Islam, Humanity and Equality for Women
-
Tp me it seems one of those well meaning writings which try to overcome the manifest disdain for women in plenty of so called islamic attitudes by explaining the Qurani text through the conditions reigning at the time of its revelation.
Depending on the context of the passage itself that may be true, but it is not true when a general statement is made. If there is such general statement and in our view it does not match true heartfelt justice, then it is sure that we are not reading properly, that we are inventing or that we are superposing on what we read the interpretations which are invented. That is the case of some the ayas examined like 2.228 or 4.34.
I know that when I sai that I will fin nobody or almost nobody agreeing with me, because truth, speacially truth coming from God Himself is very hard to swallow when it hapens that we have already found a truth that pleases us and which in fact we can sort of make acceptable to comply with todays fineries.
Another thing about equality. Females and males are not equal. We cannot make women equal to men, and the very idea of it implies that somehow women are imperfect and need to be made like men. But if anything the opposite is true. So what shoudl be strived for is that women are compensated for the extra labour that nature puts on them for the perpetuation of the species. Not punish them by limiting them but given more than men by way of freedom to start with and everything else following.
Summing up attempts to uphold women equality in islam taking the Qur'an and making excuses for it does nto work and it always looks exactly what it is excuses. The Qur'an is majestic, wise, intelligent, always ahead of our expectations, in need of no excuses but of being read without fear and without subservience to the whole load of previous arrangements so that it stays within the limits imposed by me, mostly by males or male minded minds.
Salaam
Always enjoy reading your responses Huruf - girl power! (joking ) But totally agree with you here... Too many people try twisting the Quran to suit their own views when it comes to women (PS Taro not talking about you at all here. Talking about other people i've seen).
-
The point is that, for instance, in 2.282, there is nothing to justify about males superiority, because the question is not about that. It is about divorce and period that women should wait before a new marriage and the whole talk revolves around that, not about who is superior to whom or by how many degrees.
They should wait three courses and they should not hid if they have conceived so that if a man wants to marry them there is certainte as to who is the father. There is never a question as to who is the mother but there may be a question as to who is the father, therefore that knowledge is the daraja that men have with respect to women, they have a right to know which children they have fathered. There is noneed to exlain that the daraja so and so. The whole talk is about the circumstance of divorce and the period that for integrity' sake the women must observe. And the rights they have in the circumstance are the same for the woman as for the man. They are not equivalent or similar, but the same, except for that daraja that they have to be told whether they have fathered or not.
That statement abou the daraja is not a general statement but a statement regarding the matter at hand, which does not seem to offer any doubt. It is a bout keeping lineage straight and avoid conflicts for every party concerned that could arise from not knowing who is the child. Any other thing would not make sense. One cannot say women have the same rights as those exerted over them and then undo the statement by saying that for the males a grade over them. How do you make that as a general statement. Does not make sense. You hae to stick to the facts given, not make of them a universal claim. But it is quite clear if we do stick to what the aya says in which context and for what reason. It is also very wisely formulated, because if, for instance the woman is beyond menopause she won't have three courses not even one course and obviously therefore no need for her to wait even one day.
All that of course unless some supergenius comes up with the bright idea that in order to comply with the Qur'an women who do not have courses any more, should be medicated or undergo surgery or whatever in order to have courses so that they can wait three of them. This kind of "reasoning" has been upheld by some scholars or whatever they want to call them applied to other things, so it would not be very surprising if they came up with that kind of thing.
Salaam
-
Women are better that men, just look at crime rates etc..
Women are the better than men.Irresponsibility of women can lead to increased male criminal population.
Anyways, I do agree with the author that things like polygamy and forced hijab do oppress women. However, I do feel that interpretation of 2228 is incorrect.
Literal words
And the women who shall wait concerning themselves (for) three monthly periods. And (it is) not lawful for them that they conceal what (has been) created (by) Allah in their wombs, if they believe in Allah and the Day Last. And their husbands (have) better right to take them back in that (period) if they wish (for) reconciliation. And for them (is the) like (of) that which (is) on them in a reasonable man and for the men over them (is) a degree. And Allah (is) All-Mighty, All-Wise.I do not think the verse is talking about "all" women, but wives who are pregnant, but are going through divorce issue.
