When “Women’s Rights” Justify Racism: Collective Punishment after Cologne

Women’s bodies should not be loci of political and moral debate and, yet, here we are. The recent string of sexual assaults in Cologne have understandably triggered backlash – but not against patriarchy or even sexual assault, mind you, but against refugees and non-white foreigners in general.

Sexual assault is, without question, disgusting and reprehensible – it is the duty of government to prevent sexual assault, prosecute offenders, and deliver just punishment. But collective punishment is never just. The idea that the many will have to account for the actions of a rare few is expressly proscribed by the Geneva conventions. And yet, unfortunately, this idea is no longer confined to the petty margins of right-winger quackings; it is becoming alarmingly mainstream.

It’s a strange day when Angela Merkel and Donald Trump oscillate on the same general wavelength. Within days of the attacks, the following refrain appeared from Donald Trump’s Twitter account:

“Germany is going through massive attacks to its people by the migrants allowed to enter the country. New Years Eve was a disaster. THINK!”

While we can expect racist vitriol from our friend Donald, Merkel’s reaction (although infinitely more reserved) was more disturbing. Instead of advancing legislation targeting sexual assault, she proposed a law that would make it easier to expel any refugee handed a jail term. It goes without saying that deportation to Assad’s war-and-famine-torn Syria is a harsher sentence than any blue-eyed European would ever receive. When sexual assault against women is so often trivialized in our societies (see: Rape Culture), why does it only make headlines when perpetrated by Middle Eastern men? For that, we turn to our social theorists.

One can imagine Michel Foucault and Edward Said turning over, synchronized in their respective graves. We can see what Foucault calls scientia sexualis at work; that is, the Western obsession with categorizing sexualities – normative or aberrant, acceptable or abhorrent. This sexuality is created and becomes an independent entity, a characteristic of a person or group instead of an act or crime. Because the West sees the ‘Orient’ as a static, backwards, and largely uniform ‘Other,’ the deviant sexual behavior of a few refugees has been transposed on the bulk of Brown men who happen to reside in Germany. According to Said, the Western imagination of the ‘Oriental Other’ is a one-dimensional caricature that follows a predictable archetype: non-white men are irrational, unbridled brutes. During the era of imperialism, this caricature justified European colonial rule and expansionism. Today it justifies the exclusion of refugees and the perpetuation of an oppressive racial hierarchy.

The exploitation of the struggles of women and queer people to further an anti-immigrant agenda is not a new tactic. Just last month, Norway began giving migrants lessons on Western sexual norms and ‘how to treat women’ (Higgins). In 2006, Dutch authorities added a test of tolerance to their immigration requirements by showing videos of gay men kissing (Couch). It must be reiterated that this is an unfair double standard. When sexism and homophobia run rampant among white Europeans, it cannot be fair that Muslim immigrants must have to pass imposed tests of sexual forbearance in order to earn their (inalienable) rights.

This critique is not to excuse anyone of violence, sexism, or homophobia. It is a call to realize that all such acts are equally reprehensible – whether they take place at Oktoberfest or your local frat house. It is unacceptable that sexual assault is brushed under the rug when it serves white men but is selectively brought to light when used to perpetuate xenophobia and Islamophobia. Feminism is the fight against oppression; we cannot let it become another of the oppressor’s tools.