nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Women's Rights in Islam - UPDATED WITH MOD INSTRUCTION IN FIRST POST

confusedquark

While I accept that this is an emotive topic for most, no thread in the history of this forum that I have ever seen has generated to many reported posts. With that in mind, and in an effort to keep discussion flowing, I feel I must introduce some ground rules for this thread. Some standard, some rather unorthodox.

Keep the discussion to an adult level. No "LOLS", "ROFLS" smilie faces or lots of exclamation marks. I hear they are relaunching Bebo where this kind of discussion is more suited.
I ask that you no longer quote from disreputable sources. All sources must have a reference and if they are deemed invalid/extreme/utterly biased, they will be deleted
No more copy-paste of more than 10 lines. It's just too painful to read.
In what is one of the most bizarre moves I have had to ever impose on a forum, from this point onwards there is to be no more discussion of menstruation. Yes, you read me correctly. It is irrelevant, off-topic and one or two posters appear to be obsessed with it
Back seat modding - do I really need to tell you not to correct other posters? If you have an issue, report it.

I had a look at the very long and protracted "discussion" that took place in the thread entitled "Very young girls wearing the hijab" a few days back and had intended to weigh in, but unfortunately the thread's been closed (although I do agree with Tom that it wasn't going anywhere). I had already started on a response, so I figured I'd start a new thread to share my views and perspective, because although I agree with much of what Defender of Faith had said, I didn't agree with some of his personal explanations and felt it needed a western Muslim's input. I hope that's ok with you Tom?

The main issues raised by katydid to support her argument that Islam is misogynistic were:
1) Women have a stricter dress code than men
2) Women are not permitted to be Imams and lead men in congregations
3) Women are not permitted to pray next to men and often have to pray in a separate section of a mosque away from the main area
4) A woman's testimony in the case of a debt transaction needs a backup, whereas a man's doesn't in the same circumstance
5) Men are allowed to have four wives, but women only one husband

I'll start by quoting what she had said earlier in the thread - "Treating people differently is not the same as treating one gender as inferior." It's important to look at all the issues of how the genders are treated in Islam (and the rationale behind them) before forming conclusions. For example, if the shoe was on the other foot and I was a 'masculinist' making the case the Islam is 'misandrous' (for the record, I'm not, but bear with me), I could cite some of the following examples:

- "And give to the women their Dower with a good heart" (Quran 4:4) (Dower is obligatory bridal-money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage). This could be viewed as a discrimination against men, and a gross inequality.
- "Men are the protectors and maintainers of women" (Quran 4:34)... Err, again, why? Big deal if we're a bit stronger and taller on average, but women are well able to fend for themselves, so why are men singled out to be the maintainers of women? Women are entitled to their husband's wealth, but men have no rights over their wives' wealth, even if they earn less. More discrimination and burdens for men to bear.
- This isn't just confined to marriage: If a marriage ends in divorce, women get certain guarantees during the waiting period, and even beyond for a woman's support, and are also entitled to child support if they have children. This, again, irrespective of whether she may be wealthier than him to start off with.
- Women get more leeway in matters of daily obligatory prayers. From the time a boy hits puberty, it's a sin for him to miss a single prayer for the rest of his life (assuming he remains of sound mind) - even on his death bed, whereas women get a free pass every month during their periods and have no repercussions for missing the 5 daily prayers during those days. There's also a greater onus on men to attend their local mosque for prayers (and all the effort that's entailed with that), whereas women can cash the same reward with much less effort by praying at home. More inequalities.

They're just a few things I can think of - I'm sure I could come up with more if I looked into it further, but that's enough to start off my point, because much in the same vain katydid mentioned "the FACT is that Islam contains these examples of discrimination against women and, if you claim that the Qur'an is the word of God and can't be changed in any way, Islam discriminates against women. It doesn't matter if there are a thousand quotes that say they are equal, if there is even ONE quote that shows discrimination, there is discrimination", I could easily replace 'women' with 'men' to make the opposite claim. So you really can't focus just on the few issues that support your claim, whilst ignoring other issues that do the opposite and not taking them into account before you come to your overall conclusion.

Delving specifically into the points above. First thing I'll say is that women do not have "full rights" (if we choose to define "full rights" as was the other gender get), and I'll add to that that men also do not have "full rights" (going by the same definition). Men and women are alike in many ways and different in many ways. Islam acknowledges as much and assigns each different roles and rights to each.

1) Women having a stricter dress code. Firstly, any physical extra-marital relationships are strictly forbidden in Islam, and many Islamic rules are in place to minimise the chances of such relationships happening. An often quoted saying is "anything that leads to Haram, is itself Haram" (Haram = forbidden). Hijab is part of this - the more both men and women cover up, the less likely they'll be to be attracted to one another. Why women more so? Two reasons - firstly, the effect women have on men outweighs the effect men have on women (a little hormone called testosterone has a thing or two to do with it). Yes women may find a man's chest attractive, but the effect a woman's breasts has on men is far far greater - there's a reason why we have page 3 girls and not page 3 boys. Secondly, it has to with a woman's own safety. Men are stronger than women, and it's a very very sad thing that countless rapes happen right across the world on a daily basis. I'm not saying Hijab gives a woman 100% protection and I'm not saying that any woman who doesn't wear one will be attacked (most will be fine if they are otherwise sensible), but wearing Hijab will reduce the risk of attracting a predator.

2) Why are women not permitted to lead men in prayers. Islam places no restriction on women to teach, preach and guide both women and men. "Men and women are supporters of each other. They command what is right and forbid what is wrong (Al-Tawbah 9:71)" There are many women today who are fully qualified to be jurists (faqihah) and give religious opinions (fatwa's). They teach Qur'an and Hadith in schools, colleges and universities all over the world. However, the specific issue of a woman leading a prayer congregation of men and women is something which was never done at the time of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), and as Muslims we try to stick with the traditions and ways of our prophet (peace be upon him). In part, it's a means to keep men and woman separate, but it's also a means to protect a woman's modesty - because it's not considered appropriate/decent for a woman to be bent over prostrating on the ground - where men could be potentially looking at her from behind.

3) Women are not permitted to pray next to men and often have to pray in a separate section of a mosque away from the main area. From the "anything that leads to Haram" point above, unnecessary contact between males and females (who aren't close relatives) is disliked in Islam, and this is why gender segregation is encouraged - be it in a mosque, at a wedding, at work etc. Men attend mosques in greater numbers (due to the discrimination men suffer, as highlighted above), and therefore they occupy the main prayer areas, and also leading on from the last sentence of the above point, the lines of men should be in the front area, then the lines of children and women. Katydid did mention in one of her posts that millions and men and women work together side by side without any problems, but it's also a fact that thousands (if not millions) of men and women around the world have extra-marital affairs, and often with co-workers. The more time men and women spend in each other's company, the more likely attractions are to form and affairs to happen. Again, I'm not saying it always happens, but it certainly does contribute, and that's why gender segregation, wherever possible, is encouraged in Islam.

