Symposium: Gender
Apartheid and Islam
|
|
By Jamie
Glazov
FrontPageMagazine.com | December
31, 2004
Does
Islam have the keys within itself to liberate women within Muslim social
structures? To discuss this issue with us today, Frontpage Symposium has
assembled a distinguished panel. On the side of the possibility of a
feminist Islam, joining us today are:
Mohamed El-Mallah, a
board member of Al-Ittihad Mosque in Vista, former board member
of Islamic Center of San Diego, and an associate member of the Muslim
American Society. A native of
Egypt
who migrated to the
U.S.
seven years ago, he is an activist in the Muslim Community of San Diego
who has given many series of presentations on Islamic History,
and
Julia Roach,
a UCSD student currently pursuing a bachelor's in literatures of the
world, specializing in gender issues and women in literature. She
converted to Islam in 2003.
On the side of Islam being
mutually exclusive with women’s rights, we are joined by:
Ali Sina, the
founder of Faith Freedom International (www.faithfreedom.org),
a movement of ex-Muslims created to provide support for those who
want to leave Islam and give factual information about Islam for others,
and
Robert Spencer,
the director of Jihad Watch and the author of Onward Muslim
Soldiers: How Jihad Still Threatens
America
and the West (Regnery
Publishing), and Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the
World’s Fastest Growing Faith (Encounter
Books).
FP:
Mr. El-Mallah, Robert Spencer, Julia Roach and Ali Sina, welcome to
Frontpage Symposium.
Mr. El-Mallah, let me begin with
you. Can Islam liberate women and give them equality? Or is Islam and
women’s rights mutually exclusive?
El-Mallah: Thanks
for inviting me Jamie.
I will go back 1425 lunar years to
answer your question. A woman came to the Prophet (PBUH) and asked him:
“Why women are not mentioned (in Islamic sources: Quran and Hadith) as
much as men?” Do you know how the Prophet (PBUH) answered? He answered
her publicly, he went directly to the Masjid, and asked all the people to
gather and from the pulpit he addressed the people by reciting the verse
Q33:35 that says: “For Muslim men and women, for believing men and
women, for devout men and women, for true men and women, for men and women
who are patient and constant, for men and women who humble themselves, for
men and women who give in charity, for men and women who fast (and deny
themselves), for men and women who guard their chastity, and for men and
women who engage much in Allah's praise, for them has Allah prepared
forgiveness and great reward.” This verse clarifies that the rule is
whenever the pronoun “He” is used, it can be substituted by the noun
“She” with few exception, which are clearly explained in other verses
of Quran and sayings of the Prophet (PBUH).
I would like to point out that the
first to accept Islam was a woman, the first martyr in Islam was a woman,
one of the longest chapters in Quran is named “The Women,” another
chapter is named “Mariam”. We need to separate between what some of
the Muslims practice, and what Islam is ordering us to do. We cannot put
Islam on a trial because of wrongs that are done by people who have been
living in countries that teach them nothing about Islam. Most of the
wrongs that you see done by some Muslims, are done because the lack of
good Islamic understanding.
Giving the above, we can categorize
the reasons behind any misconceptions about women in Islam into two: The
lack of knowledge of Islamic teachings and the ill-intentions of Islam
bashers.
FP:
Ms. Roach?
Roach:
First I would like to preface my comments with a sad fact that exists
within the current state of the Ummah or worldwide Islamic community: it
is unfortunate that Islam is not practiced in all parts of the world by
all Muslims to the standard prescribed by Allah in the Qur’an and
exemplified by the blessed prophet Mohamed (peace and blessing of Allah be
upon him.)
Nor is Christianity or Buddhism
always practiced by all practitioners as it supposed to be. However, when
we examine the conduct of those Muslims striving to seek knowledge as they
have been commanded by their Lord we find that those people are practicing
the deen of Islam in light of its sacred texts and the traditions of the
prophets (may the blessings of Allah be upon them all) which do contain
proof that women's equality and Islam are not mutually exclusive.
The first and perhaps foremost
important aspect of this is spiritual or religious equality: Women's souls
have equal value to those of Men's as proved by numerous verses in the
Qur’an in which Allah references the believing men and the believing
women with equal importance and responsibility in terms of religious
obligations such as charity, fasting, prayer, humility etc. Unlike the
tradition practiced by some Christians in which the woman submits to her
husband who then in turn submits to God, Muslim women are to submit to the
Lord of the worlds Allah first and foremost, they do not need an emissary
to answer for them.
