Women and Islam

@ahmedjbh,

I wish there was a button which instead of thanks said, "fail" .

@xris,

xris;98951 wrote:

Strange how it has not come to my notice any one condemn them on this thread. All i ever hear is the defence of Islam and how well it treats its women. Funny i never hear about the religious police telling men to wear appropriate length trousers or that they should grow beards. Is it the fault of countless Muslims that these distortion of scriptures restrict women freedoms or the mixed messages scriptures give them? Still this is another subject that should be brushed under the carpet hidden and not debated. I don't mind the abuse, it is of no consequence to me when i consider how many Muslim women are suffering, for no fault of theirs.

Not really sure why I'm responding to this. The reason you haven't seen anyone condemn anything on this thread is because that is not what the topic is about. The reason you hear about how well Islam treats women is because Muslims believe Islam does treat women well. What you keep banging on about is how Islam is represented by oppressive regimes and how they choose to abuse their positions of power. So if you want to talk about how badly women are treated in Pakistan or Somalia then you should start a thread about it in the Politics section. What you need to stop doing is equating the wrong actions of men in these Muslim countries to what is taught by Islam.

@josh0335,

Some people are really arrogant. Some people want others to feel small and insulted. If a Muslim cleric says "This is Islam..." and he goes on to say things that pain my heart, I may feel completely unsupported to say... "No that's not true!" Surely he knows more about it than I do. Who am I to contradict him?

Common sense says to me that Islam doesn't control anybody. People answer to God (or Nature) for what they do... not to me. So it's between them and God in the first place.

Common sense says that no religion can condone sin. No such religion would be passed down from one generation to the next.

Nevertheless.. clerics have been known to make mistakes. These mistakes stain the soul of a culture. From a certain point of view, the stains never will wash clean. Sin is eternal. From our own sin, we learn compassion for the sinner.

On this basis, anyone can see that Islamic culture is stained by human frailty. What we're calling Islam, itself, the thing that is passed down... remains unstained. It was not the source of the sin.

What really does cause sin... how conceptions of sin change over time... this becomes central in my mind, as I learn more this topic.

@josh0335,

josh0335;99046 wrote:

Not really sure why I'm responding to this. The reason you haven't seen anyone condemn anything on this thread is because that is not what the topic is about. The reason you hear about how well Islam treats women is because Muslims believe Islam does treat women well. What you keep banging on about is how Islam is represented by oppressive regimes and how they choose to abuse their positions of power. So if you want to talk about how badly women are treated in Pakistan or Somalia then you should start a thread about it in the Politics section. What you need to stop doing is equating the wrong actions of men in these Muslim countries to what is taught by Islam.

Its not just Pakistan and Somalia, what about the Iran, ksa,Afghanistan, you tell me what Muslim country, where women are treated as equals. You can protest all you like that scriptures dont demean women or treat them as unequal but those countries islamic interpretations conflict with yours. This thread is considering women and Islam and the evidence does not bare witness to your claims.

@ahmedjbh,

Xris, what of women in nations with many religious affiliations, like the UK?

@xris,

xris;99173 wrote:

Its not just Pakistan and Somalia, what about the Iran, ksa,Afghanistan, you tell me what Muslim country, where women are treated as equals. You can protest all you like that scriptures dont demean women or treat them as unequal but those countries islamic interpretations conflict with yours. This thread is considering women and Islam and the evidence does not bare witness to your claims.

There you go again! None of those countries use the shariah of Islam as the basis of governance. They are dictatorships/corrupt governments oppressing their people through a different mix of economics, religion and violence. They do not follow what Islam teaches.

Their Islamic interpretations may well conflict with mine but I can back my opinions up through scripture, historical accounts and reasoning. They cannot justify their position, nor do they need to, they simply crush anyone who protests. As for the individual men who oppress their women at a domestic level, note that the literacy rates in these countries are shocking, so it should not be a surprise people lack the education and understanding of Islam to treat women with the respect and dignity that Islam demands for them.

The evidence does not bear witness to my claims? What evidence have you seen? What Pakistan and Iran do? Come now, I'm having to repeat this to you so many times it's starting to lose meaning for me too. These countries do not follow the shariah of Islam - they are regimes looking to contain their people and hold onto power via any means.

And talking about evidence, you haven't looked beyond what you see on tv, which is where I imagine you get most of your information about Islam from. Have you read history books? Have you read Islamic jurisprudence works? Have you examined how women were treated during the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)? Did you know the first person honoured to be a Muslim (after the Prophet) was woman? The first martyr was a woman. The greatest scholar in inheritance laws was a woman etc. Don't talk about evidence when you can't be bothered to go and find a reliable source.

