Women and Islam

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Islam
  3. » Women and Islam

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Reply Sun 18 Oct, 2009 05:12 pm
Please use this thread to discuss any issues related to women and islam.

Please be civil and well mannered even if you disagree with other peoples views.
 
Caroline
 
Reply Sun 18 Oct, 2009 05:21 pm
@ahmedjbh,
Does the Koran specifically say that women should walk behind their husbands and if so why and what else does it say about womens positions within Islam?
Thanks and goodnight, will pick this thread back up in the morning.
Thank you
Caz.
 
xris
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 06:20 am
@Caroline,
This is going to be another divisive thread,whatever is said. I wont take the moderate Muslims view as the whole truth and if i say certain things then ill be marked as anti muslim.

Lets start with why should we need four women as a witness against the value of one mans witness in sharia courts? This cant be too controversial.
 
Dave Allen
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 06:59 am
@ahmedjbh,
posted in the other thread, but I'll say it here too if it keeps things neat.

Quote:
It's a matter of interpretation (like all religious writing).

The Koran permits a man to enter polygamous marriages, but not a woman. It does state that a man has to treat each wife with equal affection - which many muslims claim is impossible anyway, and so it is largely ignored (though not always, obviously).

Muslim tradition states that men and women both dress modestly. Ali (the founder of Shia Islam and mohammed's right hand man at the time of his death) particularly stressed the importance (as he saw it) of modest dress for women, which has become infamous for the full-body coverage of burkhas and yashmaks. many muslim women stress that it is a manifestation of their faith that they wear such garb - a free choice - however it's difficult not to imagine that they have been encouraged to do so by members of their community. Some muslim authorities and sects (such as Hamas in Palestine) demand women cover their hair at all times and have been known to punish those who do not.

Women walking behind men is a Kurdish tradition rather than an islamic one, though many Kurds are muslims (indeed Salladin was a Kurd and a hugely influential muslim leader).

Female circumcision is, by and large, a north African tradition. It is one that apparently horrified Mohammed, who states in the Hadith (the Hadith is things that Mohammed allegedly said that didn't go into the Koran) that it should not be attempted and if it has to be at least the perpetrators should do it in the least severe manner. This is seen by some as permission and by others as prohibition. It should be noted that some of the worst genital mutilation occurs in Christian or tribal faith areas of North Africa (such as Ethiopia) rather than Muslim areas - that said a lot of north Africa is muslim and it's a shame Mohammed wasn't more emphatic about not doing it.

In other ways Islam did trailblaze women's rights. The arabs were one of the first societies to allow women divorces and property rights.


---------- Post added 10-19-2009 at 08:09 AM ----------

xris;98449 wrote:
This is going to be another divisive thread,whatever is said. I wont take the moderate Muslims view as the whole truth and if i say certain things then ill be marked as anti muslim.

Lets start with why should we need four women as a witness against the value of one mans witness in sharia courts? This cant be too controversial.

Xris, I think the reason people take umbrage with your remarks isn't that you're necessarily coming across as anti-muslim, but you are:

a) Rarely in full possession of the facts.

b) You use your partial understanding to leap to unpleasant and exaggerated mischaracterisations.

For example, take this four women witnesses thing. It's not entirely true and somewhat misleading. The following page explains in detail the way the Koran suggests witness testimony is gathered:

Why are two witnesses who are women, equivalent to only one witness who is a man ? - Yahoo! Answers

Now, it is still sexist - in my veiw - but it's only half as bad as you make it out to be.
 
xris
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 08:16 am
@Dave Allen,
If i come across as unpleasant its because i find the subject unpleasant, i don't make any apologises. I find the treatment of women in Islam as deplorable. I may have got the numbers wrong but the principles are the same. If i was to be anti islam then there are many links that could do it for me. Just cruise, the information is there. Making excuses for any faiths dogmatic excesses is not me being exactly anti Islam, its my anti dogmatic faith, full stop. Funny i never get accused of being anti christian when i moan about their faith. If a Muslim rapes a non believer how many witnesses does she need to prove he is a rapist? why should a man be able to have four wives but a women only one husband?
 