The word degree here probably means responsibility and not CEO/manager kind of rank .
Also his verse 434 is too complicated for generalization.
Logically, not all men have wealth. Not all men are fit physically. They can be bed ridden. A woman can be fatherless, widowed, male childless or choose to stay away from men altogether.As humans, males and females are equal. But I wouldn't copy men to gain that status. We are different from each other. Leadership position isn't limited to men either.
Both polygamy and hijab are cultural problems. Not Islamic. Men who go by those twist verses to justify their perverted acts.
But sometimes I truly wonder whether men have some kind of hatred towards women. Couple of weeks ago, I saw a comment on another site where a male said something like we can give women rights, but I don't think we will ever lose the hatred we have for them. This comes not from a Muslim, but someone from the west. He wasn't attacked by other males for this comment. Instead, they went with the flow. The site had nothing to do with religions.
-
4.34 is twisted and difficult to interpret because we do not read what it says. 2.228, for instance speaks clearly about divorced women, husbands and lastly males int he circumstance of marriage and divorce.
n the other hand 4.34 does not sppeak about husbands or wives divorced or otherwise, it speaks about males and females, men and women, in general. In general, it si women who have the privilege of bearing children and also the burden that it entails, males on the other hand have the privilege of freedom from su burden but surbservience to women for procreation and recognizance as fathers.
That is the reciprocal advantages that the aya talks about, it is because of that burden they do nto bear and women do, that women are entitled to the males earnings or fortunes, the males in general, it does not say husband or father or whatever. That is globally women should be supported by males. Today en many states, when it is done, that is done through taxation and redistribution falling on women who rear children. Even that is nto exactly fair, because even if a woman does nto have children, through expectations and limitations that may be placed on her because of those expectations she is already disadvantaged from the start.
And Reel, yes, there is some kind of resentment, rancour for women ont he part of some men, unfortunately, just as there are rapes and other things, which may be more or less common and that some people feel that if there was education or there was this or that that would not exist. Hopefully not, but still, we are in this world which is the dunya, not in paradise, this is the world of evolution or ascension and trial and hopefully too,, imrovement as human beings, and therefore sex is also a test. It is a test that we are two sexes and we always will have to strive on that count, for fairness and justice and compassion.
I understand that men when they feel unsecure, which may be quite often, should feel despondent, finally, we, women take for granted very capital things like offspring, for them it is a depedency. They have to put themselves in somebody else's hands. That is hard and they try to compensate. And when on top of everything they get the idea that they are the top the profeteers of those wretched idot women and in reverse to women the expectations with respect to them are high as opposed to women, then...
I could never see myself int hat situation of dependency from somebody else for offspring, it would be completely strange feeling to me. So, it is better if we understand that and realise that it takes a lot of moral and emotional strength and courage for men to be loyal and unresentful and accept their condition without seeking to get even. Not that I justify that. I don't but there is an explanation for it.
Salaam
-
Just my two cents but am I the only one who thinks adhribuhunna (from dharaba) in 434 should be translated as leave/split from? And qawwamuna (from qiyam, which literally means to stand) should be translated as "to stand up for"? So then the ayat would be translated as
Men are to stand up for women for what Allah has graced some of them over (some) others and for what they have expended of their riches. So righteous women are devout, preservers of the Unseen for. And the ones whom you fear their non-compliance, then admonish them and forsake them in their beds, and (lastly) leave them, yet in case they obey you, then do not seek inequitably any way against them; surely Allah has been Ever-Exalted, Ever-Great.
-
The aya is not addressing any husband but the believers, men and women, in general. The adressee are the believers, men and women. And the talk is about men and women in general, not husbands and wives.
Stand up is a good translation.
"some of them over (some) others" purports to translate the frase "ba3duhum a3ala ba3din" which is always a reciprocal frase. When there are two terms, like here is reciprocal between those two terms, that is "on account of that in which God graced the ones over the others", that is, God has graced in something women over men, and in something else men over women..
