In this week's readings, Puar elaborates on concepts introduced in her previous chapter concerning homonationalism and biopolitics, connecting it to the Abu Ghraib case where Iraqi prisoners were tortured at length by US soldiers, sparking international debate and outrage. By expounding upon the notion of US exceptionalism, Puar explains how the Abu Ghraib case and its reception is a highly emotionally charged platform through which the US displays its tendency to discourses of state of exception.
Mentioned in both of the readings is Patai's The Arab Mind, a text that formed the basis for these cultural assumptions, in turn leading into the formation of the Muslim subject perceived to be sexually repressed and prideful, which in turn helped develop the torture methods used by the soldiers in Abu Ghraib. The kind of violence targeted in this case, sexual violation, and the transparency of the crime help to project US culture and viewpoint on the Muslim subject. By declaring that this act was particularly atrocious due to the humiliation suffered by a "homosexual act", the US not only creates an all-encompassing structure of Muslim culture, but also positions itself as a nation that is more open-minded, more tolerant, and more "progressive" than its ethnic other. Similar to the case of the two men charged with rape of another boy when underage, the incident at Abu Ghraib is also being used as a vehicle for further propulsion on the subject of homosexuality in the US through its focus on the sexual crime. As various members of the LBGT community lament the negative light cast by this incident, Puar argues that the main atrocity, the corporeal torture of the prisoners, stays in the shadows.For this case to even receive media attention, it had to fit a certain criteria in line with the news' agenda. The US as occupying nation manages to turn a particularly heinous crime into a representation of itself as a "free" nation, diverting attention away from the normalization of corporeal torture. By condemning these acts as sexual violation, the US has secured itself as the moral upholder, home to those that are "truly free."
Nicely written. I found many of Puar's arguments to be valuable, particularly the one suggesting that the techniques of sexual and bodily torture inflicted on the Abu Ghraib prisoners was strategically imposed by the U.S. military as a civilizing mission and also a form of subjugation and occupation. Puar mentions that some of the acts of torture consisted of forcing the prisoners to eat pork and drink alcohol, which are forbidden under Islam and also forcing the prisoners to simulate gay sex. You mention the US motive to create an "all-encompassing structure of Muslim culture," which also exemplifies aspects of Orientalism. Torture in this context is largely seen as a civilizing mission. Civilizing the Muslim "other" is a crucial aspect of Orientalist discourse and this is why the framework in which this "civilizing mission" operates in is indisputably Orientalist. Orientalist notions suggest the perverse, deviant and pedophilic nature of male Arab/Muslim sexualities are in need of being tamed and civilized (as suggested by Raphael Patai in his book, The Arab Mind). This text which was arguably used as a handbook to inform the tortures also claimed, "Arabs only understand force" and shame and humiliation is their" biggest weakness" according to Patai. Such fictitious and manufactured knowledge homogenizes Arab/Muslim cultures and subjects and potentially seeks to justify a civilizing mission. Although I knew about the Abu Ghraib tortures prior to this reading, Puar's essay made me realize how strategic and meticulously thought-out the diverse forms of torture were; purposely intended to specifically dehumanize the imagined "Muslim terrorist" subject.
ReplyDeleteMara, you did a awesome job summarizing this week readings on homonationalism and biopolitics. Both concepts were clearly introduced in the beginning, thus stating its relation to the Abu Ghriad case. The reading Terrorist Assemblages highlights the notion of homonationalism, sexual exceptionalism,and queer throughout the reading, in which allowed me to get a general understanding of the U.S. position with the Muslim culture. Overall, I enjoyed reading your summary about the reading, and now understand the cultrual assumptions that U.S. imposed on the Muslim culture.
ReplyDeleteVery well summarized Mara! Great Job! From Puar's reading, It is clear that how US regime had justified its torture during war time on Muslim bodies through the tool of shame and guilt by exposing them to homosexuality. And how "The Arab Mind" has been used as a handbook for US military force in order to victimize and "civilize" Muslim people. A knowledge production of Orientalism, where everything about Muslim culture is critiqued, from clothing to language, from Arab people's mind in handling them through force and humility, from repetitive and uncreative art and music to family upbringing was brought up in "Misreading.." which homogenizes all muslim bodies and their culture. In Puar's article, a lot is discussed about Abu Gharib's case. I have known this case before, but not through sexuality and US exceptionalism perspective. Everything in Muslim culture is seen as dehumanizing, was acted upon the prisoners in Abu Gharib; a female military personnel, England, torturing the prisoners (punishment from women), how homosexuality is seen as a sin in Muslim culture was exposed in pictures (all prisoners touching each other's genitals) and made it look like homosexuality is profoundly existent in Muslim culture. Like Mara has mentioned, how this act positions US itself as more open-minded, liberal, more progressive, more tolerant as oppose to Muslim culture. Overall, very sad and humiliating Abu Gharib case and still how Bush regime got through it, justifying the torture needed on terrorist bodies.
ReplyDelete