of being poor in the developing world.
Posted 22 Feb 2008 at 6:14 am ¶
luckyfatima wrote:
the article is not inaccurate about the situation in Egypt of dowry costs—for middle and upper class Egyptians, the groom has to provide a flat and a set of furniture in order to prove himself able to provide for a family—this leads to all kinds of problems, like guys who can never marry and girls who go without because it is just too expensive to get married. The articles myopic conclusion is wrong, though. Islam is the negative result of exorbitant marriage demands and sexual frustration? Huh? Oh, it is all that simple. the article also neglected to mention a lot of other consequences of this social problem. For example, in Egyptian religious scholarship, a type of marriage called ‘urfi, (kind of like a secret or just common law marriage) has also been declared permissable so that couples can elope without parents’ demands and a formal wedding, things like that. The article is just about the simplistic view sexual frustration leads to militant Islam. Cuz as we know, dogmatic religion is the opiate of the frustrated masses and all…and the main frustration a Muslim/Middle Easterner has is of course sexual. It’s not about globalization, economics, a repressive gov’t, unemployment, the cost of bread. It’s all about sex.
The other thing is that Egypt is a distinct place with a unique culture and what goes on in Egypt does not apply to the rest of the Middle East or Muslim world. I don’t like how the article draws conclusions about the entire Middle East based on Egyptian issues. In other countries, the dowry practice is totally different and this whole article is irrelevent outside of the Egyptian context.
This is just poor journalism.
Posted 22 Feb 2008 at 6:36 am ¶
Latoya Peterson wrote:
I read this article with interest a few days ago. As a non-Muslimah, the message the article was trying to convey is neatly summed up in this paragraph:
Like most religious young people, Mr. Sayyid is not an extremist. But with religious conservatism becoming the norm — the starting point — it is easier for extremists to entice young people over the line. There is simply a larger pool to recruit from and a shorter distance to go, especially when coupled with widespread hopelessness.
Net takeaway from the article - Egypt’s kids are poor with no hope. They aren’t jihadists yet, but keep an eye on them.
I found it interesting that there was very little explanation of why there is such widespread poverty in Egypt. They explained the job slow down, but not too much was explained about the government or entrepreneurship issues.
Not too long ago, I read a long article on the Freeter culture in Japan. The conditions here were similar - youth that are widely unemployed, severely delayed entering the job market, and unable to wed or start a family due to the high cost of living and cultural expectations. However, the article did not point out any cause for alarm - freeters were seen as a problem for Japan to sort out.
Interesting how the perspective changes once religion is thrown in the mix.
Posted 22 Feb 2008 at 9:41 am ¶
Josh wrote:
yeah, thats a really stupid piece from the ny times. pissed off people turn to religion in general to give them guidance (and to justify their being pissed off at others). simplifying it like that is pretty messed up. primitive racism once again.
Posted 22 Feb 2008 at 10:15 am ¶
technophobicgeek wrote:
I think that this blog post is being extremely reactionary to the Nyt article. I am from a working class neighborhood in India - the religion is different, but many of the social mores are similar.
Marriage is a social duty, an obligation, and not being able to marry is a cause for shame, for both men and women, though for different reasons. You are being extremely trivial and condescending in dismissing Sayyid’s frustrations at not being able to marry. There is a sexual component to that frustration, but more importantly he sees it as a personal failure.
Religion often serves as a resort for youth like this, because it tells them that their suffering has a higher purpose, Or that they are somehow better for it. Religion has always gained strength in societies with political and economic problems, and I think the article is just pointing that out. It is also reasonable in pointing out that * some* Of these young men are susceptible to jihadist brainwashing
Posted 22 Feb 2008 at 10:28 am ¶
Colin wrote:
What is “jihadist brainwashing”?
Posted 22 Feb 2008 at 1:04 pm ¶
Fatemeh wrote:
Thanks for your comments, everybody!
I agree that I may have been more than irritated when writing this post. But I think the NYT article was a bad one because of how it collapsed the entire Middle East and the a fair share of Muslims into this one little box that applies to some Egyptians.
I think perhaps that luckyfatima and Latoya put it into words more eloquently than I could.
I understand the weight of marriage as one who lives within the Iranian community; there are a number of social similarities attached to marriage in the Iranian community, and many youth in Iran face similar obstacles to independence and marriage because of the bad economy, and feel similarly frustrated. But the majority of them do not turn to conservative Islam.
This article might lead people who read this to apply Egyptians’ challenges to the rest of the Middle East or the Muslim world. The experiences and frustrations of one generation in one developing country will never mirror those of other generations or other developing countries because of differing social factors, histories, traditions, governments, etc.
Posted 22 Feb 2008 at 1:33 pm ¶
NancyP wrote:
The two people in the article were Muslim before the marriages were called off, and are still Muslim, just more observant. Why is this a surprise? 1. they have more time on their hands 2. religion is a consolation. As if we haven’t seen this phenomenon in American churches of all denominations. I imagine that the letdown is even harder when one lives in a society where the unmarried(past a certain age) really are regarded as not-quite-adult. And if there is an age differential between husband and wife, the let-down woman is going to be more anxious about finding someone. Again, a more exaggerated version of the turns-30-no-ring panic that hits some American women.
