Eight years ago, three Egyptian women embarked at Alexandria on a ship bound for Italy. They were heading for Rome, to attend the International Alliance of Women Congress. Al-Ahram Weekly examines contemporary responses of the Italian and Egyptian press to this historic eventBeneath the banners
Amina Elbendary examines the subtexts in local responses to the return of the Egyptian delegation from Rome
The Egyptian delegation's participation in an international conference and their interaction with activists from other countries was preceded by the formation of the Egyptian Feminist Union in March, partly in preparation for the international event. And, indeed, the Rome Conference of 1923 has long been regarded as a watershed n the historiography of the Egyptian feminist movement with a great deal being made, for example, of the decision by the delegation to unveil.
In contrast to the reaction that the Egyptian delegation -- and indeed the whole conference -- elicited in Italy (see above), the delegation was accorded much respect back home. Their trip, however, was played neither up nor down.
Al-Ahram's front page of 1 June published a press release from the Democratic Party welcoming the delegation back and expressing "relief at the direction of the Egyptian women towards social reform" as well as admiration and gratitude for Shaarawi.
The early feminist movement in Egypt couched its programme and demands in nationalist tones, consciously presenting itself as part of the nationalist project for independence which was itself going through a tumultuous period in the wake of the First World War. This allowed the pioneering women of the EFU -- with no insincerity, it must be noted -- to present/pass their objectives and ideals as ones for a broader constituency. The common accusation directed against feminism, that it is a Western import, could hardly be directed at Hoda Shaarawi, Ceza Nabarawi and Nabawiya Moussa in 1923. Somehow, these women's characters, as well as their class and political backgrounds (including Shaarawi's association with the Wafd Party) shielded them.
That the women played the nationalist card well is evident from their dispatches from Rome as well as the speeches and interviews they gave upon their arrival. But this was a double- edged sword. It also meant that what were perceived as national ideals always took precedence over more focussed and limited demands relating to women in particular. The press often highlighted the EFU's efforts to guarantee equal education to men and women rather than demands for suffrage and political rights -- a point an early feminist oppositionist, Munira Thabet, took against the EFU women in an article published in Al-Ahram on 14 May. (And, indeed, while the 1923 constitution declared all Egyptians equal the electoral law that was passed immediately after restricted political rights to men only.)
At the conference the Egyptian delegation also highlighted the issue of education, with Shaarawi outlining the obstacles put in the place of women's education, accusing the British of having actively discouraging it since 1910. The delegation was also in support of allowing organisations that were politically active into the international feminist union arguing that "involvement in politics is patriotic and patriotism isn't a sin or a fault but a virtue" -- a point well-argued given the fact that the EFU had itself grown out of the 1919 Revolution.
In a front page story on the conference in its 24 May issue Al-Ahram quotes parts of an interview Shaarawi gave in Italy: "Before woman demands her political rights her economic conditions have to be improved so that she can enjoy an independent existence and have her own opinions especially on political matters. Therefore, our first aim is to allow the Egyptian woman to improve her economic conditions by having the right to learn just like a man."
The idea of bridging differences between Western and Egyptian feminism was ripe even then. It is clear in Shaarawi's interviews with the Italian press and in subsequent commentary in Al- Ahram by Moussa, in which she elucidated that the main differences the Egyptians had with the internationals centred on the question of children born out of wedlock and venereal disease -- and nothing more.
"Reservations" regarding international conventions would remain a recurring motif in the history of Egyptian feminism, continuing till now. Already, on 4 May, Al-Ahram's report on the delegation's departure sought to reassure readers that the leaders had "agreed to a programme that matched the specificity of the status of women in our country, and that they would not be lured into the programme of the conference which had been attacked because it is foreign to our customs and traditions."