4) A woman's testimony in the case of a financial transaction needs a backup, whereas a man's doesn't in the same circumstance. From what I can gather, the reason for this at the time the verse was revealed was because women didn't deal as much with financial affairs, and a backup was needed more so because of their inexperience. The Islamic jurisprudent Ibn Taimeya clarified that the verse was discussing the condition of transaction not the legal testimony before a judge. He added that a woman’s forgetfulness and hence her need for another woman to confirm her testimony in situations of deals is not a nature in all woman, but it rather has to do with experience and practice (in financial affairs), so if a woman has experience in financial matters and was known to have piety then her testimony alone is accepted. Allah (subhana wa'tala) knows best. Furthermore, another verse relating to women's testimony in court shows that a woman's testimony is at least equal to (if not greater than) her husband's if she is accused of adultery:

"And as for those who accuse their wives but have no witnesses except themselves, let the testimony of one of them be four testimonies (i.e. testifies four times) by Allah that he be one of those who speak the truth. And the fifth (testimony) (should be) invoking the Curse of Allah on him if he be one of those who tell a lie (against her). But it shall avert the punishment from her, if she bears witness four times by Allah, that he (her husband) is telling a lie. And the fifth (testimony) should be that the Wrath of Allah be upon her if (her husband) speaks the truth". (Quran 24:6-9)

5) Men are allowed to have four wives, but women only one husband. There are many practical reasons for this. Children for starters. If and when the woman becomes pregnant, issues of paternity crop up, and which one exactly is the father. If a woman has four husbands, even if you could do DNA paternity testing, the very fact that she's one woman, who can only go through one pregnancy at a time, followed by nursing a newborn and recovering before she could have another, one of the husbands could potentially have to wait 6-8 years (and quite possibly longer depending on how things work out - will all the men just be happy to wait their turn for a child? will the woman want a break at some point?) before having a child of his own. Then if and when the woman does get pregnant, is it ok for her to be having intercourse with one man whilst carrying the baby of another? (I'm not fan of polygamy, I'll add - and whilst people will say it's wrong for a man to be having intercourse with a second wife while number one is expecting, the previous scenario is probably still wronger). Furthermore, I think it's pretty tough on a woman to undergo pregnancy and subsequent nursing whilst trying to satify four husbands at the same time. And finally, as tough as it must be for women to live as co-wives, men by their very nature are competitive, testosterone-driven and prone to head-locking over females, so I'd imagine there would be more likelihood of trouble - esp. as they'll be competing to produce off-spring.

All in all, I think Islam treats women quite well. My own wife says that "we have it easy". Yes they are given some different roles, responsibilities and rights to men, but they are still given plenty of opportunities to pursue jobs/careers etc, they are kept protected, they are cared for, they have rights that men don't, they are even pampered I'd say, and men are explicitly told to live with them in kindness.

“... consort with them in kindness, for if ye hate them it may happen that ye hate a thing wherein Allah hath placed much good” (Quran 4:19)

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Tom Dunne

No problem with the thread, I'll even throw in my bit on my own personal observations on Islam and women.

I stress that all of what I am about to write below is my own personal opinion, and nothing more.

In terms of context, I think we in the Western, non-Mulsim world have to appreciate the nature of society in the Muslim world. It is quite a patriarchal, hierarchical society, where unlike in the West, older people for example are treated with the utmost of respect. Somewhat like Western society, the man is considered the head of the household and consequently, family unit, with each member of the family unit having their own distinct role.

Another aspect, and this is not intended to be in any way disingenuous, the Muslim world is still technically full of developing nations. Even in the Gulf region, where I have spent many happy years, the countries, despite their vast wealth, are still essentially Third World countries with money. The laws, societal norms and levels of illiteracy are vastly different when compared to the West.

Which brings me to my next point - women in Muslim society. Believe it or not, women are revered, as a short little anecdote will testify. I was out shopping in a supermarket with my wife, she reached to a higher shelf (she is quite short) and a local many came over and started to admonish me for having my wife undertake such a task (while smiling, of course). It was at that point that I noticed that there were no local women in the supermarket, only local men, some with their young sons. It was the mans "job" to go out, on a Friday morning before prayers, and undertake the weekly shopping, while the woman stayed at home.

A trivial example, yes, and one that potentially leaves me open to accusations of the gender divide in Muslim society, but I think it is an anecdote that puts a lot of things into perspective. Without the full context of what I have experienced, that situation could be interpreted as the domineering male demanding his wife stay in her place at home while he sources the provisions, or, it can be seen as a man fulfilling his role in a more traditional society as the provider. Guess which way I see it.

In terms of men and women praying together, here's my cut on it - distractions. As you may know, when praying, Muslims bend over (not sure of the correct term) and place themselves in various physical poses. I don't know about you, but if I was praying (I'm not a Muslim, remember), and some women was bending over in front of me, you can be 100% certain I would be distracted. I'm only human....:o

So, in terms of men and women dressing differently, yes, there is a difference, but gross generalisations about all women being oppressed and forced to wear something against their will is dangerous. Here in the Gulf, women choose to wear what they like, Saudi Arabia notwithstanding (though as I have pointed out many times before, Saudi is not representative of a Muslim society). I've seen girls/women here wearing the abaya, along with the veil, I've seen women here wear very Western high-heels and skirt, and everything in between. I agree in the likes of Afghanistan the accusations of oppression are difficult to argue, but to me, that is a failed state, with the legislative and societal vacuum being filled by the only other thing they know of - religion.

Are men and women treated differently - without question. Did we in Ireland treat men and women differently up until quite recently - without question we did. I refer you to the many articles that frequently appear in business supplements/magazines about gender inequality in the corporate world. Legislation guaranteeing men and women equal pay only came into force in 1973. Have things changed in the West in relation to gender inequality, they have and they still are. Have things changed in the Muslim world? Not yet, but they are. However, given the sociolo-policital issues that pretty much most Muslim countries are currently experiencing, I do think that gender equality is one of many items that need to be addressed.

I could go on (with a nod to my note in the other thread about walls of text), but I think it is dangerous to simplify the topic at hand into "Islam oppresses women". It doesn't, men do.

looksee

I cannot see that either of the previous two posters have said anything different from the other thread. We are arguing from different bases. You are happy with the way you treat women. You say yes, we are a paternalistic society, we take care of our women and remove from them any need to pursue a career or do anything other than marry, be obedient and have children. This is to their advantage and actually puts a lot of pressure on men who have to take all this responsibility.

The western women who are arguing with you are asking why you think one sex has the right to decide how the other will live. Why should women need protection from men? Would it not be possible for men to learn to control their animal urges and treat women with respect for their own sake, not because they are covered from head to foot. If women are equal they should not have to be subject to men's decisions on whether they have a career or marry and have children.

There does not seem to be any possibility of meeting on these two views. The final male argument is that the (male) prophet was given divine instruction from the (male) God, these instructions have been translated by (male) experts for the benefit of a paternalistic society. Are there any female Muslim Boardsies who would like offer an opinion? Beyond that, there really is no point in discussing it any further.

katydid

looksee wrote: »

I cannot see that either of the previous two posters have said anything different from the other thread. We are arguing from different bases. You are happy with the way you treat women. You say yes, we are a paternalistic society, we take care of our women and remove from them any need to pursue a career or do anything other than marry, be obedient and have children. This is to their advantage and actually puts a lot of pressure on men who have to take all this responsibility.

The western women who are arguing with you are asking why you think one sex has the right to decide how the other will live. Why should women need protection from men? Would it not be possible for men to learn to control their animal urges and treat women with respect for their own sake, not because they are covered from head to foot. If women are equal they should not have to be subject to men's decisions on whether they have a career or marry and have children.

There does not seem to be any possibility of meeting on these two views. The final male argument is that the (male) prophet was given divine instruction from the (male) God, these instructions have been translated by (male) experts for the benefit of a paternalistic society. Are there any female Muslim Boardsies who would like offer an opinion? Beyond that, there really is no point in discussing it any further.

My thoughts exactly.

Tom Dunne

I'm curious how you reconcile this statement

looksee wrote: »

You are happy with the way you treat women.

with this statement:

Tom Dunne wrote: »

(I'm not a Muslim, remember)

I am not justifying anything, I am merely providing context.