Salaam
-
But sometimes I truly wonder whether men have some kind of hatred towards women. Couple of weeks ago, I saw a comment on another site where a male said something like we can give women rights, but I don't think we will ever lose the hatred we have for them. This comes not from a Muslim, but someone from the west. He wasn't attacked by other males for this comment. Instead, they went with the flow. The site had nothing to do with religions.
Bold Perhaps some men have it... and vice versa (perhaps some women also have it towards men).
-
I have already written on that, the second ost int he thread.
Salaam
I see.
-
Huruf what Do you mean are you okay??
Women are better that men, just look at crime rates etc..
Women are the better than men.Praise be to Allah the almight lord of the worlds.
we got a cuck here
most infanticide are committed by the mother, but i won't be saying men are better because of that specific crime
you on the other hand say ALL women are better than ALL men because of crime rates?
wanna play that game? have a look at who invented, found and research the vast majority of science, engineering, biology and physics, from past to this day men
but i will not say ALL men are better than ALL women because of this fact
this collectivism mindset is dangerous
-
But sometimes I truly wonder whether men have some kind of hatred towards women. Couple of weeks ago, I saw a comment on another site where a male said something like we can give women rights, but I don't think we will ever lose the hatred we have for them. This comes not from a Muslim, but someone from the west. He wasn't attacked by other males for this comment. Instead, they went with the flow. The site had nothing to do with religions.
you dont understand where they come from
in the west a divorce can cost the life of the man
house, car, money, children, all gone because the wife one day decided to divorce without giving a proper reasondivorce in the west is nothing like whats described in the quran btw
feminism has pitted women against men and it is doing great harm to society
-
you dont understand where they come from
in the west a divorce can cost the life of the man
house, car, money, children, all gone because the wife one day decided to divorce without giving a proper reasondivorce in the west is nothing like whats described in the quran btw
feminism has pitted women against men and it is doing great harm to society
This discussion is SO irrelevant. Also, no gender is better than the other. Allah swt created both man and woman from ONE soul. "O mankind, fear your Lord, who created you from one soul and created with it its mate" (41)
The Quran has the answer to this argument for you men and women are equal. Neither is better than the other. The only status amongst individuals is in piety.
-
This discussion is SO irrelevant. Also, no gender is better than the other. Allah swt created both man and woman from ONE soul. "O mankind, fear your Lord, who created you from one soul and created with it its mate" (41)
The Quran has the answer to this argument for you men and women are equal. Neither is better than the other. The only status amongst individuals is in piety.
it is 100% relevant because we see this beast called feminism wrecking havok in the west using "women's liberation" as an excuse
when i see "equality for women", i don't know what it means, and it looks like people who stand by this statement have no idea what it means either
what kind of "equality"? i am told by some feminists that equality for women means that women should become sluts and free from personal responsibility, implying that men are in such a situation to begin with
i am told that it's paying women the same for the same job, the same experience and the same hours done, and in the west it is the case, yet we still see feminists come up with bogus research on the subject, some even say we should outright take money out of men's pocket and give that money to women
http//www.huffingtonpost.com/christina-hoff-sommers/wage-gap_b_2073804.html
http//washingtonexaminer.com/white-house-the-77-cents-wage-gap-figure-isnt-accurate-but-theyll-use-it-anyway/article/2546914i am told that we ought to expect the same physical output and if we note a difference, we're somehow misogynistic
through the very simple study of a population, we can see trends appear, such as men being on average taller and stronger than women, it's not something i make up, it's something that's observable in every population all around the globe, it's something that can be tested, over and over and over again, and the more you test it, the more you are likely to prove the observation to be true
it's an observation, physically, this is what we observe, but physical strength says nothing of the heart's content
http//hotair.com/archives/2013/01/27/some-advice-on-women-in-combat-from-a-female-veteran/
https//www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/04/08/women-now-0-for-29-in-attempting-marine-infantry-officer-course/i am told that if we don't have 50/50 men/women in ALL fields in a society, that it means we have a misogyny problem
