One of my favorite aspects of feminism is that it encourages women to speak out about issues that matter to us and make our ideas, opinions, and thoughts heard. Feminism values women's voices; it understands that, in general, the more discourse happens, the more people can understand one another. However, what happens when some women use their voices to oppress others? Is it ever OK to tell a woman to sit down and shut up?

Two recent incidents made me want to utter the verboten phrase. On one end of the spectrum, we have Michelle Malkin, rallying the world against Rachael Ray's scarf in a Dunkin' Donuts commercial. On the other, we have Belgian Malika El Aroud, using her words as a weapon in jihad.

The Dunkin' Donuts "controversy" was born on May 23, when Malkin wrote on her blog about Ray's "clueless sporting of a jihadi chic keffiyeh in a recent DD ad campaign. I’m hoping her hate couture choice was spurred more by ignorance than ideology." Overly sensitive right-wing ideologues considered a ban on Dunkin' Donuts (which, thanks to Malkin's blog, I now know supports restrictive immigration policies, which is rather ironic for a franchise business that is often operated by immigrants, but I digress). By May 27th, The Boston Globe reported that Dunkin' Donuts "abruptly canceled" the ad which caused such offense.

On one hand, this whole thing makes me want to laugh. Do we not have anything better to worry about than the scarf worn by a pitchwoman for iced coffee? On the other, the cultural hatred shown in these statements is terrifying. I'll say it: I am a proud supporter of Israel. I believe that it has a right to exist, and that a two state solution must be worked out. But I no more look at a keffiyeh and associate it with terrorism than I view a priest's collar and associate it with the Inquisition; it's the condemnation of an entire people and culture, and it makes no sense. I don't think this is what feminists had in mind when we encouraged women to add their voices to political discourse. The only upside to this type of statement is that it may be drown out in the infamous marketplace of ideas.

The flip side to Malkin is El Aroud. According to an article in The New York Times, El Aroud:

...insists that she does not disseminate instructions on bomb-making and has no intention of taking up arms herself. Rather, she bullies Muslim men to go and fight and rallies women to join the cause.

“It’s not my role to set off bombs — that’s ridiculous,” she said in a rare interview. “I have a weapon. It’s to write. It’s to speak out. That’s my jihad. You can do many things with words. Writing is also a bomb.”

She even reflects the ideals of feminism in defense of her hate speech, saying, "It is important that I am a woman. There are men who don’t want to speak out because they are afraid of getting into trouble. Even when I get into trouble, I speak out." This is the ultimate perversion of the power of women's speech. Feminism was not meant to empower women to so that we can encourage the murder of others.

What scares me about El Aroud's use of speech is that it not only encourages others to eradicate women like me, but it also provides a kernel of justification to women like Malkin. In both cases, I worry that the marketplace of ideas may not even be effective. Other women may add their voices to the discussion, but the followers of women like El Aroud and Malkin chose to be ignorant. Facts are meaningless to them unless they conform with their world view. El Aroud told the Times that, “Women didn’t have problems under the Taliban." Malkin has argued that the interment of the Japanese during WWII was an appropriate response to Pearl Harbor.

Again, if the point of feminism is that women should be heard, how do we encourage women to share their views and experiences when we sometimes disagree with them? Who decides what is appropriate and what should be condemned? How does culture fit into the picture? Gulfs between us appear on all sorts of topics, not just whether a scarf resembles a keffiyeh or someone issues a call to arms. For example, I've vehemently disagreed with other American women on whether abortion should be legal, if I am obligated to vote for Hillary Clinton, and whether Brazilian waxes were some sort of sick manifestation of a return to childhood. Thanks to some of these discussions, I've learned a lot and changed my stance on some issues (although not my personal blog's title). On others, I've wanted to clamp my hands over my ears and tell people to stick it where the sun don't shine.

Other women are saying:

• "So, what do you know, there's even a glass ceiling in jihad." - Tracey Clark-Flory on Salon's Broadsheet
• "In Sweden the "palestina scarf" as we call it has been a staple of communist, punks, vegans and other alternative kids clothing since the seventies..." - Dabitch on Adland

Suzanne also blogs about life at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants, about yogurt at Live Active Cultures, and about creating positive social change at Just Cause.