Context is king.

looksee

Really Tom, I am not interested in reconciling it. This is the Islam forum, I am referring to Muslims generally. Is that the only point you can find to argue about in my statement? And you will note that in fact I am suggesting that, rather than keep insisting that Muslims do not treat women equally, they could say, 'no, agreed, we do not treat them equally, there is no need to, we look after them and care for them. It is our belief that what we do is correct.' At least that would be honest.

At the same time maybe western society should do the same and say, 'what you do in your own country is your own business, but while you are living in a Christian/non-Muslin type society you respect our beliefs and accept that women have the same rights, responsibilities and autonomy as men'. This is especially true if, as has been claimed, it is cultural rather than religious beliefs that are the basis for your attitudes.

Stereomaniac

Well women who live in this state have the same rights, regarless of their backgrounds. So if someone really wants to pursue a career, from a Muslim background in this country, no man can stop them legally. What more can we do in this country, we can't force a belief system on anyone? For sure, I would not choose to live the way that the Muslim people do (I'm male, by the way), but I feel that it is not my place to judge them on how they have lived for so many years. There are many strong Muslim women out there who can advocate for themselves.

katydid

Stereomaniac wrote: »

Well women who live in this state have the same rights, regarless of their backgrounds. So if someone really wants to pursue a career, from a Muslim background in this country, no man can stop them legally. What more can we do in this country, we can't force a belief system on anyone? For sure, I would not choose to live the way that the Muslim people do (I'm male, by the way), but I feel that it is not my place to judge them on how they have lived for so many years. There are many strong Muslim women out there who can advocate for themselves.

You can't legislate for forcing Muslim women not to abide by some of the diktats of their religion except where their actions interfere with other people, or with public safety. For example, you certainly can legislate against the use in public of face coverings, because of the expectations in our society of certain identity and communication matters. Other than that, there's not a lot we can, other than provide the means for Muslim women to have choices if they wish to take them, and can overcome the restrictions of their community.

confusedquark

looksee wrote: »

You are happy with the way you treat women. You say yes, we are a paternalistic society, we take care of our women and remove from them any need to pursue a career or do anything other than marry, be obedient and have children.

Men do try to remove the need of their wives's having to work, but we don't remove the choice of whether they still want to pursue a career or not. I don't see how that's anything other than a win-win for women - work if you want to, but you shouldn't have to. That said, times are tough and Muslims aren't immune to economics and many many Muslim couples both still need to work for financial reasons.

looksee wrote: »

The western women who are arguing with you are asking why you think one sex has the right to decide how the other will live... If women are equal they should not have to be subject to men's decisions on whether they have a career or marry and have children.

One sex doesn't have the right to decide how the other will live (although I do wonder when I'm being ordered around the house!). As I said above, women are free to pursue a career if they want to. Marriage is also very much their own decision and it's not something women should be forced into Islamically (some cultural practices diverge from this, and I can't condemn them enough). Marriage is as much a partnership for Muslim couples as it is for western couples - the vast majority of couples love and care a great deal for one another and try their utmost to keep their spouses happy, so it's seldom a case of the man deciding how his wife lives, but rather couples making decisions together. Anybody who knows enough Muslims would know that, but in the west we only seem to be fed the oppressive-husband story.

looksee wrote: »

Why should women need protection from men? Would it not be possible for men to learn to control their animal urges and treat women with respect for their own sake, not because they are covered from head to foot.

Can we teach all men everywhere to control their animal urges and treat women with respect? I'll be honest I don't think we can - it's certainly not a futile objective, and every man you can instil that morality into the better, and having stringent laws in place to catch and prosecute those who still attack women will also act as a deterrent, but there always have been and there always will be men out there who will pose a risk to women. And I firmly believe that women wearing hijab will offer them some protection from such prying eyes.

looksee wrote: »

There does not seem to be any possibility of meeting on these two views. The final male argument is that the (male) prophet was given divine instruction from the (male) God, these instructions have been translated by (male) experts for the benefit of a paternalistic society. Are there any female Muslim Boardsies who would like offer an opinion? Beyond that, there really is no point in discussing it any further.

I am suggesting that, rather than keep insisting that Muslims do not treat women equally, they could say, 'no, agreed, we do not treat them equally, there is no need to, we look after them and care for them. It is our belief that what we do is correct.' At least that would be honest.

The last paragraph of my first post said as much. I really think it boils down to a "glass half empty" vs "glass half full" type argument. If the roles were reversed, I'm sure feminists would consider it absolutely outrageous if the onus was on women to provide for their men - you can't keep everyone happy. But I very much object to misogyny being used for Islam, and I've already outlined my argument as to why.

confusedquark

Stereomaniac wrote: »

Well women who live in this state have the same rights, regarless of their backgrounds. So if someone really wants to pursue a career, from a Muslim background in this country, no man can stop them legally.

I can only stress it again - Islam does not prevent a woman from pursuing a career. It's something that she doesn't have to do (whereas a man has to), but very much something she can do if she wants.

katydid

confusedquark wrote: »

I can only stress it again - Islam does not prevent a woman from pursuing a career. It's something that she doesn't have to do (whereas a man has to), but very much something she can do if she wants.

Why does a woman not have to and a man has to?

katydid

confusedquark wrote: »

Marriage is as much a partnership for Muslim couples as it is for western couples - the vast majority of couples love and care a great deal for one another and try their utmost to keep their spouses happy, so it's seldom a case of the man deciding how his wife lives, but rather couples making decisions together.
...
Can we teach all men everywhere to control their animal urges and treat women with respect? I'll be honest I don't think we can - it's certainly not a futile objective, and every man you can instil that mora

The last paragraph of my first post said as much. I really think it boils down to a "glass half empty" vs "glass half full" type argument. If the roles were reversed, I'm sure feminists would consider it absolutely outrageous if the onus was on women to provide for their men - you can't keep everyone happy. But I very much object to misogyny being used for Islam, and I've already outlined my argument as to why.

Marriage is hardly a partnership in Islam, if a man is allowed have four wives. Even if he doesn't choose to exercise that right, the notion of a wife and husband as equal partners is clearly not one that Islam supports.

A pity you think Muslim men are so weak that they can't control them. Luckily the Christian and atheist men I work with and have as friends can manage to be in the same room as me without turning into raving sex maniacs. Maybe it's something about Islam that makes men incapable of self control?

No, it's not a "glass half empty/glass half full" situation; things are definitely skewed in favour of men. I have never seen a man covered from head to toe, with just a slit for his eyes. I have never heard of a country which forbids men from driving cars. I have never heard of a country where educating girls was considered immoral. You may say those are extremes of Islam, and indeed they are, but the fact is that Islam is such that it enables such discrimination against women. Nothing you have said that Islam is not misogynistic; it IS misogynistic to make men responsible for providing for woman, as it is saying that women are not capable of providing for themselves.

confusedquark

katydid wrote: »

Marriage is hardly a partnership in Islam, if a man is allowed have four wives. Even if he doesn't choose to exercise that right, the notion of a wife and husband as equal partners is clearly not one that Islam supports.

Marriage is always a partnership and it requires a lot of effort and dedication to keep it running smoothly. The fact that polygamy is permitted (in certain circumstances) does not mean that the remaining 99.99+% of non-polygamous Muslim couples in Islam aren't encouraged to be loving and caring towards one another in Islam.

katydid wrote: »

A pity you think Muslim men are so weak that they can't control them. Luckily the Christian and atheist men I work with and have as friends can manage to be in the same room as me without turning into raving sex maniacs. Maybe it's something about Islam that makes men incapable of self control?