Posted 22 Feb 2008 at 2:43 pm ¶
sfsinger wrote:
Besides, since religion has been mentioned I was under the impression that a lot of Persians are in fact Jewish.
Posted 23 Feb 2008 at 12:51 am ¶
Shereen Zaky wrote:
i don’t think you’re supposed to feel that the situation is the same all over the Muslim world. if it were, they wouldn’t be having a series of articles, it would be just the one. While Michael Slackman has a reputation among the egyptian journalistic community as a lazy corespondent who doesn’t research his own stories, not everything he says is outrageous or racist or whatever.
for one thing, i can’t express just how strongly marriage ACTUALLY is the gateway to life here. if u are unmarried, you have NO CHOICE but to live with your parents forever, and obviously not to have sex. It’s not as if the obvious answer is to turn to radical religion in itself: people in Egypt ARE religious, even if sometimes only by appearance. The society is immensely conservative, and Islam is the most encouraged of consolations, since it also helps resist against temptations. even though he doesn’t focus on it enough, the role of economic hardship and repression is immense in producing the rise in RADICAL Islam - not just devotion per se.
there is something also to be said for the influence of living in a collective society in promoting ideas faster and fostering conservatism, of course.
in discussion about this article with friends, we noted that the article - indeed the world - fails to notice the immense appeal of political Islam, not as a last resort but as a good one. as a friend of mine said: “Islam does offer a system for social and political organization. It is viable, it is relevant to people, and they feel drawn to it intellectually, emotionally, and ethically. Even people who ARE married and who make way more money than any of us.”
in fact, there is a follow up article where rich young people are inteviewed and they reflect a certain rise in piousness. it’s on the rise all over egypt, not just among the poor. not that there isn’t still a growing number of ultra western ultra liberal young people as well.
so i do support that he seems to be implying that increased religious devotion has no innate appeal in itself, or that it’s something new and restricted to Muslims: but it doesn’t mean there ISN’T a rise, or that it’s nothing to do with the increasing difficulties of life in Egypt. it’s just to do with more than that, is all.
Posted 23 Feb 2008 at 4:45 am ¶
Jeremy Pierce wrote:
There’s a lot of turning to God in hard times, and it’s got nothing to do with the particulars of any religion. This is just an instance of it with two Muslims. Christians, Jews, and other theists do it too. The phenomenon they’re pointing to is certainly independent of Islam itself. It’s a normal part of human psychology. It isn’t bad to notice that, although I won’t speak for how they presented it (since I don’t have time to read the article right now).
Posted 23 Feb 2008 at 8:59 pm ¶
forgotusername wrote:
I don’t understand the sympathy with Islam over here? I’m African and Islam is closely connected with suffering and misery in my continent. Yes, there are many caveats to my statement, but ask any non-Muslim African what they think of the effects of Islam on Africa, and they’ll likely have nothing positive to say.
Posted 24 Feb 2008 at 8:26 pm ¶
Sabrina wrote:
I think it’s interesting how so many of the comments to this post tend towards the belief that criticizing this NYT’s article is overly reactionary. But no one seems to have acknowledged that the article itself comes from “a place of extreme privilege and a real lack of understanding about the challenges of being poor in the developing world” as will most of its audience.
Newspapers like the NYT has a history of glorifying/manipulating certain “truths” to paint a culture or religion as backwards. So this “truth” is that there are a lot of real issues with poverty in the global south that can lead to a rise in religious observance. Writers then place value judgments on “truths.” …seriously, no one found it weird that “something snapped” for Ms. Ashour before she “seeks solace in increasingly strict religious practice?” Loaded words, it seems.
There is a fragile dynamic between the journalist and the people the journalist purports to represent. The journalist is usually in a position of power/privilege just by being a journalist. Just because an article contains “truths” does not exempt it from that dynamic. The problematic way that mainstream media portrays Islam is just as real as the situations that these Egyptian youth are facing. And it’s unfair and unnecessary to say that criticizing the former negates the latter.
Who reads the NYT? Mostly Americans probably. And who will face the brunt of an insensitively written NYT article? Probaby Muslim Americans. So it’s ironic that being Muslim in America means that you are “too privileged” to critically examine representations of Islam.
Posted 01 Mar 2008 at 2:50 pm ¶
Aquarianbrass wrote:
I’m disturbed more with the implication that practicing the tenets of Islam leads to Islamism(politicized Islam)
It constructs a frame in peoples head that automatically connects up piety and politics, when my intuition suggest the opposite. I don’t think the more pious ones are the ones most susceptible to being assimilated by the “extremist”. Most pious devotees I know eschew politics.
And being that anger is the premilanary state to any sort of violent engagement, it seems that people with quietist leanings are hardly candidates for radicalization. I suspect most radicals hardly have time to pick up a Koran or say prayers., since their minds and mouths did to be filled with tirades not Koranic verses.
At least this is what informants actually said about the Taliban. Just my thoughts.
Posted 04 Mar 2008 at 1:39 pm ¶