Muslim women can pray by themselves
or in a group in which no male need be present to worship their lord and
that worship will be accepted as much as any other person's worship (in
sha Allah, If God wills). Similarly a woman's sin is counted as much as a
man's too! A woman's rights are protected, such as the right to life,
which women could not be guaranteed in the pre-Islamic Arabian period
(many female infants were murdered because boy children were preferred,
Islam abolished this practice and Allah mentions the testimony of the
murdered female child as being one characteristic of the day of Judgment).
What right could be more serious than to be able to fight and die in
battle?
Muslim women have had the right and
opportunity to fight and die in battle for the past 1400 years, a right
which was just recently bequeathed to American women, and the death of a
female in battle counts just as much as a man's death: she is still a
martyr and merits paradise (in sha Allah).The first martyr in Islam was a
woman, women fought alongside the Prophet (pbuh) in numerous battles, some
sustaining serious injuries. Muslim women have always had the right to
vote and their vote has always equalled a man's, the right to own and
dispose of property without having to obtain permission from male kin, the
right to work outside the home, the right to equal work for equal pay, the
right to keep her hard earned money for herself, the right to marry whom
they wish and deny whom they wish, the right to sexual satisfaction within
her marriage, (if a woman is unsatisfied she can obtain a divorce) etc.
etc. etc.
I will not burden you with too much
more (yes there is more!) It is unfortunate that more people do not get
beyond their conception of the headscarf and ask us why we are proud to
wear it...because we are Muslims and we are happy with our Lord and our
lives, we are not being smashed by gender inequalities when we stand up
for our own rights. Oh, one more thing, Muslim women are required to
educate themselves about their deen and are urged to receive a formal
education of some sort, putting them on the intellectually equal playing
field as well.
FP:
Ok Mr. Spencer, would you like to respond? A lot of this is about our
definitions of “equality” and “freedom” isn’t it? What we think
women’s “liberty” means is not necessarily what many Muslims take it
to mean. Right?
Spencer: You
are right Jamie. The nomenclature problem is akin to that over the
word “terrorism”: some Muslims today denounce terrorism but don’t
consider suicide attacks in
Israel
or even 9/11 to be terrorism at all. And speaking of names, it really
makes no difference that “one of the longest chapters in Qur’an is
named The Women, another chapter is named Mariam,” as Mr. El-Mallah
points out (as do many other Islamic apologists). There are also chapters
of the Qur’an entitled “Spoils of War” (8), “Haggling” (64),
“Divorce” (65), “Soul-Snatchers” (79), “The Cheats” (83),
“The Earthquake” (99), “The Calamity” (101), “The Traducer”
(104), and “The Disbelievers” (109). That’s not to say that the
Qur’an regards women as on the level of a calamity or an earthquake, but
only that to bear the name of a sura of the Qur’an is not automatically
a sign of approval.
And while it is true that, as Mr. El-Mallah says, “We need to separate
between what some of the Muslims practice, and what Islam is ordering us
to do,” I wish he had chosen to explore more of what Islam teaches about
women. After all, the question before us is “Does Islam contain within
itself the keys to liberate women within contemporary Islamic
societies?” In order to consider this question fully, the obstacles to
such liberation must be addressed: Qur’anic verses such as 4:34 (which
enjoins wife-beating) and those that make a woman’s testimony (2:282)
and inheritance (4:11) worth half of a man’s do indeed involve Islamic
teachings, not just cultural practices. There are also numerous ahadith
that reflect poorly on women, including one in which Muhammad declares
that most of hell’s population is female and that women are deficient in
intelligence and piety (Bukhari, I:6:304).
Sura 4:34, which has recently been advanced as a valid principle for
conduct by Muslim spokesmen in Turkey, Spain, and elsewhere, makes for an
atmosphere in which abuse of women is epidemic. The Pakistan Institute of
Medical Sciences, for example, has determined that over nine out of ten
Pakistani wives have been struck, beaten, or abused sexually for offenses
on the order of cooking an unsatisfactory meal. It is the Qur’anic
mandate for this abuse that makes it hard for me to accept Mr. El-Mallah’s
contention that where women suffer in the Islamic world, it is because of
a “lack of good Islamic understanding.”
