Who Monitors the Public Square?

Dareen Halima, a Syrian refugee in Holland, is taking Arab social media by storm.

“Yes, I had sex with a free thinking and physically attractive man and I don’t feel ashamed,” she declared in a recent Facebook post entitled “I Had Sex.” “Rather I feel strong, worthy and ... like I made the right choice.”

Halima is no stranger to outspoken advocacy—her NGO Nasawyia (the Arabic word for “feminism”) promotes literacy around women’s rights—but “I Had Sex” has catapulted her into the spotlight. Halima’s assertion that she felt empowered by casual sex, rather than ashamed, struck at a central taboo among Muslim communities that weaponize Islamic law to suppress women’s agency. The female body is the site of abiding controversy, politicization, and control in Islam—until last month, the Saudi government barred women from traveling, registering a divorce or marriage, or applying for official documents without permission from a male guardian.

As a result, Halima’s post attracted tens of thousands of comments applauding her courage—as well as such emphatic outcry that, she tells me, Facebook is currently considering shutting her page down.

Her situation illuminates an intensifying struggle playing out online between the forces of tradition and reform. The Middle East and North Africa, according to Freedom House, has “historically been the least free region in the world”—and social media plays a singular, pivotal role in elevating dissenting voices and facilitating exchange of ideas. Online activists (including Halima) have seized on the tragic “honor killing” of Israa Ghrayeb, a 21-year-old Palestinian woman beaten to death by family members last month for posting an Instagram video of herself with her fiancé. Her story might have been buried with her had it not been for the feminist Palestinian Facebook group Do You Know Him, which posted an alleged recording of Ghrayeb screaming in the hospital while being beaten by her father, brothers and brother-in-law. The case caught fire across social media—even Rep. Rashida Talib (D-Mich.) tweeted out the hashtag #JusticeforIsraa—prompting mounting public pressure on the Palestinian Authority to take action. As of last week, three of Ghrayeb’s relatives face murder charges for her death.

The case highlights social media’s growing role as a force for cultural and political change—as well as an accompanying, equally weighty development. While debates around Ghrayeb’s honor killing and Halima’s defense of her own sexuality take place largely in Muslim communities, they are arbitrated by U.S. social media companies tasked with moderating such discussions—platforms that subsequently find themselves with enormous, unprecedented influence in societies that have traditionally limited open expression.

For many, the development is welcome: Entire communities are being rewired for greater participation and transparency, as I outline in my forthcoming book A Million Clicks to Freedom. But what separates the line between informed critique and hate speech? While platforms may be reluctant to curtail the voices of Halima and other activists, criticism of long-standing cultural and religious traditions might strike some as blatant Islamophobia—no small consideration for social media companies, which face growing pressure to ban racist, white supremacist, and anti-immigrant rhetoric from their sites.

The question, for these companies, is how to foster audacious Muslim voices in the same way they foster—for good or for ill—western voices. Is there a double standard being applied? My concern is that it’s a perverted form of racism wrapped in cultural relativism that keeps Halima and many activists like her worried about having their platforms silenced. And if the virtual space is no longer available to them, where should they go to push for reform in their communities?