6 sexual assaults are committed in Ireland every single day (and I'll save myself the effort of quoting global rape stats, because the number's going to be scary high either way). I specifically said "all men everywhere" because it's not just Muslim men who have to deal with animal urges. I already dealt with your point in my first post, but I'll copy and paste it here again: "Katydid did mention in one of her posts that millions and men and women work together side by side without any problems, but it's also a fact that thousands (if not millions) of men and women around the world have extra-marital affairs, and often with co-workers. The more time men and women spend in each other's company, the more likely attractions are to form and affairs to happen. Again, I'm not saying it always happens, but it certainly does contribute, and that's why gender segregation, wherever possible, is encouraged in Islam."

katydid wrote: »

No, it's not a "glass half empty/glass half full" situation; things are definitely skewed in favour of men. I have never seen a man covered from head to toe, with just a slit for his eyes. I have never heard of a country which forbids men from driving cars. I have never heard of a country where educating girls was considered immoral. You may say those are extremes of Islam, and indeed they are, but the fact is that Islam is such that it enables such discrimination against women. Nothing you have said that Islam is not misogynistic; it IS misogynistic to make men responsible for providing for woman, as it is saying that women are not capable of providing for themselves.

With all of these things, it's very important to sift out what's Islam and what isn't. The Niqab (covered except for slit in the eyes) is a more extreme interpretation of Hijab - most Muslim women would consider the headscarf and dressing modestly as sufficient. I've already explained the reasons as to why Hijab is more strict for women. Women not being allowed to drive is simply not an Islamic ruling - it's a cultural thing in Saudi and probably will change in time. I've never heard of a country where educating girls was considered immoral either - and if there is one, they're certainly not following Islamic principles, because there's a lot of emphasis on education in Islam (of both genders). You're concluding statement typifies the "glass half empty/glass half full" situation - I see it as a win-win situation for women that they don't have to work, but can do if they choose to, whereas you see it as misogyny. I mentioned enough in my opening post to make a case that men are the ones discriminated against in Islam if one would be inclined to look at things from that perspective, so you can take your pick.

I think Tom summarised it well when he said "I think it is dangerous to simplify the topic at hand into "Islam oppresses women". It doesn't, men do."

katydid wrote: »

You can't legislate for forcing Muslim women not to abide by some of the diktats of their religion except where their actions interfere with other people, or with public safety. For example, you certainly can legislate against the use in public of face coverings, because of the expectations in our society of certain identity and communication matters. Other than that, there's not a lot we can, other than provide the means for Muslim women to have choices if they wish to take them, and can overcome the restrictions of their community.

Are you providing means for Muslim women to have choices, or removing choice from them by legislating against the use in public of face coverings? You should really speak to Muslim women and ask them what they want before you go restricting their freedoms on their behalf. Will you next suggest that all Muslim women be forced to work in Ireland to save them having to choose whether they want to or not (and all the supposed misogyny that comes with having that choice)?

katydid

confusedquark wrote: »

Marriage is always a partnership and it requires a lot of effort and dedication to keep it running smoothly. The fact that polygamy is permitted (in certain circumstances) does not mean that the remaining 99.99+% of non-polygamous Muslim couples in Islam aren't encouraged to be loving and caring towards one another in Islam.

6 sexual assaults are committed in Ireland every single day (and I'll save myself the effort of quoting global rape stats, because the number's going to be scary high either way). I specifically said "all men everywhere" because it's not just Muslim men who have to deal with animal urges. I already dealt with your point in my first post, but I'll copy and paste it here again: "Katydid did mention in one of her posts that millions and men and women work together side by side without any problems, but it's also a fact that thousands (if not millions) of men and women around the world have extra-marital affairs, and often with co-workers. The more time men and women spend in each other's company, the more likely attractions are to form and affairs to happen. Again, I'm not saying it always happens, but it certainly does contribute, and that's why gender segregation, wherever possible, is encouraged in Islam."

With all of these things, it's very important to sift out what's Islam and what isn't. The Niqab (covered except for slit in the eyes) is a more extreme interpretation of Hijab - most Muslim women would consider the headscarf and dressing modestly as sufficient. I've already explained the reasons as to why Hijab is more strict for women. Women not being allowed to drive is simply not an Islamic ruling - it's a cultural thing in Saudi and probably will change in time. I've never heard of a country where educating girls was considered immoral either - and if there is one, they're certainly not following Islamic principles, because there's a lot of emphasis on education in Islam (of both genders). You're concluding statement typifies the "glass half empty/glass half full" situation - I see it as a win-win situation for women that they don't have to work, but can do if they choose to, whereas you see it as misogyny. I mentioned enough in my opening post to make a case that men are the ones discriminated against in Islam if one would be inclined to look at things from that perspective, so you can take your pick.

I think Tom summarised it well when he said "I think it is dangerous to simplify the topic at hand into "Islam oppresses women". It doesn't, men do."

Are you providing means for Muslim women to have choices, or removing choice from them by legislating against the use in public of face coverings? You should really speak to Muslim women and ask them what they want before you go restricting their freedoms on their behalf. Will you next suggest that all Muslim women be forced to work in Ireland to save them having to choose whether they want to or not (and all the supposed misogyny that comes with having that choice)?

A relationship between one man and up to four women is not the kind of relationship we in the West consider a partnership. For us, marriage is a unique relationship between two people. Even if a Muslim man only has one wife, the relationship is open to three more people, so it's not the same idea at all.

If you think sexual assaults don't happen in Muslim countries, you must live a very sheltered life. In any country where men are given priority over women, men will always try to dominate them with sex. Look at all the incidents in India in recent months. And even in fully Islamic countries, where women walk around fully covered, they are routinely assaulted in the street, and THEY are punished if they are raped.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBbfpmsGQrc Not much respect for women seen here, and this is a mild example.

I think I'll take my chances in a society where most men respect me and can control themselves, and where, if men dared to behave like those men in Saudi, I would call the police and they would be dealt with.

You have not "explained" why men have to cover themselves more than men. You tried to justify it. You are a man; how do you know how we women feel when faced with a good looking man? If the purpose is to stop sexual desire, then men should cover up as well. But then, you probably think women don't have sexual desire...

You've never heard of a country where educating girls is considered immoral? You've heard of Afghanistan? The Taliban? They may be extremists, but they base their beliefs on Islam and believe sincerely that Islam gives them permission to treat women in this way.

In this country, we communicate with each other respectfully, face to face. We expect to see the face of the person we are interacting with. If Muslim women aren't prepared to do this, they should not go into society and interact with other people. A shop assistant should not have to interact with a curtain. A teacher should not have to try to teach a curtain.

You tried to argue that men are discriminated against in Islam because they are expected to look after women. This is hardly discrimination, in that the other side of the coin is that they also have power and control over them. Women are rendered dependent on them, and have little power to change their lives, should they wish.

confusedquark

katydid wrote: »

A relationship between one man and up to four women is not the kind of relationship we in the West consider a partnership. For us, marriage is a unique relationship between two people. Even if a Muslim man only has one wife, the relationship is open to three more people, so it's not the same idea at all.

It only becomes "not the same idea" if the man gets married a second time. For the vast vast majority of us, marriage is a unique relationship between two people, and one in which couples love and care a great deal for one another and try their utmost to keep their spouses happy, so it's seldom a case of the man deciding how his wife lives, but rather couples making decisions together in partnership - going back to my original point.

katydid wrote: »

If you think sexual assaults don't happen in Muslim countries, you must live a very sheltered life. In any country where men are given priority over women, men will always try to dominate them with sex. Look at all the incidents in India in recent months. And even in fully Islamic countries, where women walk around fully covered, they are routinely assaulted in the street, and THEY are punished if they are raped.