Ms. Roach also mentions none of this, and instead attempts to deflect
attention to Christianity, which is allegedly worse. But there is no
analogy to Qur’an 4:34 in the Christian Bible, and even if there were,
it is off the point. The question before us is whether Islam, not
Christianity, liberates women. Muslims who care for the equality of
dignity and human rights of women must acknowledge the existence of the
material from the Qur’an and Sunnah that I have quoted above and other
similar passages, and find some way to mitigate their destructive force
among Muslims. I hope Mr. El-Mallah and Ms. Roach will take up that
challenge.
FP:
Mr. Sina?
Sina: Hello
Jamie and thank you for inviting me to this symposium.
Mr. El-Mallah quotes the verse 33:35
where men and women are mentioned and their responsibilities and rewards
are enumerated. How Mr. El-Mallah concludes that this verse establishes
equality between man and woman is beyond me. If I say to you that you and
your dog should not walk on the grass, should do this or should do that,
does that imply that you and your dog are equal? I see no hint of equality
in that verse.
Let us see what the Quran says about
women. It says “men have a degree (of advantage) over them” 2:228
; that the witness of woman is worth half of that of man 2:282;
that women inherit half of their male siblings, 4:11-12;
that a man can marry two or three or four women 4:3;
that if a women becomes captive in a war, her Muslim master is allowed to
rape her 33:50; that if a woman is not
totally submissive to her husband she will enter Hell 66:10;
that women are “tilth” for their husbands (to cultivate them) 2:223;
that men are in charge of women, as if women were imbeciles or minors who
could not take care of themselves; that they must be obedient to their
husbands or be admonished (verbally abused), banished from the bed
(psychologically abused) and beaten (physically abused) 4:34.
These verses define the station of
women in Islam.
Another “proof” that Mr. El-Mallah
presents to prove the high status of women in Islam is that one of the
long surahs of the Qur’an is named "Women". Mr. Spencer has
answered this correctly. May I also remind Mr. El-Mallah that the longest
surah of the Qur’an is named "Cow" (286 verses). The surah
Women is only 176 verses. According to Mr. El Mallah’s logic, cows must
have a higher status than women. Another big surah is surah Livestock. It
has 165 verses. Therefore women are just eleven points superior to
livestock but 110 points inferior to cows. In fact even insects and bugs
such as bees, ants and spiders have surahs named after them. Should women
be trilled for having a surah named after them when even spiders have
one?
Another “proof” presented by Mr.
El Mallah is the fact that the first believer in Muhammad was a woman. Why
should this be an indication that women have equal rights?
The next “evidence” that he
presents is that the first martyr in Islam also was a woman. Muslims must
think this is such a convincing proof that it was also presented by Ms.
Roach.
Apart from the fact that this in no
ways indicates equality of rights for women in Islam the story is
apocryphal. Our Muslim friends are talking about Summayyah. Ibn Sa’d is
the only historian that says Summayyah suffered martyrdom in the hands of
Abu Jahl. If this martyrdom really had occurred; it would have been
trumpeted forth by every biographer and would have been reported in
innumerable traditions. This is just an example of the exaggerations that
Muslims have been fond of making from the beginning.
In fact the same biographer also
claims that Bilal was also the first martyr, though he long survived the
alleged persecutions, came back to
Mecca
and chanted the Azan from the roof top of Ka’ba after Muhammad conquered
that town and he died a natural death.
Ibn Sa’d describes that Summayyah,
her husband Yasir and their son Ammar were persecuted in Mecca (p. 227)
But after Yasir (who died of natural causes) Summayyah married the Greek
slave Azrak and with him had a son called Salma. How then are we to
understand that she died under persecution? Azrak belonged to Taif, and
was one of the slaves who at the siege of that city (some fifteen years
later), fled over to Muhammad’s camp. It is natural to conclude that
Summayyah, after Yasir's death, married Azrak, and lived at Taif.
Ms. Roach laments that Islam is not
practiced in all parts of the world by all Muslims to the standard
prescribed by Allah in the Qur’an.