@Didymos Thomas,

Didymos Thomas;99175 wrote:

Xris, what of women in nations with many religious affiliations, like the UK?

secular countries have laws that reflect logic rather dogmatic scriptures, they have to act within the law.

---------- Post added 10-22-2009 at 09:21 AM ----------

josh0335;99178 wrote:

There you go again! None of those countries use the shariah of Islam as the basis of governance. They are dictatorships/corrupt governments oppressing their people through a different mix of economics, religion and violence. They do not follow what Islam teaches.

Their Islamic interpretations may well conflict with mine but I can back my opinions up through scripture, historical accounts and reasoning. They cannot justify their position, nor do they need to, they simply crush anyone who protests. As for the individual men who oppress their women at a domestic level, note that the literacy rates in these countries are shocking, so it should not be a surprise people lack the education and understanding of Islam to treat women with the respect and dignity that Islam demands for them.

The evidence does not bear witness to my claims? What evidence have you seen? What Pakistan and Iran do? Come now, I'm having to repeat this to you so many times it's starting to lose meaning for me too. These countries do not follow the shariah of Islam - they are regimes looking to contain their people and hold onto power via any means.

And talking about evidence, you haven't looked beyond what you see on tv, which is where I imagine you get most of your information about Islam from. Have you read history books? Have you read Islamic jurisprudence works? Have you examined how women were treated during the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)? Did you know the first person honoured to be a Muslim (after the Prophet) was woman? The first martyr was a woman. The greatest scholar in inheritance laws was a woman etc. Don't talk about evidence when you can't be bothered to go and find a reliable source.

Now what do want me to prove that these countries you dont recognise as Muslim countries do or do not act on equal basis for women. I'm a bit confused on what you require, if you dont consider them Islamic why do want me to prove they act incorrectly? If you want me to prove my claims in those countries i consider Islamic say so.

As for the women at the start of the Islamic times, do you want me to refer to scriptures about advising physical means to get your wife to obey? Do you want me to talk about what you can do with the slave women, you possess? or maybe they does not count. Just ask , but dont moan when i do and complain im being anti Islamic.

@xris,

xris;99219 wrote:

secular countries have laws that reflect logic rather dogmatic scriptures, they have to act within the law.

Here is a list of 17 majority Muslim countries with secular governments:

Burkina Faso
Chad
Gambia
Guinea
Mali
Senegal
Somalia
Kazakhstan
Kyrgystan
Tajikstan
Turkmenistan
Uzbekistan
Albania
Azerbaijan
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Kosovo
Turkey

Islam and secularism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

@Aedes,

Aedes;99225 wrote:

Here is a list of 17 majority Muslim countries with secular governments:

Burkina Faso
Chad
Gambia
Guinea
Mali
Senegal
Somalia
Kazakhstan
Kyrgystan
Tajikstan
Turkmenistan
Uzbekistan
Albania
Azerbaijan
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Kosovo
Turkey

Islam and secularism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And do they have sharia law or secular law?

@ahmedjbh,

They all have secular law.

Well, except for Somalia which has no law.

@Aedes,

Aedes;99249 wrote:

They all have secular law.

Well, except for Somalia which has no law.

I dont think so, Somalia, i believe has just introduced sharia. All the others, or the majority use sharia for civil matters. Now im led to believe , correct me if im wrong, a women has not the same rights in divorce as a man in these civil courts.

Morocco, Libya .Yemen,Sudan, ksa, Gambia, Mauritania, Iran,Bangladesh,Afghanistan,Oman, are governed by sharia law ,now can one be selected that gives a good report on women's rights.

@Aedes,

Aedes;99249 wrote:

They all have secular law.

Well, except for Somalia which has no law.

It says in the wikipedia Somalians have shari'a courts...?

@xris,

xris;99265 wrote:

I dont think so, Somali

Somalia does not have a functioning government, it has not had one in nearly a generation. There is a nominal government that is completely ignored by the general population, to the point where different regions of the country (esp Somaliland) have begun to act like independent states. The country is in lawless disarray, ruled by warlords, and it's increaslingly becoming an operating grounds for extremist groups. That's a hell of a lot different than the Taliban.

Quote:

Gambia (is) overned by sharia law

Dude, you have no idea what you're talking about. I have spent months working in Gambia, most recently a couple years ago, I have good friends there, I have known people in the government, and I've even seen Jammeh in person. In fact I just got together with a close Gambian friend the day before yesterday and we talked at length about the country. The government in Gambia is pretty bad, Jammeh is a self-aggrandizing child, but it is not even remotely a religious state. Sharia may well be practiced by various mosques and small communities, but it is not even part of the national judicial or legal system. Also true of Senegal, which borders Gambia.