At what point did I imply that sexual assaults don't happen in Muslim countries? I cited those figures for your benefit, considering you seemed to think it was only "Muslim men are so weak that they can't control them". Again, I'll copy and paste what I have written in my first post - "I'm not saying Hijab gives a woman 100% protection and I'm not saying that any woman who doesn't wear one will be attacked (most will be fine if they are otherwise sensible), but wearing Hijab will reduce the risk of attracting a predator." Women are not punished if they are raped in Islam - but rather their claims are taken very seriously. Circumstantial evidence, medical data and expert testimony form the evidence that are used to prosecute such crimes. During the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him), punishment was inflicted on the rapist on the solitary evidence of the woman who was raped by the perpetrator.

katydid wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBbfpmsGQrc Not much respect for women seen here, and this is a mild example. I think I'll take my chances in a society where most men respect me and can control themselves, and where, if men dared to behave like those men in Saudi, I would call the police and they would be dealt with.

Certainly not much respect for women in that video and I would punch those a-holes if I could, but every nation has it's fair share of idiots, and if those Saudi lads had a better understanding of their religion, and followed it, they wouldn't do anything of the sort. Which again, is why I had said - With all of these things, it's very important to sift out what's Islam and what isn't. (I now understand why Defender of Faith had to write so much in bold in the last thread - it would save us both a lot of time if you would please take on board the points I make).

Have a look at this following video of a woman walking through New York city - will you then conclude that women in the west don't get any respect either? It's very easy to pick out the worst of a country, but it isn't always representative of the country as a whole, and certainly isn't always representative of what their religion preaches.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1XGPvbWn0A

katydid wrote: »

You have not "explained" why men have to cover themselves more than men. You tried to justify it. You are a man; how do you know how we women feel when faced with a good looking man? If the purpose is to stop sexual desire, then men should cover up as well. But then, you probably think women don't have sexual desire...

What?! Women have a sexual desire?? :rolleyes:
Anyway, I've already given you the two reasons why women need to cover themselves more than men. The dress code is just one part of Islam that reduces extra-marital relationships forming between men and women - other rulings are segregation wherever possible (as already mentioned), men and women to limit contact and conversation to whatever is absolutely necessary, and also both men and women being advised to keep their eyes low and to not gawk at one another (in stark contrast to what those Saudi idiots were doing).

katydid wrote: »

You've never heard of a country where educating girls is considered immoral? You've heard of Afghanistan? The Taliban? They may be extremists, but they base their beliefs on Islam and believe sincerely that Islam gives them permission to treat women in this way.

Considering the Taliban have been out of power in Afghanistan for well over a decade now, I didn't really consider them a country to themselves. They recently murdered 100+ little children (boys and girls) in a school in Pakistan in cold blood, and there is zero justification for slaughtering innocent children in Islam. Their actions are much akin to likes of Al Qaeda and ISIS - they are a bunch of terrorists using religion for their own means, and as I had already said, "they're certainly not following Islamic principles, because there's a lot of emphasis on education in Islam (of both genders)".

katydid wrote: »

In this country, we communicate with each other respectfully, face to face. We expect to see the face of the person we are interacting with. If Muslim women aren't prepared to do this, they should not go into society and interact with other people. A shop assistant should not have to interact with a curtain. A teacher should not have to try to teach a curtain.

Indeed, and you could make a strong case on those grounds for restricting the rights of Muslim women to dress as they please (and that's a discussion for another day). But that's what you're doing - you're restricting their rights for the sake of your society's needs/wants, so don't go selling it as something that will liberate Muslim women, which was very much implied in follow-up sentence "Other than that, there's not a lot we can, other than provide the means for Muslim women to have choices if they wish to take them, and can overcome the restrictions of their community."

katydid wrote: »

You tried to argue that men are discriminated against in Islam because they are expected to look after women. This is hardly discrimination, in that the other side of the coin is that they also have power and control over them. Women are rendered dependent on them, and have little power to change their lives, should they wish.

Yeah, discrimination need not apply when it's a man that's at the receiving end... Again, women very much have the power to change their lives (by which I assume you mean to pursue a career?), should they so desire. I'm not sure how many more times I'll have to repeat that.

looksee

Anyway, I've already given you the two reasons why women need to cover themselves more than men. The dress code is just one part of Islam that reduces extra-marital relationships forming between men and women - other rulings are segregation wherever possible (as already mentioned), men and women to limit contact and conversation to whatever is absolutely necessary, and also both men and women being advised to keep their eyes low and to not gawk at one another (in stark contrast to what those Saudi idiots were doing).

So the four or five veiled women faced with a herd of jeering men were idiots? Right. You have explained exactly nothing, and obviously do not have the faintest idea of the points that are being made.

I meet up occasionally with (male) friends, people I used to work with, people I know through various interests, for coffee and a chat. There is absolutely nothing more than platonic friendship going on, neither their wives nor my husband is threatened in any way, we are just friends with common interests. My daughter is just now waiting to be collected by a male friend of many years, they are going for lunch and to catch up on three years of news. His wife is aware of the meeting, it is not a problem.

Whether it is religion or culture, it seems very immature and insecure for men to require 'their' women to be wrapped up like parcels. It is also counter productive (or more salacious) - a hundred or more years ago when western women wore full length dresses a glimpse of an ankle was more titillating than a woman in a bikini on the beach is now.

niamhstokes

I think women in islam can be summed up like this:

A bird in a cage is fed, watered and protected, adored and loved; But is the bird free? No!

The bird is a woman in islam. Let her fly free. Life is not about wearing clothes to hide yourself from the world in case a demonized version of men stare at you. Be free , be happy and enjoy life. God loves to see his children play and be happy, he doesn't say cover yourself from head to toe and dissolve your identity into nothing in public

katydid

confusedquark wrote: »

It only becomes "not the same idea" if the man gets married a second time. For the vast vast majority of us, marriage is a unique relationship between two people, and one in which couples love and care a great deal for one another and try their utmost to keep their spouses happy, so it's seldom a case of the man deciding how his wife lives, but rather couples making decisions together in partnership - going back to my original point.

At what point did I imply that sexual assaults don't happen in Muslim countries? I cited those figures for your benefit, considering you seemed to think it was only "Muslim men are so weak that they can't control them". Again, I'll copy and paste what I have written in my first post - "I'm not saying Hijab gives a woman 100% protection and I'm not saying that any woman who doesn't wear one will be attacked (most will be fine if they are otherwise sensible), but wearing Hijab will reduce the risk of attracting a predator." Women are not punished if they are raped in Islam - but rather their claims are taken very seriously. Circumstantial evidence, medical data and expert testimony form the evidence that are used to prosecute such crimes. During the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him), punishment was inflicted on the rapist on the solitary evidence of the woman who was raped by the perpetrator.

Certainly not much respect for women in that video and I would punch those a-holes if I could, but every nation has it's fair share of idiots, and if those Saudi lads had a better understanding of their religion, and followed it, they wouldn't do anything of the sort. Which again, is why I had said - With all of these things, it's very important to sift out what's Islam and what isn't. (I now understand why Defender of Faith had to write so much in bold in the last thread - it would save us both a lot of time if you would please take on board the points I make).

Have a look at this following video of a woman walking through New York city - will you then conclude that women in the west don't get any respect either? It's very easy to pick out the worst of a country, but it isn't always representative of the country as a whole, and certainly isn't always representative of what their religion preaches.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1XGPvbWn0A

What?! Women have a sexual desire?? :rolleyes:
Anyway, I've already given you the two reasons why women need to cover themselves more than men. The dress code is just one part of Islam that reduces extra-marital relationships forming between men and women - other rulings are segregation wherever possible (as already mentioned), men and women to limit contact and conversation to whatever is absolutely necessary, and also both men and women being advised to keep their eyes low and to not gawk at one another (in stark contrast to what those Saudi idiots were doing).