For that we should give thanks to
God. Imagine if all Muslims were to stone or hang victims of rape or flog
women for minor offenses such as exposing a flock of hair. In fact, the
countries that practice Islam to its fullest are truly barbaric. Just
think of the suffering of the women in
Afghanistan
during the rule of the Taliban. Women were not allowed to go out of their
homes or work. Male doctors were not allowed to visit female patients. So,
when women became sick, there was no one to take care of them and they
died. The more a country becomes Islamic the more hellish it gets.
Ms. Roach comforts herself by
thinking that after women die they can expect to be treated equally and
says “Women's souls have equal value to those of Men's”. In other
words, what she is saying is that while women live a life of slavery,
abuse and deprivation in this world they can rejoice because after they
die they will be treated equally. Although I find this a vacuous bargain,
the truth is that even this promise is not true. Women in Islam are not
treated equally even in death.
Men are promised many virgins after
they die. What do women get? They get their old lousy husband to share
with 72 voluptuous celestial virgins. With that many high-bosomed houries
why would any man want to spend a night with an old wife? Do women get
also young celestial studs to have orgies with? No they don’t. They have
to maintain their “modesty” even after their death. The truth is that
in Islam men and women are not treated equally even after their
death.
In fact, according to Muhammad few
women ever make it to
Paradise
. The majority of them end up in Hell. Let us see what the Prophet says in
this regards. This is where he describes his hallucinatory visit to hell
and paradise:
"Then I saw the (Hell) Fire,
and I have never before, seen such a horrible sight as that, and I saw
that the majority of its dwellers were women." The people asked,
"O Allah's Apostle! What is the reason for that?" He replied,
"Because of their ungratefulness." It was said. "Do they
disbelieve in Allah (are they ungrateful to Allah)?" He replied,
"They are not thankful to their husbands and are ungrateful for the
favors done to them. Even if you do good to one of them all your life,
when she seems some harshness from you, she will say, "I have never
seen any good from you.' " Bukhari 7.62.125
Ms. Roach says Muslim women can pray
by themselves. Is that the sign of their equality and liberation? Can’t
women of other Faiths pray by themselves? Wouldn’t God accept their
prayers?
Ms. Roach says that in pre-Islamic
Arabia
female infants were murdered and Islam abolished that. Muslims truly
believe that this was a common practice. If that was the case, where did
Arab women came from? They also claim that Muhammad raised the status of
women by limiting a man to no more than four wives. How could Arab men
have so many wives if they practiced female infanticide?
Perhaps some ignorant people killed
their newborn daughters, but that could not have been a common practice.
Infanticide is just against human nature. After all, Arabs were also
humans. They must have had the same kind of parental instincts that we
have. Even animals have parental instinct. Yes exceptions always
occur. Even today female infanticide is practiced in
China
and in
India
. But it is an abhorrent practice frowned by the society and punished by
the law. The cases are extremely rare. The pre-Islamic
Arabia
could not have been different. What Muhammad said was commonsense and
agreed by everyone. Let me make an example. We read in the news that
some men kill their wives. How common is this practice? It is extremely
rare. But suppose I declare myself a prophet and among other things
prohibit wife killing. Not a big deal, everybody knows wife killing is
bad. A thousand years from now my zealot followers claim that in Pre-Sinaic
period of ignorance people practiced wife killing and his holiness Ali
Sina (pbuh) abolished this repugnant practice. How ludicrous does it
sound to you? Well, it is no more ludicrous than the claim of the Muslims
that Muhammad abolished female infanticide
Among the “rights” of the Muslim
women, Ms. Roach claims that the “right” to fight in battle is the
most important. She says “What right could be more serious than to be
able to fight and die in battle?”
Is this a right? Wouldn’t it have
been better if instead of wars Muhammad had brought peace to the world and
gave women (and men and children) the right to live in peace? He called
upon Muslims to wage war in the name of God and shed the blood of their
fellow human beings.2:216, 9:39
Is this something good? Didn’t humans have enough wars already? Did they
need a prophet from God to give them the “right” to kill and die? He
took away the right to think, the right to believe in the faith of one’s
choice, the right to self determination and instead gave them the right to
wage war, to kill, to hate, to “instill terror in the heart of the
enemy” 8:12, to destroy this world and
to die. Is this a right? This is like saying Muhammad gave Muslims the
right to live in hell, the right to be slaves, the right to be abused and
tortured.
In
America
and other civilized countries, people have the right to freedom, to life
and to the pursuit of happiness. In Islam Muslims have the right to wage
war and to die. Are we still supposed to believe Islam is a divine
religion? The problem with Islam is that it destroys one's values.