Dave Allen
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 08:28 am
@xris,
xris;98470 wrote:
If i come across as unpleasant its because i find the subject unpleasant, i don't make any apologises.

Which is why people take you for a bigot, because bigots characteristically jump to the most unpleasant conclusions and spout out their prejudices without requisite fact-checking.

And you do make apologies, which is big of you, you made an apology to me a few days back - because you had your facts wrong.

Why not make a bit more effort before trying to build a case on nothing more than intemperate rants backed up with not much?

Quote:
Just cruise, the information is there.

No. Make your case or lump it. What's the point of a discussion forum if the participants just refer their opponents to elsewhere?
 
xris
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 08:35 am
@Dave Allen,
Dave Allen;98475 wrote:
Which is why people take you for a bigot, because bigots characteristically jump to the most unpleasant conclusions and spout out their prejudices without requisite fact-checking.

And you do make apologies, which is big of you, you made an apology to me a few days back - because you had your facts wrong.

Why not make a bit more effort before trying to build a case on nothing more than intemperate rants backed up with not much?


No. Make your case or lump it. What's the point of a discussion forum if the participants just refer their opponents to elsewhere?
So whats more unpleasant you trying to excuse the fact that womens evidence are less than mans or mine for pointing it out. Yes i do applogise for any errors but not for my views. I have seen many unrepentant errors by those who make out islam as the peace loving faith, it is not.
 
Dave Allen
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 08:44 am
@ahmedjbh,
Quote:
So whats more unpleasant you trying to excuse the fact that womens evidence are less than mans or mine for pointing it out.

Is this a question?

I'm not sure I understand it.

You seem to be accusing me of excusing the disparity between women's testimony and men's in Sharia courts.

However, I did not do this.

In fact I called it sexist did I not?

Oh yeah - I did, on my first post in the thread.

I say again - You Should Check Your Facts.
 
xris
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 09:12 am
@Dave Allen,
Dave Allen;98481 wrote:
Is this a question?

I'm not sure I understand it.

You seem to be accusing me of excusing the disparity between women's testimony and men's in Sharia courts.

However, I did not do this.

In fact I called it sexist did I not?

Oh yeah - I did, on my first post in the thread.

I say again - You Should Check Your Facts.
Only half as bad, half as bad as what?" I only shot him once, not twice my lord"."oh that's ok my man, case dismissed"
 
Caroline
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 09:18 am
@ahmedjbh,
I just want to know are women regarded as second class citizens within the realms of Islam please.
Cheers.
 
Dave Allen
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 09:26 am
@ahmedjbh,
Quote:
Only half as bad, half as bad as what? "I only shot him once, not twice my lord". "Oh that's ok my man, case dismissed."

What a stunningly mature and considered response.

Shooting someone once is half as bad as shooting someone twice (all other criteria being equal).

Does this mean the case should be dismissed?

No. A guy (or woman) is still guilty of having shot another.

If you are having trouble grasping the complexities of this you have my sympathy. It's quite clear to me that sexism is sexism, but that judging two women as being as reliable as one man in financial law (specifically) is ... NOT ... AS ... SEXIST ... as judging four women the equal of a man in law (generally).

And so portraying the issue as a general regard that four women = one man in the eyes of Sharia is WRONG. And that before any sensible discussion of the sexism inherent in Sharia can go ahead we need to get past the silly exaggerations made in an attempt to smear Islam (rather than a smaller issue which is still admittedly sexist and which NO ONE is trying to excuse - despite your lies to the contrary).

Is this really so hard to grasp Xris? Can you manage to parse that, or is it beyond your ken, like?
 
Caroline
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 09:32 am
@ahmedjbh,
I think if you read the orginal op it states keep it CIVIL please.
Thanks.
 
xris
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 09:39 am
@Dave Allen,
Dave Allen;98490 wrote:
What a stunningly mature and considered response.

Shooting someone once is half as bad as shooting someone twice (all other criteria being equal).