Considering the Taliban have been out of power in Afghanistan for well over a decade now, I didn't really consider them a country to themselves. They recently murdered 100+ little children (boys and girls) in a school in Pakistan in cold blood, and there is zero justification for slaughtering innocent children in Islam. Their actions are much akin to likes of Al Qaeda and ISIS - they are a bunch of terrorists using religion for their own means, and as I had already said, "they're certainly not following Islamic principles, because there's a lot of emphasis on education in Islam (of both genders)".

Indeed, and you could make a strong case on those grounds for restricting the rights of Muslim women to dress as they please (and that's a discussion for another day). But that's what you're doing - you're restricting their rights for the sake of your society's needs/wants, so don't go selling it as something that will liberate Muslim women, which was very much implied in follow-up sentence "Other than that, there's not a lot we can, other than provide the means for Muslim women to have choices if they wish to take them, and can overcome the restrictions of their community."

Yeah, discrimination need not apply when it's a man that's at the receiving end... Again, women very much have the power to change their lives (by which I assume you mean to pursue a career?), should they so desire. I'm not sure how many more times I'll have to repeat that.

The thing about all the things you try to defend because they are "only" interpretations of Islam, that's just making excuses. Muslims claim that Islamic scripture is written in stone and can't be changed. Yet Muslims interpret it all the time, as evidenced by the many varieties of groups that say THEY are the true Muslims. The Taliban may not be officially in power in Afghanistan, but their power is still very strong, and in many parts of that country, and their rule hold sway. All that would be fine, as I pointed out to Defender of Faith, if Muslims admitted that the writings have to be contextualised and not all of them make sense in the world we live in today. But that is something I have yet to hear a Muslim admit. He didn't. Do you?

Some things don't even need contextualisation, like the marriage thing. The fact that Muslim marriage is open to the possibility that one party can have multiple partners means that from the get go it is not a marriage in the sense we understand it in the West, which is a unique partnership between two people. Your religion does not define marriage in this way, since it allows for one party to have multiple partners. Which is fine, if women are happy to go into a marriage on that basis, but let's not pretend for one minute it's an equal partnership in any way, shape or form. My relationship with my husband would not be the same if I thought that he was free, according to our religion, to divide his "love" with other people. I want and expect his undivided attention and I give him mine.

You didn't imply that there was no sexual assault in Muslim countries. I was just pointing out that it happens there too, and when it does, there is usually little justice for the victims, who are as often as not blamed for what happened to them. In the example I showed you of a bunch of a**h*les harassing innocent women, there is no guarantee, as there would be in a Western country, that the women would be dealt with fairly. There are several reports of women in such situations in Islamic countries being dismissed by police and authorities.

Your figures don't change the fact that your religion seems to think that Muslim men are capable of controlling themselves. If it did, it would trust them to be in the presence of women without feeling uncontrollable sexual urges. Women covering themselves up may reduce the chances of being attacked by a sexual predator - so does men controlling their urges. Is that so crazy? I work and socialise with men all the time, and I have managed to live for fifty years in this world without inciting uncontrollable urges in my male colleagues and friends.

You haven't given me reasons why women need to cover themselves more. You've given me excuses, predicated on the assumption that women are not attracted to men in the same way as men.

Yes, I would restrict the women's rights to dress in a manner which is a health and safety or a communication, because in our society individual's rights are balanced with the rights of the community. In our society, for example, a person can't walk into a bank wearing a motorbike helmet because of security issues, or can't give evidence in court wearing something in front of their face, because a jury needs to be able to see their face, and their reaction to questions and so on. As a teacher, I would not teach someone whose face I could not see, because I wouldn't be able to see their reactions to what I was saying, and whether or not they were paying attention to me, or how they would interact with other students. Muslim women will be liberated if they can carry on their lives in the same way as their peers, and will be held back if they are unable to do certain things that are normal in our society.
If I go to Saudi Arabia or Iran, I can't choose to exercise my right to wear what I wish in public...

confusedquark

looksee wrote: »

So the four or five veiled women faced with a herd of jeering men were idiots? Right. You have explained exactly nothing, and obviously do not have the faintest idea of the points that are being made.

... I made it very clear I was referring to the MEN in the video when I used the term idiots: "Certainly not much respect for women in that video and I would punch those a-holes if I could, but every nation has it's fair share of idiots, and if those Saudi lads had a better understanding of their religion, and followed it, they wouldn't do anything of the sort."

With that clarified, I'd encourage you to re-read my post and if you're interested in having a discussion about the points I'm actually making, I'll be happy to continue.

looksee wrote: »

I meet up occasionally with (male) friends, people I used to work with, people I know through various interests, for coffee and a chat. There is absolutely nothing more than platonic friendship going on, neither their wives nor my husband is threatened in any way, we are just friends with common interests. My daughter is just now waiting to be collected by a male friend of many years, they are going for lunch and to catch up on three years of news. His wife is aware of the meeting, it is not a problem.

That's very similar to katydid's argument from earlier, so I'll just copy and paste my reply to that here (adding platonic friends to co-workers), as you haven't responded to the point I made in reply to it: "But it's also a fact that thousands (if not millions) of men and women around the world have extra-marital affairs, and often with co-workers/"platonic" friends. The more time men and women spend in each other's company, the more likely attractions are to form and affairs to happen. Again, I'm not saying it always happens, but it certainly does contribute, and that's why gender segregation, wherever possible, is encouraged in Islam." You might consider that overkill, but an extra-marital affair is one of the worst sins in Islam (nor is it considered acceptable in the west - not yet anyway, who knows which way society will swing over the next few decades and centuries), and so a lot of different measures are taken to reduce the chance of it occurring.

looksee wrote: »

Whether it is religion or culture, it seems very immature and insecure for men to require 'their' women to be wrapped up like parcels. It is also counter productive (or more salacious) - a hundred or more years ago when western women wore full length dresses a glimpse of an ankle was more titillating than a woman in a bikini on the beach is now.

I've already given 2 reasons as to why women have a stricter dress code than men, and male insecurities are neither of them. Again, you keep viewing women as oppressed beings who are made wear/do things by men, but does it even cross your mind that many many women choose to dress like that of their own accord, because of what they believe themselves? I also completely disagree with your counter productive argument - irrespective of the transient excitement of seeing something supposedly forbidden (be it a leg for a man in Saudi or a breast for a man here), in general terms, the more that's on display for a man to see, the more the likelihood of titillation (even after you correct for societal norms). I don't think men become immune to effect of women in bikini's if they see enough of them. If anything, it probably whets their appetite for more, the more they see (in some cases anyway).

confusedquark

niamhstokes wrote: »

I think women in islam can be summed up like this:

A bird in a cage is fed, watered and protected, adored and loved; But is the bird free? No!

The bird is a woman in islam. Let her fly free. Life is not about wearing clothes to hide yourself from the world in case a demonized version of men stare at you. Be free , be happy and enjoy life. God loves to see his children play and be happy, he doesn't say cover yourself from head to toe and dissolve your identity into nothing in public

A) Muslim women are not kept in cages. I'll also stress again that the full veil (Niqab) is a more extreme interpretation of Hijab - most Muslim women would consider the headscarf and dressing modestly as sufficient, so they have a very definite public identity.

On what basis do you speak on behalf on God? Is it a Christian belief that we are here to just play and be happy - or are there certain rules we should be following in how we live?

katydid

confusedquark wrote: »

A) Muslim women are not kept in cages. I'll also stress again that the full veil (Niqab) is a more extreme interpretation of Hijab - most Muslim women would consider the headscarf and dressing modestly as sufficient, so they have a very definite public identity.