The right becomes wrong and evil is praised as good. Now seriously: how
does a Muslim woman fight wrapped in her burqa? That is something worth
seeing.
Furthermore, are non-Muslim women
prohibited to fight if they want to? Do we know of any women in any
society that does not have the "right" to fight and die?
Maybe Ms. Roach should read the
biography of her prophet once again. She will notice that even the pagans
used to take their wives to the battlefield. In the battle of Uhud it was
Hind, the wife of Abu Sofyan, who was roaring like a lioness and
encouraging the men to march forward. In those days women used to
accompany their husbands to the battle to provide logistics for them and
to nurse them if they were wounded. Muhammad did what other Arabs did.
However, after Islam, when Muslims started to put into practice their
prophet’s teachings, they found there was no room for women anywhere --
including in the battlefield -- and hence women were discarded and were
relegated to second class citizens.
Ms. Roach says “Muslim women have
always had the right to vote”. How can this be true when even
Muslim men do not have the right to vote? In Islam there is no
democracy. How can you vote where there is no democracy? Lack of
democracy in Islam is another interesting subject worth exploring.
Ms Roach says women in Islam have
the right to own and dispose of property without having to obtain
permission from their male kin. Is she forgetting that Khadijah, prior to
marring Muhammad was a businesswomen who had made a fortune running her
own trading business and who had many men at her service? Can women
succeed in any Islamic country the way Khadijah succeeded in a pagan
society? Was there a single woman after Khadijah in any Islamic country
during these 1400 years that has rivaled her success? The answer is no!
Doesn’t this prove that there are fewer opportunities in Islamic world
for women than what Khadijah had in a pagan world? It is clear that women
have lost their rights after Islam and did not gain anything from
it.
Ms. Roach says Muslim women have the
right to work outside the home. I wonder why she did not tell that to the
Taliban. They prohibited women from working outside the home. Also I would
like to ask her how a woman can work outside the home when she can’t be
in a room alone with a man and can’t travel alone without a male kin (mahram).
Muhammad discouraged women from going out of their home and in fact he
said that it is better for them to pray in the privacy of their home (read
prisons) than pray in the mosque. In some Islamic countries women are not
even allowed to drive a car. How they are supposed to go to work if they
can’t even get there unless someone drives them to and from work?
Ms. Roach says Muslim women have the
right to marry whom they wish. I ask her, how can a 9 year old child
consent to a marriage? How can a Muslim woman be free in her choice when
she is not even allowed to date the man whom she is planning to marry in
order to know him? How can you choose when you do not even know the
person? What choice one has? How can you make any intelligent and
educated decision when you do not know your prospect mate? A blind choice
is not a choice.
She also claims that a Muslim woman
has the right to sexual satisfaction within her marriage and clarified
that “if a woman is unsatisfied she can obtain a divorce”. Is that
true? Under the Sharia women are not allowed to divorce even if their
husband beats them. The decision to divorce rest only on man's whims. Now
imagine a women going to a Judge demanding divorce accusing her husband of
impotency. How can you humiliate the gigantic ego of a Muslim man and
expect to live after that? She will be a dead woman the next day. If she
survives and manages to divorce, she will be seen as a whore by everyone.
A divorced woman has nowhere to go in the Islamic world. I do not know
whether Ms. Roach has ever lived in an Islamic country. Muslim women are
not allowed to have any libido. It is not pious for women to have sexual
feelings. In fact the genital mutilation is designed to take away any
sexual pleasure from them. Women are not supposed to enjoy sex. If they
have any libido, there is a risk that they may fornicate and commit sin.
Women must only provide satisfaction to their husbands and deny all their
own sexual needs. According to a tradition:
Allah's Apostle said, "If a
husband calls his wife to his bed (i.e. to have sexual relation) and she
refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till
morning." Bukhari
4.54.450
It is hilarious to think that the
angels have nothing better to do than sit around and curse the poor woman
all the night for depriving them from watching the live porno show.
If Allah must punish woman for not satisfying the sexual needs of their
husbands why does he needs angels to lobby him for it? Isn’t it a waste
of angel’s resources?
In one sense this is all truly very
funny. But in another, much larger sense, it is a tragedy.
*
To continue reading this
symposium, click here.
|