Does this mean the case should be dismissed?

No. A guy (or woman) is still guilty of having shot another.

If you are having trouble grasping the complexities of this you have my sympathy. It's quite clear to me that sexism is sexism, but that judging two women as being as reliable as one man in financial law (specifically) is ... NOT ... AS ... SEXIST ... as judging four women the equal of a man in law (generally).

And so portraying the issue as a general regard that four women = one man is WRONG. And that before any sensible discussion of the sexism inherent in Sharia can go ahead we need to get past the silly exaggerations made in an attempt to smear Islam (rather than a smaller issue which is still admittedly sexist and which NO ONE is trying to excuse - despite your lies to the contrary).

Is this really so hard to grasp Xris? Can you manage to parse that, or is it beyond your ken, like?
Dont try and be too clever, it is too much apparent you have no real wish to debate women in islam but just to make your abuse heard. It was your words not mine..only half as bad..I will ask again, half as bad as what? It is also apparent that you think only requiring two women not four, is not a smear but four women is. How strange a concept is that, no its much to much for me to comprehend.
 
jgweed
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 09:42 am
@ahmedjbh,
This is a philosophy forum, not a name-calling forum.

I realise that religious discussions, at least witih some people, can become heated; but despite this, that does not excuse personal attacks or discussions aimed at denigrating Members of this community contrary to Forum Rules.

John
Forum Administrator
 
Caroline
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 09:48 am
@ahmedjbh,
I've heard a lot of stories where women are treated as second class citizens, (for want of a better word), according to the Koran, is this true, that the Koran really portrays women like this? I know there are extremists too but that is not what I want to know. I haven't read the Koran but I have read stories where women are abused before it, is this really men taking the interpretation and using it for their own misuse or is it true? Anyone? Only I'm confused.
Thanks.
 
Dave Allen
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 09:49 am
@ahmedjbh,
Quote:
Dont try and be too clever, it is too much apparent you have no real wish to debate women in islam but just to make your abuse heard.

That must be why I wrote a 540 word post on the subject I suppose.

Quote:
It was your words not mine..only half as bad..I will ask again, half as bad as what?

It really is very easy.

Two women required to give evidence in place of one man for financial Sharia law (specifically) is not half as bad as saying that four women are required to give evidence in place of one man in sharia law (generally).

Quote:
It is also apparent that you think only requiring two women not four, is not a smear but four women is.

Another total misrepresentation of what I actually wrote.

To repeat,

...actually, to repeat a third time...

I called it sexism in the very first post I wrote on this thread.

---------- Post added 10-19-2009 at 10:56 AM ----------

jgweed;98496 wrote:
This is a philosophy forum, not a name-calling forum. I realise that religious discussions, at least witih some people...

I'm not personally bothered by the religious content.

What I am finding irritating is the complete disregard Xris seems to be paying in terms of attempting to follow points that seem at odds with his own (even when they aren't). More than once he has asked me to defend a position entirely at odds with what I have actually stated in posts on this very thread. Positions I don't actually agree with.

Name calling and blasphemy I'm (personally) fine with.

But as you say - it's a philosophy forum, hence I'd prefer to see a bit more attempt to actually debate something other than strawman constructs and some basic comprehension skills.

Not that I wish to cross the mods - but I'm literally having to defend myself from someone claiming I'm standing for the polar opposite of what I actually wrote about.
 
xris
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 10:59 am
@Dave Allen,
Dave Allen;98500 wrote:
That must be why I wrote a 540 word post on the subject I suppose.


It really is very easy.

Two women required to give evidence in place of one man for financial Sharia law (specifically) is not half as bad as saying that four women are required to give evidence in place of one man in sharia law (generally).


Another total misrepresentation of what I actually wrote.

To repeat,

...actually, to repeat a third time...

I called it sexism in the very first post I wrote on this thread.

---------- Post added 10-19-2009 at 10:56 AM ----------


I'm not personally bothered by the religious content.

