this post was submitted on 27 May 2024
3 points (50.8% liked)

World News

38647 readers
2325 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Reading too much into the language seems, at this point, to be less of a danger than reading too little into it.

This week, Israel released an appalling video featuring five female Israeli soldiers taken captive at Nahal Oz military base on October 7. Fearful and bloody, the women beg for their lives while Hamas fighters mill around and alternately threaten to kill them and compliment their appearance. The captors call the women “sabaya,” which Israel translated as “women who can get pregnant.” Almost immediately, others disputed the translation and said sabaya referred merely to “female captives” and included no reference to their fertility. “The Arabic word sabaya doesn’t have sexual connotations,” the Al Jazeera journalist Laila Al-Arian wrote in a post on X, taking exception to a Washington Post article that said that it did. She said the Israeli translation was “playing on racist and orientalist tropes about Arabs and Muslims.”

These are real women and victims of ongoing war crimes, so it does seem excessively lurid to suggest, without direct evidence, that they have been raped in captivity for the past several months. (“Eight months,” the Israelis noted, allowing readers to do the gestational math. “Think of what that means for these young women.”) But to assert that sabaya is devoid of sexual connotation reflects ignorance, at best. The word is well attested in classical sources and refers to female captives; the choice of a classical term over a modern one implies a fondness for classical modes of war, which codified sexual violence at scale. Just as concubine and comfort woman carry the befoulments of their historic use, sabaya is straightforwardly associated with what we moderns call rape. Anyone who uses sabaya in modern Gaza or Raqqah can be assumed to have specific and disgusting reasons to want to revive it.

Archive Link

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sami@lemmy.zip 84 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (5 children)

This is just straight up racist propaganda. No other way to describe it

sabaya is straightforwardly associated with what we moderns call rape

Absolutely factually incorrect. Sabaya is the plural of sabiye which means young woman/girl. The masculine form is sabi which means boy or shab for young man (not exactly symmetric like use of guy vs girl in english). Zero sexual connotation and used in everyday language in levantine arabic.

[–] ralphio@lemmy.world 39 points 4 months ago

Yep. And the subheading I really have a problem with.

Reading too much into the language seems, at this point, to be less of a danger than reading too little into it.

The implication being that it's low stakes to make this accusation without solid evidence. In reality the whole justification from the West for the state of affairs between Israel and Palestine is that Arabs are a bunch of backwards savages, and this extends to the way the West has acted throughout the Middle East.

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 22 points 4 months ago

Honestly, the use of the word "moderns" is enough to tell you it's a racist interpretation.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 13 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Isn't Sabaya just like Senorita where they indicate an unmarried young woman? Or, like, Miss?

[–] Sami@lemmy.zip 14 points 4 months ago

Pretty much yes. (Ma)demoiselle vs madame are also used due to french influence over the region for singular use but sabaya is what you would use for a group of younger women with neswein being the alternative for older/married women.

[–] PanArab@lemm.ee -3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You are confusing سبايا captives (male or female the word is genderless) with صبايا young women

[–] Sami@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

At the time, I watched the video and I didn't even catch the word so I thought the claim came from other footage and I was under the impression that it was deliberate misrepresentation of words. I went back to listen to the part where he says it but I still couldn't make it out definitively (maybe that's on me if you can).

[–] PanArab@lemm.ee -3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

They said هاي السبايا " those are captives".

The Arabic word for female slaves are إماء Imaa' and جواري Jawari and singular female slave are أمة Amat and جارية Jariyat.