http//i.picpar.com/eM9b.pngyes, this is very relevant, because it offers a precedent, we see concretely what the people who stand behind feminism and the western definition of equality have done for decades
it's a serious case study, and we can not glimpse over the mistakes made by other peoples and other countries just like that, it needs to be studied thoroughly
we can only consider people equal in front of the law
to say everyone is equal means everyone can carry the same burdens, when clearly in the quran it says god doesn't over burden individuals -
it is 100% relevant because we see this beast called feminism wrecking havok in the west using "women's liberation" as an excuse
when i see "equality for women", i don't know what it means, and it looks like people who stand by this statement have no idea what it means either
what kind of "equality"? i am told by some feminists that equality for women means that women should become sluts and free from personal responsibility, implying that men are in such a situation to begin with
i am told that it's paying women the same for the same job, the same experience and the same hours done, and in the west it is the case, yet we still see feminists come up with bogus research on the subject, some even say we should outright take money out of men's pocket and give that money to women
http//www.huffingtonpost.com/christina-hoff-sommers/wage-gap_b_2073804.html
http//washingtonexaminer.com/white-house-the-77-cents-wage-gap-figure-isnt-accurate-but-theyll-use-it-anyway/article/2546914i am told that we ought to expect the same physical output and if we note a difference, we're somehow misogynistic
through the very simple study of a population, we can see trends appear, such as men being on average taller and stronger than women, it's not something i make up, it's something that's observable in every population all around the globe, it's something that can be tested, over and over and over again, and the more you test it, the more you are likely to prove the observation to be true
it's an observation, physically, this is what we observe, but physical strength says nothing of the heart's content
http//hotair.com/archives/2013/01/27/some-advice-on-women-in-combat-from-a-female-veteran/
https//www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/04/08/women-now-0-for-29-in-attempting-marine-infantry-officer-course/i am told that if we don't have 50/50 men/women in ALL fields in a society, that it means we have a misogyny problem
http//i.picpar.com/eM9b.pngyes, this is very relevant, because it offers a precedent, we see concretely what the people who stand behind feminism and the western definition of equality have done for decades
it's a serious case study, and we can not glimpse over the mistakes made by other peoples and other countries just like that, it needs to be studied thoroughly
we can only consider people equal in front of the law
to say everyone is equal means everyone can carry the same burdens, when clearly in the quran it says god doesn't over burden individualsMan you have gone overbord with this. I m surrounded by feminist I am feminist and I don't see any of thempreaching those things you say.
sto themen tht cnnot live because their ex wives take all their money. That most certainy is nto what I see. What I see is exactly the opposite. Men who dissppear and leave women with mortgages, children and without a job. When change model when they get tired of their wife and then leave their former family in need nd odge as much as they can the rights of their children and to the mother of the children who looks after them and pays for them.
As to women taking money out of the pocket of men. Surely if you were a follower of the Qur'an your women would not need todo that since it is God himselfwho orders men to maintain women.
Get angry with God and do not go after some feminist straw womenn for your furustrations.
As to the money paart in fact many feminists are in agreemnt with men tha women should contribute equally to everything. That is their equality of certain kinds of feminists.
Salaam
-
Man you have gone overbord with this. I m surrounded by feminist I am feminist and I don't see any of thempreaching those things you say.
sto themen tht cnnot live because their ex wives take all their money. That most certainy is nto what I see. What I see is exactly the opposite. Men who dissppear and leave women with mortgages, children and without a job. When change model when they get tired of their wife and then leave their former family in need nd odge as much as they can the rights of their children and to the mother of the children who looks after them and pays for them.
As to women taking money out of the pocket of men. Surely if you were a follower of the Qur'an your women would not need todo that since it is God himselfwho orders men to maintain women.
Get angry with God and do not go after some feminist straw womenn for your furustrations.
As to the money paart in fact many feminists are in agreemnt with men tha women should contribute equally to everything. That is their equality of certain kinds of feminists.