What I am finding irritating is the complete disregard Xris seems to be paying in terms of attempting to follow points that seem at odds with his own (even when they aren't). More than once he has asked me to defend a position entirely at odds with what I have actually stated in posts on this very thread. Positions I don't actually agree with.

Name calling and blasphemy I'm (personally) fine with.

But as you say - it's a philosophy forum, hence I'd prefer to see a bit more attempt to actually debate something other than strawman constructs and some basic comprehension skills.

Not that I wish to cross the mods - but I'm literally having to defend myself from someone claiming I'm standing for the polar opposite of what I actually wrote about.

The point that you made was, i was bigot, because i mistakenly claimed four women's evidence was equivalent to one mans evidence and not two women. If this is bigotry, i think we need to clarify the dictionaries definition of bigot. Funny i thought it was the strict adherent to creed or belief.

It does not just apply to civil cases in many Islamic countries, it is used in rape cases where the rape victim is classified as an adulterer, simple because its his word against hers and his evidence counts more than hers. When the victim is a non believer she can have umpteen witnesses, for it is of no consequence , a non believers testament counts for nothing. If this is their ignorance of islamic law , i think you should be calling them names not me.
 
Arjuna
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 11:02 am
@Dave Allen,
I think our friend Xris is anti-dogma. He is anti-muslim, anti-christian, anti-buddhist... as long as we equate religion with dogma. One assumes a religion is not just dogma, in the same way Mozart's Requiem isn't just notes on a page. In fact, when a religion is reduced to dogma, at that point it's a dead religion. A dead religion needs no defense. It needs a burial.

I am interested in Islam's state of health. Since there's a 0% chance that I will become a Muslim, all I can do is listen to a Muslim tell me what the music of Islam sounds like. I assume that since the Muslim is just as human as I am, I will be able to understand at least some of what I'm told, even though I can't hear it for myself.

I've been told that traditional Islamic culture is sexist. I've been told that Islam can survive a change from tradition so as to allow respect for women as adult human beings. For me, this is an important issue to explore because there is absolutely no middle ground between my values and sexism.

I, like Caroline has asked repeatedly, would like to know how Muslims view the issue of women being entitled to human and civil rights.
 
Aedes
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 11:12 am
@Caroline,
Caroline;98487 wrote:
I just want to know are women regarded as second class citizens within the realms of Islam please.
Caroline, there is no "realm of Islam".

A very large minority of the United States and Western European population is Muslim. I went to college, med school, and have had my professional working life alongside many many female Muslim physicians who are the pride and joy of their families. I just had a female med student from an Iranian family who was summa cum laude at Princeton as an undergrad.

And when you talk about the rest of the world, there are what a couple billion Muslims living in several continents and god knows how many countries. Predominantly Muslim countries include sub-Saharan West African countries like Gambia and Mali, sub-Saharan Central African countries like Chad, sub-Saharan East African countries like Somalia, Saharan desert countries from Morocco in the West all the way to Egypt in the East -- and that's just Africa.

What about Europe? (like Bosnia)

What about Asia minor? (Turkey, Azerbaijan)

What about the Middle East? (Lebanon, Syria, Iraq)

What about the Arabian peninsula? (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar)

What about Central Asia? (Afghanistan, Uzbekistan)

What about South Asia? (Pakistan, Bangladesh)

What about Southeast Asia? (Indonesia, Malaysia)

What about the Pacific Islands? (Fiji, Philippines)

and what about all the countries in which there are huge Muslim minority populations? (India, China, Russia)


There is no Muslim realm. The Muslim realm is the entire planet. Just as the Christian realm is the entire planet. The regional, cultural, geographic, ethnic, etc differences are so variable that it's exceptionally difficult to generalize about the attitudes of all these people.
 
Caroline
 
Reply Mon 19 Oct, 2009 11:33 am
@ahmedjbh,
I was talking about Iran Paul.
Thanks.

---------- Post added 10-19-2009 at 12:38 PM ----------

In Iran women don't have hardly any rights. If you read about it, you'll see how bad it really is.
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Islam
  3. » Women and Islam
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 08/18/2018 at 10:28:23