Women's rights in the Gambia are not terrible (women serve in Parliament, can vote, can own businesses and property), though in general their quality of life is bad because of severe poverty and lack of access to literacy, education, and health care. It doesn't have anything to do with religion, I mean it's no worse than in nearby non-Muslim countries, like Guinea, Sierra Leone, Cote d'Ivoire.

And you're wrong about some other countries too. Bangladesh is a parliamentary democracy, and its laws are not based on Sharia. Morocco is a constitutional monarchy, also without government-imposed Sharia.

PLEASE look stuff up before you type, it wastes everyone's time to correct factual errors instead of discussing things of substance.

---------- Post added 10-22-2009 at 02:25 PM ----------

Zetherin;99268 wrote:

It says in the wikipedia Somalians have shari'a courts...?

Somalia is going to be a very conservative Islamic state whenever it actually becomes a state. But it's completely lawless right now despite transitional governments being "named". They have no governing power.

Look at what the US State Dept and the British Foreign Office have to say about Somalia's central government: "No central government since 1991" and "the nascent TFG remains fragile and lacks the capacity to provide services inside Somalia. General insecurity and inter- and intra-clan violence frequently occur throughout the country, and attacks and fighting between anti-government elements and TFG and Ethiopian forces take place regularly in Mogadishu and in regions outside the capital. The United States has no official representation inside Somalia".

Country Profile: Somalia

Somalia

So I'm not disputing that Somalia has Sharia to some degree and that it will have it to a greater degree when it stabilizes. But one thing it is not right now is a Sharia state -- it's just a suffering lawless wasteland.

@Caroline,

Caroline;98487 wrote:

I just want to know are women regarded as second class citizens within the realms of Islam please.
Cheers.

They are not regarded as second class.

@Aedes,

Aedes;99279 wrote:

Somalia does not have a functioning government, it has not had one in nearly a generation. There is a nominal government that is completely ignored by the general population, to the point where different regions of the country (esp Somaliland) have begun to act like independent states. The country is in lawless disarray, ruled by warlords, and it's increaslingly becoming an operating grounds for extremist groups. That's a hell of a lot different than the Taliban.

Dude, you have no idea what you're talking about. I have spent months working in Gambia, most recently a couple years ago, I have good friends there, I have known people in the government, and I've even seen Jammeh in person. In fact I just got together with a close Gambian friend the day before yesterday and we talked at length about the country. The government in Gambia is pretty bad, Jammeh is a self-aggrandizing child, but it is not even remotely a religious state. Sharia may well be practiced by various mosques and small communities, but it is not even part of the national judicial or legal system. Also true of Senegal, which borders Gambia.

Women's rights in the Gambia are not terrible (women serve in Parliament, can vote, can own businesses and property), though in general their quality of life is bad because of severe poverty and lack of access to literacy, education, and health care. It doesn't have anything to do with religion, I mean it's no worse than in nearby non-Muslim countries, like Guinea, Sierra Leone, Cote d'Ivoire.

And you're wrong about some other countries too. Bangladesh is a parliamentary democracy, and its laws are not based on Sharia. Morocco is a constitutional monarchy, also without government-imposed Sharia.

PLEASE look stuff up before you type, it wastes everyone's time to correct factual errors instead of discussing things of substance.

---------- Post added 10-22-2009 at 02:25 PM ----------

Somalia is going to be a very conservative Islamic state whenever it actually becomes a state. But it's completely lawless right now despite transitional governments being "named". They have no governing power.

Look at what the US State Dept and the British Foreign Office have to say about Somalia's central government: "No central government since 1991" and "the nascent TFG remains fragile and lacks the capacity to provide services inside Somalia. General insecurity and inter- and intra-clan violence frequently occur throughout the country, and attacks and fighting between anti-government elements and TFG and Ethiopian forces take place regularly in Mogadishu and in regions outside the capital. The United States has no official representation inside Somalia".

Country Profile: Somalia

Somalia

So I'm not disputing that Somalia has Sharia to some degree and that it will have it to a greater degree when it stabilizes. But one thing it is not right now is a Sharia state -- it's just a suffering lawless wasteland.

Well its a difference on what source you read and what you consider sharia. The point is, can it be shown that sharia does no harm to women in such things as divorce. A man can divorce his wife with ease but a women has to show that her husband is impotent before divorce is permitted. I'm not doubting many womens rights are ignored in many societies but its the authority of sharia that im questioning. This debate is about Islam and women, not women in African societies. Do you question the publicized problems we see in such states as Pakistan and Iran, are they not as a direct result of sharia interpretation?