The women were perfectly conscious of their nationality, and of the fact they were not only representing women but also Egypt. The main aim of the delegation, they declared upon their departure, was to obliterate the dominant idea in the West of Egyptian women as totally isolated from public life. It was a strategy that made sense -- the fight for exclusively women's rights was not going to take place in Italy, where the delegation met with and interacted with activists from different countries and -- inevitably -- served as representatives of their nation and culture to the outside world.
In her report to Al-Ahram published on 25 May Nabawiya Moussa alluded to the racist condescension inherent in the group's European welcome: "The women expressed surprise at finding out that we were Egyptians because their impression of Egyptian women was different from what they saw. They thought the Egyptian delegation would be beneath the Indian delegation that attended last year and the members of which had no opinions to share on the matters on the agenda."
The president of the conference was surprised and impressed to see the Egyptian flag at the time, which had a crescent hugging a cross. In its report on 17 May Al-Ahram stressed that the presence of the Egyptian delegation at the predominantly Anglo-Saxon conference was important and had caused ripples, especially among British political circles in Rome which had claimed that Egyptian women were incapable of participating in such a conference.
In its coverage of the conference Al- Lata'if Al-Musawwara, an illustrated magazine, was -- naturally -- preoccupied with the photographs. While photographs of women in the magazine were not entirely unheard of, they were rare and mainly of foreign women and actresses. In its issue of 28 May the magazine published photos of Hoda Shaarawi and Ceza Nabarawi on the front page, explaining that the magazine had shied away from publishing the photos of "famous Egyptian women unveiled" until other publications had opened the way. Al-Lata'if thus published the photos of Shaarawi and Nabarawi, heads covered and faces unveiled which, they explained, had appeared in the Sphinx magazine "on the occasion of their trip to Rome and participation in the general women's conference held in that city." The short item also referred to Shaarawi's call at the conference to the Egyptian woman to "participate in the political affairs of the nation because this is one of the prerogatives of sincere patriotism." Al-Lata'if's 11 June issue had another item on the conference, publishing a photo of its president and another with Mussolini in a group photo with some of the participants.
Some scholars, have dated the unveiling of Egyptian women not to the 1919 Revolution during which they went out on demonstrations, but rather to the Rome conference and the decision by the three women to unveil and the subsequent publication of their photographs in Egypt. It was, however, more likely a gradual process. Obviously the Shaarawi and Nabarawi photographs were significant, as Al-Lata'if's editors so self-consciously pointed out. They were "famous" women, but also women of a certain class and stature in society. But it is worth noting that an issue earlier, on 14 May, the magazine published photos of Safiyya Zaghlul and Fatma Thabet, faces unveiled and heads bonneted in a group photograph marking the release of Saad Zaghlul Pasha. Safiyya Zaghlul had also appeared unveiled on the cover of the 7 May issue alongside her husband in another group photograph. These latter photographs, though, were taken in the West and then republished in Egypt.
In Feminists, Islam and Nation, Margot Badran recounts an anecdote by Ceza Nabarawi's concerning unveiling: it was later in the same year when the Zaghluls were returning to Egypt on the same ship as Hoda Shaarawi. Shaarawi no longer covered her face and Saad Zaghlul expressed approval, suggesting his wife emulate her. However, Wafdist men who gathered the dignitaries on the ship in Alexandria disapproved, arguing that the people would not accept to see the wife of the national leader unveiled. Hence, Safiyya went down veiled, Hoda with her face uncovered.
The issue of unveiling had apparently come up during the conference and Al- Ahram alludes to it in one of its dispatches, though the report remains characteristically reticent on details. The three women had considered altering their dress so they would cease to be objects of attention, the readers were told, without further details.
Rereading the Egyptian press of 1923 one is left with the impression not of how much of a watershed the Rome conference was in the history of the Egyptian feminist movement but -- sadly -- how many of its underlying presumptions and problematics remain much the same 80 years on.
Al-Ahram Weekly Online : 24 - 30 July 2003 (Issue No. 648)
Located at: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2003/648/cu5.htm