On what basis do you speak on behalf on God? Is it a Christian belief that we are here to just play and be happy - or are there certain rules we should be following in how we live?

Even a headscarf and "dressing modestly" is not freedom, if men are not expected to wear headscarves and "dress modestly" in the same way.

Why would they need to have a very definite public identity?

looksee

I have read your posts, including the bolded bits, and I cannot see that we are getting anywhere. To discuss your points to your satisfaction, I would have to accept the basic premises that you have repeated and repeated, but which I do not accept.

I am never going to agree that it is a woman's responsibility to cover herself to save men from their passions.

I am never going to agree that it is appropriate for a man to be as paternalistic/patronising to women as posters here seem to think is natural.

I would be interested to know why there are not Muslim women contributing to this thread and expressing their views. The only time I have seen women admitting to being Muslim on Boards was in Personal Issues, where they were warning an Irish woman who was wondering about marrying a Muslim of the restrictive nature of marriage in those circumstances.

Frank Grimes

looksee wrote: »

I would be interested to know why there are not Muslim women contributing to this thread and expressing their views. The only time I have seen women admitting to being Muslim on Boards was in Personal Issues, where they were warning an Irish woman who was wondering about marrying a Muslim of the restrictive nature of marriage in those circumstances.

There was at least one female Muslim (or woman admitting to be a Muslim as you put it) active on this forum. She hasn't posted for a while though, that I've noticed anyway.

niamhstokes

confusedquark wrote: »

A) Muslim women are not kept in cages. I'll also stress again that the full veil (Niqab) is a more extreme interpretation of Hijab - most Muslim women would consider the headscarf and dressing modestly as sufficient, so they have a very definite public identity.

On what basis do you speak on behalf on God? Is it a Christian belief that we are here to just play and be happy - or are there certain rules we should be following in how we live?

It was a metaphor not literal

LOL

And God never said we should cover our hair. Often followers of the quran, claim the Bible says to cover hair too and they use verses from Corinthians. Of course this is eisegesis as the verses themselves were directed at corinthian society as was hair length with men too and not a command from God for all women here and forever to cover their hair.

Yes we are here to be happy and have fun and not be serious 24/7. There are many ways we can worship and praise God, through music, dancing, praying , doing good deeds. Lots. Modesty of the heart is THE most important modesty of all afterall, i am sure you will agree with that

Defender OF Faith

looksee wrote: »

I am never going to agree that it is a woman's responsibility to cover herself to save men from their passions.

Unfortunately the majority doesn't agree with you:

A third of Britons believe a woman who acts flirtatiously is partially or completely to blame for being raped, according to a new study.
More than a quarter also believe a woman is at least partly responsible for being raped if she wears sexy or revealing clothing, or is drunk, the study found.

Interesting when given the following scenario:

If the woman was wearing sexy or revealing clothing, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 20pc said she was partially responsible.

Most Brazilian – about 65 – percent agree that it is justified to rape women “wearing clothes showing their bodies.”

Am sorry but this is the reality of the world we live in. Not all men are self constraint as you are my friend, we live in a society that treat the women unjustly even though she is given "her rights".
A women is bashed and dishonoured by men is they found out she slept with multiple men before, however this doesn't apply to the man; similarly many would blame the women for inviting the rape is she wore revealing outfits.

Now let me ask you this suppose we have two twin sister walking down the street and there's a hooligan or a bunch of hipsters on the street corner.

One of the sisters is dressed following the Islamic dress code with a Hijab and wide non-revealing clothing while the other is wearing a Mini-Skirt and a half buttoned shirt. Am asking the question who will this hooligan target and attempt to flirt with?

A women is more vulnerable then a man in falling a victim and a prey to his weakness when compared with the man.
This is a fact all major world religion recognise and hence you will find that the holy scriptures of both the Hindus and Christians preaches that a women should cover her hair and dress modestly.

I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God. 1 Timothy 2:9-10

God made you women , so that you shall lower your gaze , do not look at men , keep your Feet close cover you hear and should not disclose the garment , which should conceal with the veil”
Rig Veda Book 8 Hymn 33 Mantra 19-20

"And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof.." Qur'an 24:31

As you can see Islam did not come with something new regarding the the subject of a women modestly, however Islam practice this the most out of the major religion and hence why the finger is always pointed at Islam.

There's a small social experiment performed to contrast with the "women walking 10h in New York". This time the women wearing the Islamic Hijab instead. After first walking wearing her normal outfit which wasn't even bad, indicating that the sickness is from men and the Islamic dress code offers the Muslim women a shield from the sickness of some men.

Notice how she does not receive a single cat call or a flirtatious gesture when wearing the Hijab.

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-369262/Women-blame-raped.html & http://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/stories/PDFs/SIPS/140327_sips_violencia_mulheres.pdf

Defender OF Faith

looksee wrote: »

I would be interested to know why there are not Muslim women contributing to this thread and expressing their views. The only time I have seen women admitting to being Muslim on Boards was in Personal Issues, where they were warning an Irish woman who was wondering about marrying a Muslim of the restrictive nature of marriage in those circumstances.

I dont think there are many Muslim women in Board or at least some that are active on this forum however I will direct you to a massage made by a number of western Muslim women discussing the Niqab and not even the Hijab from their perspective.

niamhstokes

HAHAHA loook!!!!! I just talked about the Corinthians verses and how muslims misinterpret them. See my post above. They were directed at Corinthian society!!! I am so sick and tired of non Christians always misinterpreting those verses

Also that video was edited to make out the burqa works. It doesn't :P Plus she was walking in REALLY rough areas where she got the cat calls. Look at the comments on the video to see how it was fake and edited.

How come i can walk down O'Connell street and this doesn't happen? It's obviously a rough area of new york and NOT a reason for women to wear an ancient arabic fashion item

I especially like this comment on the video which got over 400 likes by Lindsay Jenny:
"
Soooo... the lesson learned is A) its womens fault

women should hide themselves away C) Women who want equal opportunity to wear clothing should accept harassement D) it's better for women to live life as invisible E) they are, in fact, possessions solely of desire".

And this comment from an Egyptian Girl called Belkis Alaa:
"This is a really stupid comparison. It all depends on the country. Obviously a hijabi girl wouldn't get hit on in New York, but make her walk in, say, Egypt and you'll see the different reactions. "

And the hijab does not stop the high sexual abuse of women in muslim majority countries, often left unreported so it appears as though the rate of rape is low there.

niamhstokes

I especially like this comment on the video which got over 400 likes by Lindsay Jenny:
"
Soooo... the lesson learned is A) its womens fault

women should hide themselves away C) Women who want equal opportunity to wear clothing should accept harassement D) it's better for women to live life as invisible E) they are, in fact, possessions solely of desire".

And this comment from an Egyptian woman called Belkis Alaa:
"This is a really stupid comparison. It all depends on the country. Obviously a hijabi girl wouldn't get hit on in New York, but make her walk in, say, Egypt and you'll see the different reactions. "

And the hijab does not stop the high sexual abuse of women in muslim majority countries, often left unreported so it appears as though the rate of rape is low there.

confusedquark

katydid wrote: »

All that would be fine, as I pointed out to Defender of Faith, if Muslims admitted that the writings have to be contextualised and not all of them make sense in the world we live in today. But that is something I have yet to hear a Muslim admit. He didn't. Do you?