@xris,

xris;99404 wrote:

Well its a difference on ... what you consider sharia.

And also the degree to which sharia is applied. Very few places apply it as stringently and literally as the Taliban did. And many Muslim nations do not have it at all as a government policy, so if it's around it's at a social level and not a legal level.

xris;99404 wrote:

This debate is about Islam and women, not women in African societies.

Or women in central Asian societies, women in Arabian societies, women in North African societies, or women in impoverished societies?

xris;99404 wrote:

Do you question the publicized problems we see in such states as Pakistan and Iran, are they not as a direct result of sharia interpretation?

I greatly question that, because there are too many other confounding variables. I've worked a great deal in Africa and in South America, in both Muslim and non-Muslim countries, and many of the same problems exist for women every single place I go.

I agree that Sharia as implemented in certain places constrains women and sometimes traps them in abusive situations. I do not agree that this is an inherent or universal aspect of Sharia, I do not agree that it is a generalizable problem in all Muslim societies, and I do not agree that it can be separated from the national legal systems and geography/demography-specific variables of a given society.

@Aedes,

Then lets talk about sharia if you dont want to be confined to any one country. What do you say if sharia was allowed to replace US divorce laws for those muslims who desired it?

@ahmedjbh,

sharia isn't sharia isn't sharia -- are you talking about a 100% complete fundamentalist interpretation of it? If so, in how many places does that exist other than pre-2001 Afghanistan?

@Aedes,

Aedes;99518 wrote:

sharia isn't sharia isn't sharia -- are you talking about a 100% complete fundamentalist interpretation of it? If so, in how many places does that exist other than pre-2001 Afghanistan?

No im not talking about the extreme interpretation and not in Afghanistan, as that is an extreme example, just moderate countries such as Egypt. I am striving for you debate it on any level. You appear to not want to, for some strange reason.

@xris,

When a man wishes to marry a woman, he is required to give a dowry. This is usually a big financial commitment and a token of loyalty given by the man to honour and care for his wife. In the event of a divorce, the wife keeps the dowry.

For women who wish to abuse such a system, it is easy for her to marry multiple times, repeatedly get divorced and subsequently keep the dowry given by each man. Of course, this is unacceptable. As such, women are given less freedom to demand a divorce than a man. There is no financial interest for the man to divorce his wife, as he will lose the dowry and continue to have to pay to look after any children he has had with his wife. If he divorces and marries again, he has to pay another dowry to his new wife. With this system in place, it is more likely that the man will concede to a divorce once all efforts to save the marriage have been made.

Divorce is the most disliked of legal things in Islam. Islam teaches many things to make sure a husband and wife live happily together. But where a woman has a right to divorce, and is refused this by her husband, she can go to the courts and demand one. The courts can force the man to divorce if it is found that it is not reasonable for the marriage to continue.

There is equality in that the man must give the dowry, feed and care for his wife, but has the right to initiate the divorce. The woman does not have to give anything to marry, is not required to work but must go to the courts to demand a divorce. As with many things in Islam, the man and the woman have different rights but are still equal.

This will help you understand why it is prescribed in the Qur'an to resort to physically reprimanding a wife who is not fulfilling her Islamic obligations in a marriage. Note that this is a last resort. The 'beating' is not actually physical harm, as noted by the saying of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him).

This may seem oppressive to women but it should be understood in the context of a functioning Islamic society. Where there is a greater financial investment made by a man to marry, where there are fewer men than women, and where orphans and single women can become a burden on the public treasury, every effort must be made to keep men and women in a state of marriage. A righteous couple would never have to resort to such actions, as all the other teachings of Islam regarding marriage will have created a happy environment.

So, the follow-up question: is a woman allowed to physically reprimand her husband if he does not fulfil his Islamic obligations in the marriage? The woman has not been given this right by Islam. Trying to 'beat' her husband would result in him initiating a divorce, and so the action would be of no benefit.

This rule makes no sense in a liberal Western society where there is less emphasis on gender roles and marriage. The whole setup is different. To be fair to this issue, you should not isolate it as a snapshot and draw your conclusions from there. As Muslims, we take example of how Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) treated his wives, and he never beat them.

Regarding female slaves, their male masters are permitted to have sex with them provided the slave agrees. But seeing how slavery has been phased out, and this was no doubt the intention of God in the Qur'an due to the many verses calling for the freeing of slaves, this rule is not practised anymore. Slavery is no longer required.

Philosophy Forum

Women and Islam

Quick Links

My Account

able2know