Salaam
i hope you understand that the claims i made are backed up by empirical studies conducted by reputable research centres with a history of excellence in their respective fields
feminism in the west is not an example to follow, i invite you to read books that is critical of feminism, instead of just going with the idea that feminism is for "women's liberation" or whatever, without ever questioning what is done in its name only because you were told what feminism is supposed to be
personally, i reserve myself the right to not be part of any sect, cult or group, that includes feminism, and if i say i am not a feminist, that doesn't mean i hate women
too many times have i been told that i hated women because i merely reserve myself the right to not be part of any cult, sect or group that exist out there
i have this right and i make it known, and it's only feminists that get mad at this idea
not even the salafist i met got mad at this idea, salafists
i use this test to see if an individual is willing to talk or notwhat you're describing in your post is the system that was setup by feminists themselves the sexual "revolution"
in it, it says men and women can have as much sex as they want, and these men that leave if the woman gets pregnant? guess what they did they followed the feminist's idea of a sexual "revolution"
all the things feminist complain about today? it is often due to the ideas that were spread by the "sexual revolution" in the 60's
-
One should always look on both sides of the coin.
-
i hope you understand that the claims i made are backed up by empirical studies conducted by reputable research centres with a history of excellence in their respective fields
feminism in the west is not an example to follow, i invite you to read books that is critical of feminism, instead of just going with the idea that feminism is for "women's liberation" or whatever, without ever questioning what is done in its name only because you were told what feminism is supposed to be
personally, i reserve myself the right to not be part of any sect, cult or group, that includes feminism, and if i say i am not a feminist, that doesn't mean i hate women
too many times have i been told that i hated women because i merely reserve myself the right to not be part of any cult, sect or group that exist out there
i have this right and i make it known, and it's only feminists that get mad at this idea
not even the salafist i met got mad at this idea, salafists
i use this test to see if an individual is willing to talk or notwhat you're describing in your post is the system that was setup by feminists themselves the sexual "revolution"
in it, it says men and women can have as much sex as they want, and these men that leave if the woman gets pregnant? guess what they did they followed the feminist's idea of a sexual "revolution"
all the things feminist complain about today? it is often due to the ideas that were spread by the "sexual revolution" in the 60's
You may have your problems nd your history, but please refrain from making that the universal history.
Men hstorically have always had that sexual freedm you are pained about. Some men used it wrongly nd others used it rightly. It was their choice. Some chose to be pigs, because they could and nothing happened to them because of that, and some men were virtuous and did not do that.
Now what happened inthe last century was that the exclusive freedom of men men for sexual debauchery was extended to women. As far as I am concerned morally it should have been the other way around, that is, make men as moral as women and not women as inmoral as men. But obviously do you think it was easier to to moral self-discipline as women wereforced to be or that it ws easier to make the other way around,.
And now you come with it wbecause of women's freedom. Whom are you trying to kid?
It is a moral teaching that we learn as kids that if you put rotten apples in a bsket with good apples, all of them will rot.
You are blind to the very facts thaat women hve been oppressed and not treated with justice as such women and tht doay continues to be so for maany, too many women.
Nobody is saying all men have been evil and are evil. You like to assume that those who do not aggree with you say that. I have muscle ache in my mouth from saying the opposite. There are virtuous men, thank God. But all men are far from virtuous aand they are enabled and have been enabled historically to let loose their lack of morals on everybody but particularly on women.
If you deny that, thenit is you business, but do not expect sympathy.
Again you cannot have rotten apples and mix them with sane apples and then expect that all will not rot.
Yes there are good men nd there are bad women, but that is a moral question. Socially, women have been abused as such and are still in some ways. Things have got better, much better than in the last trhree centuries. In someother ways what has been given with one hand has been withdrawn with the other.
It is shameless to pretend now that all is the faault of women, or feminists. What do you call a feminist. The word is not yours to mani0ulate s you like.
Is it your new version of witches?
Do you remember witches? Yes women when they are not absolutely powerless are evil. The only good Indian is the dead Indian, and so on.
Salaam
-
You may have your problems nd your history, but please refrain from making that the universal history.