We believe that the Quran is the literal word of Allah (subhana wa'tala), and so the scripture itself can't be changed. The Quran still needs to be interpreted within the context in which it was revealed, and there are parts of it that specifically dealt with the problems Muslims at the time were facing and aren't applicable to Muslims today. That said, most of it still is applicable and relevant today. There are many issues in Islam that the Quran doesn't specifically deal with, and those are the issues which more so result in differing opinions - and they are usually handled by what the majority consensus between the scholars is (e.g. their widespread condemnation of the actions of ISIS of late). So it's not so much a different interpretation of Islam itself, but rather different interpretations of specific issues within Islam. In that sense, there are some issues that you could (and should) contextualise, but others that you can't.

katydid wrote: »

My relationship with my husband would not be the same if I thought that he was free, according to our religion, to divide his "love" with other people. I want and expect his undivided attention and I give him mine.

Again, the partnership only becomes "unequal" if and when the man marries a second time. The man having religious permission to marry a second time (in certain circumstances) in itself does not take away from the unique loving and caring relationship he has with his wife, where it's seldom a case of the man deciding how his wife lives (which again was my original point).

katydid wrote: »

You didn't imply that there was no sexual assault in Muslim countries. I was just pointing out that it happens there too, and when it does, there is usually little justice for the victims, who are as often as not blamed for what happened to them. In the example I showed you of a bunch of a**h*les harassing innocent women, there is no guarantee, as there would be in a Western country, that the women would be dealt with fairly. There are several reports of women in such situations in Islamic countries being dismissed by police and authorities.

I don't know what proportion of women would be dealt with fairly here (I'm sure if you looked, you'd find reports of women's concerns being dismissed here as well), and I don't know what proportion of women are dealt with fairly in Muslim countries. I'm here to discuss Islamic principles - if police in Muslim countries are not dealing with people harassing women, then they are not performing their Islamic duties. Again, there's Islam and then there are Muslims - who may or may not be following Islam.

katydid wrote: »

Your figures don't change the fact that your religion seems to think that Muslim men are capable of controlling themselves. If it did, it would trust them to be in the presence of women without feeling uncontrollable sexual urges. Women covering themselves up may reduce the chances of being attacked by a sexual predator - so does men controlling their urges. Is that so crazy? I work and socialise with men all the time, and I have managed to live for fifty years in this world without inciting uncontrollable urges in my male colleagues and friends.

Islam is realistic and practical. You can command men to control themselves, but we all have our free will to do right or wrong and not every person for every second of their lives will control themselves and do the right thing. In that sense, Islam commands men (and women) to control their urges, but no, it doesn't trust all men (or women) to always be in control of their urges at all times (and again, it's not just Muslim men - it's all men everywhere this applies to). Again, in that sense, for the sake of women's protection, and for the sake of reducing the risk of extra-marital relationships, Islam encourages both women (and men) to cover themselves, and both men and women to control their urges. Either one of those two measure alone is not sufficient - even both measures implemented won't stop all extra-marital relationships - but the more layers of protection there are against it, the less they will happen. You haven't incited uncontrollable urges in your male colleagues and friends and good for you, but again, thousands/millions across the world have done.

katydid wrote: »

You haven't given me reasons why women need to cover themselves more. You've given me excuses, predicated on the assumption that women are not attracted to men in the same way as men.

That's an assumption I stand by. Men are testosterone-fuelled, and that has a big impact on our thoughts and actions, which results in women having a greater effect on men than men do on women.

katydid wrote: »

Yes, I would restrict the women's rights to dress in a manner which is a health and safety or a communication, because in our society individual's rights are balanced with the rights of the community. In our society, for example, a person can't walk into a bank wearing a motorbike helmet because of security issues, or can't give evidence in court wearing something in front of their face, because a jury needs to be able to see their face, and their reaction to questions and so on. As a teacher, I would not teach someone whose face I could not see, because I wouldn't be able to see their reactions to what I was saying, and whether or not they were paying attention to me, or how they would interact with other students. Muslim women will be liberated if they can carry on their lives in the same way as their peers, and will be held back if they are unable to do certain things that are normal in our society.
If I go to Saudi Arabia or Iran, I can't choose to exercise my right to wear what I wish in public...

Very ironic that after all you've said about women being discriminated against, you're actually arguing that removing a choice from them will liberate them. Do you not consider Muslim women to be capable to judge for themselves what's best for them and what isn't? And instead, you're proposing to "liberate" them against their will, even though many of them will consider that discrimination? Once again, you're not doing it for their sake - you're restricting their rights for the sake of your society's needs/wants. Personally I'm not so keen on the full veil - I think it is an overly strict interpretation, and certainly does result in some issues in western society, but I've equally seen very educated Muslim women very passionately defend it as a right. I see both sides and am not too sure where I stand, but for the purposes of this thread, it demonstrates pretty well my glass half empty/full argument - you'll pick and choose "discrimination" and "liberation" to whatever suits your argument.

confusedquark

niamhstokes wrote: »

It was a metaphor not literal LOL

... and so was my reply

katydid

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

Unfortunately the majority doesn't agree with you:

A third of Britons believe a woman who acts flirtatiously is partially or completely to blame for being raped, according to a new study.
More than a quarter also believe a woman is at least partly responsible for being raped if she wears sexy or revealing clothing, or is drunk, the study found.

Interesting when given the following scenario:

If the woman was wearing sexy or revealing clothing, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 20pc said she was partially responsible.

Most Brazilian – about 65 – percent agree that it is justified to rape women “wearing clothes showing their bodies.”

Am sorry but this is the reality of the world we live in. Not all men are self constraint as you are my friend, we live in a society that treat the women unjustly even though she is given "her rights".
A women is bashed and dishonoured by men is they found out she slept with multiple men before, however this doesn't apply to the man; similarly as you can see and I was quoting statistics not even from the Muslim world, many would blame the women for inviting the rape is she wore revealing outfits.

Now let me ask you this suppose we have two twin sister walking down the street and there's a hooligan or a bunch of hipsters on the street corner.

One of the sisters is dressed following the Islamic dress code with a Hijab and wide non-revealing clothing while the other is wearing a Mini-Skirt and a half buttoned shirt. Am asking the question who will this hooligan target?

A women is more vulnerable then a man in falling a victim and a prey to his weakness when compared with the man.
This is a fact all major world religion recognise and hence you will find that the holy scriptures of both the Hindus and Christians preaches that a women should cover her hair and dress modestly.

I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God. 1 Timothy 2:9-10

God made you women , so that you shall lower your gaze , do not look at men , keep your Feet close cover you hear and should not disclose the garment , which should conceal with the veil”
Rig Veda Book 8 Hymn 33 Mantra 19-20

As you can see Islam did not come with something new regarding the the subject of a women covering her head or dressing modestly, however Islam practice this the most out of the major religion and hence why the fingers is always pointed at Islam.

There's a small social experiment performed to contrast with the "women walking 10h in New York" with the women wearing the Islamic Hijab instead after first walking wearing her normal outfit which wasn't even bad indicating that the sickness is from men and the Islamic dress code offers the Muslim women a way to protect herself from the sickness of some men.

Notice how she does not receive a single cat call or a flirtatious gesture aferward.

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-369262/Women-blame-raped.html & http://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/stories/PDFs/SIPS/140327_sips_violencia_mulheres.pdf

"Unfortunately the majority doesn't agree with you:

A third of Britons believe a woman who acts flirtatiously is partially or completely to blame for being raped, according to a new study.
More than a quarter also believe.."

You do realise, don't you, that a third or a quarter of Britons is not a majority...? So Brazilians, who celebrate Mardi Gras with half naked women parading along their streets think rape is justified by the way a woman dresses...oh well, that says more about Brazilian society than about the West in general.

"A women is bashed and dishonoured by men is they found out she slept with multiple men before, however this doesn't apply to the man;"

She may be bashed, but she is certainly not dishonoured. The man dishonours himself by such behaviour. And trust me, women have other, more subtle, ways of dealing with men who cheat on them...