Men hstorically have always had that sexual freedm you are pained about.
this is blatantly wrong
men had the duty to marry a woman and stay with her, and take care of the familyall this was thrown out of the window with the so called "sexual revolution"
Some men used it wrongly nd others used it rightly. It was their choice. Some chose to be pigs, because they could and nothing happened to them because of that, and some men were virtuous and did not do that.
how is it a choice?
society tells girls to become sluts, and boys to become sharks
the music bombards kids with sexual messages and cues, and kids follow what they see, without understanding
we live in a society that hypersexualises kids, and here you are talking about choices
how can it be a choice, or a freedom, if the people who are targeted are the most easily influenced?
you can not talk about freedom without mentioning responsibility, and people who are easily influenced are not free, they are at the mercy of people who can easily influence
i'm looking at reality, while you are talking about hypothetical situations
yes, there exists men who are virtuous and yadda yadda, there also exists such women, but in the west, a world run by feminists, these two types of people are becoming extinct
for a fact 1 in 4 teenagers in the US has a STD, and this number is growing
other research of interest on this
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2496932/
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16882784
this is what the "sexual revolution" of feminists has brought on societiesNow what happened inthe last century was that the exclusive freedom of men men for sexual debauchery was extended to women. As far as I am concerned morally it should have been the other way around, that is, make men as moral as women and not women as inmoral as men. But obviously do you think it was easier to to moral self-discipline as women wereforced to be or that it ws easier to make the other way around,.
this has yet to be proven
and again, you're making a generalisation, where you say MEN enjoyed this "freedom", and that MEN engage in sexual debauchery
you talk like a collectivist, as if ALL MEN were responsible for the actions of other individualswhat does the quran say? that i am not responsible for the actions of others
feminist theory is based on the idea that MEN, ALL MEN, are guilty of some crimeAnd now you come with it wbecause of women's freedom. Whom are you trying to kid?
you're making statements based on the idea that ALL MEN have to be held guilty of something
It is a moral teaching that we learn as kids that if you put rotten apples in a bsket with good apples, all of them will rot.
You are blind to the very facts thaat women hve been oppressed and not treated with justice as such women and tht doay continues to be so for maany, too many women.
it's obvious you haven't studied history, because groups women, even before the whole sexual "revolution", the feminism and what not, exerted a tremendous amount of power over men, for a fact the white feather movement in world war 1, where women would shame men who refused to engage in this useless world war
once again, you talk like a collectivist, you blame ALL MEN, when clearly the quran says i am not responsible for the actions of others, and you also say ALL WOMEN were "oppressed", without giving specific examples
who was behind the alcohol ban in the USA? groups of womeni on the other hand can give you examples of how groups women had tremendous influence over men
Nobody is saying all men have been evil and are evil. You like to assume that those who do not aggree with you say that. I have muscle ache in my mouth from saying the opposite. There are virtuous men, thank God. But all men are far from virtuous aand they are enabled and have been enabled historically to let loose their lack of morals on everybody but particularly on women.
If you deny that, thenit is you business, but do not expect sympathy.i'm not saying this because you disagree with me, i'm saying this because it's what you said
"Now what happened inthe last century was that the exclusive freedom of men men for sexual debauchery"
"Men hstorically have always had that sexual freedm you are pained about."Yes there are good men nd there are bad women, but that is a moral question. Socially, women have been abused as such and are still in some ways. Things have got better, much better than in the last trhree centuries. In someother ways what has been given with one hand has been withdrawn with the other.
explain how the happiness of women has been declining ever since feminism grew then
http//isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic457678.files/WomensHappiness.pdf
this is an empirical study, carried out by serious people, who have a history of rigorous work
unlike you, i look at the precedents, i look at what the feminists, as a group, have done in the past, and are doing right nowyou're offended over the fact that i am not blindly agreeing with anything a "feminist" has to say, that i am being critical of feminism, and i don't understand why
there's literally nothing wrong criticizing feminism, many scholars do it, like christina hoff sommers and many others i don't recall their names yet
It is shameless to pretend now that all is the faault of women, or feminists. What do you call a feminist. The word is not yours to mani0ulate s you like.
Is it your new version of witches?
Do you remember witches? Yes women when they are not absolutely powerless are evil. The only good Indian is the dead Indian, and so on.Salaam
i specifically talk about feminists, then you say i talk about all women
can you not read what i write? i never did any generalisations like you