PDA

View Full Version : Yasmin Alibhai-Brown: Who'd be female under Islamic law?



Beorn
05-04-2009, 03:04 PM
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown: Who'd be female under Islamic law?

I am a Muslim woman and, like my late mother, free, independent, sensuous, educated, liberal, contrary and confrontational when provoked, both feminine and feminist. I style and colour my hair, wear lovely things and perfumes, appear on public platforms with men who are not related to me, shake their hands, embrace some I know well, take care of my family.

I defend Muslims persecuted by their enemies and their own kith and kin. I pray, fast, give to charity and try to be a decent human being. I also drink wine and do not lie about that, unlike so many other "good" Muslims. I am the kind of Muslim woman who maddens reactionary Muslim men and their asinine female followers. What a badge of honour.

Female oppression in Islamic countries is manifestly getting worse. Islam, as practiced by millions today, has lost its compassion and integrity and is entering one of the darkest of dark ages. Here is this month's short list of unbearable stories (imagine how many more there are which will never be known):

Iranian painter Delara Darabi, only 22 and in prison since she was 17, accused of murdering an elderly relative, was hanged last week even though she had been given a temporary stay of execution by the chief justice of the country. She phoned her mother on the day of her hanging to beg for help and the phone was snatched by a prison official who told them: "We will easily execute your daughter and there's nothing you can do about it." Her paintings reveal the cruelty to which she was subjected.

Meanwhile Roxana Saberi, a 32- year-old broadcast journalist whose father is Iranian, is incarcerated in Tehran's Evin prison, accused of spying for the US. She denies this and says she has been framed because she was seen buying a bottle of wine. This intelligent, beautiful and defiant woman is on hunger strike. Over in Saudi Arabia, an eight-year-old child has just divorced a 50-year-old man. Her father, no doubt a very devout man, sold his daughter for about £9,000.

I have been reading Disfigured, the story of Rania Al-Baz, a Saudi TV anchor, the first woman to have such a job, who was so badly beaten up by her abusive husband that she had to have 13 operations to re-make her once gorgeous face. Domestic violence destroys females in all countries, but in Muslim states, it is validated by laws and values. As Al-Baz writes, "It is appalling to realise that a woman cannot walk down the street without men staring at her openly. For them she is nothing but a body without a mind, something that moves and does not think. Women are banned from studying law, from civil engineering and from the sacrosanct area of oil."

Small optimistic signs do periodically appear in this harsh desert, says Quanta A Ahmed, a doctor who worked in Saudi Arabia and then wrote her account, In the Land of Invisible Women. She describes the love she finds between some husbands and wives, idealists who think better rights will come one day.

That faith in the future is echoed by Norah al-Faiz, the Deputy Minister for Women's Education, chosen in this week's Time magazine list of the world's most influential people. They hope because they must, I guess, even though they can see the brute forces lining up on the horizon ready to crush them by any means necessary. This country has spread its anti-female Wahabi Islam across the globe, its second most important export after oil.

In Afghanistan Ayman Udas was a singer and songwriter who wore lipstick and appeared on TV, defying her family. She was a divorced mother of two who had remarried. Ten days after this she was shot dead, allegedly by her brothers, who must think they are upright moral upholders with places reserved in paradise.

--(These sort of 'family honour' reprisals have been prevelant in Afghanistan since even before the time of Alexander the Great. So, hardly comparable to believing Islam is behind the custom, but more a continuation excuse)-- WT

In March President Karzai gave monstrous tribal leaders what they demanded, absolute control over wives by husbands and the right to rape them on the marital bed. Protests by brave women in that country and international outrage has forced him to step back from this commitment but there is concern that he is too weak to hold out, and once again women will become the personal and political playthings of men.

Let's to Pakistan then shall we, the country that once elected a woman head of state. The divinely beautiful Swat Valley has, for reasons of political expediency, been handed over to the Taliban, and there they have blown up over a hundred schools for girls and regularly flog young females on the streets. The girls are shrouded and forbidden to scream because the female voice has the potential to arouse desire. Or pity perhaps.

I am aware that my words will help confirm the pernicious prejudices that fester in the minds of those who despise Islam. Yet to conceal or excuse the violations would be to condone and encourage them. There have been enlightened times when some Muslim civilisations honoured and cherished females. This is not one of them. Across the West – for a host of reasons – millions of Muslims are embracing backward practices. In the UK young girls – some so young that they are still in push chairs – are covered up in hijabs. Disgracefully, there are always vocal Muslim women who seek to justify honour killings, forced marriages, inequality, polygamy and childhood betrothals. Why are large numbers of Muslim men so terrorised by the female body and spirit? Why do Muslim women encourage this savage paranoia?

I look out of my study at the common and see a wife fully burkaed on a sunny day. She sits still. Her children and husband run around, laughing, playing cricket. She sits still, dead, buried, a ghost. She is complicit in her own degradation, as are countless others. Their acquiescence in a free democracy is a crime against their sisters who have no such choices in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan and elsewhere.
Al-Baz says: "I am a disruptive presence because I give women ideas." Me too. To transgress against diehard obscurantists and their unholy rules is an inescapable sacred duty. Yet how pathetic that sounds. Progressive believers tilt at windmills driven by ferocious winds of self-righteousness. Our arms and legs weaken and we are brought to our knees. I fear there is only worse to come.Source (http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/yasmin-alibhai-brown/yasmin-alibhaibrown-whod-be-female-under-islamic-law-1678549.html)

Psychonaut
05-04-2009, 05:32 PM
I'm curious Wat, in another thread (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3759), you said:


It should be made a law that anyone sad and pathetic enough to wantonly ruin someones belief system, whether it be Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, atheism, should be hit, HARD across the face with a big fat STFU!

How are we to reconcile this statement with an article like this? Is this religion deserving of anything other than ruin?

Thorum
05-04-2009, 05:40 PM
I'm curious Wat, in another thread (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3759), you said:



How are we to reconcile this statement with an article like this? Is this religion deserving of anything other than ruin?

Psycho, I thought the same thing. I was puzzled...

Beorn
05-04-2009, 06:18 PM
How are we to reconcile this statement with an article like this? Is this religion deserving of anything other than ruin?

It depends if you wish to perceive the religion through the eyes given to you by those who use and abuse the religion, or those who separate religion from both state and military policy.

Islam, like all religions - some more than others - has two sides.

There is the religion of Islam which is peaceful, gentle and benevolent; largely following the Hadiths of Muhammad before his exile from Mecca.
Peace and equality amongst your fellow man, religious tolerance, obedience to religious virtues, etc...
Then you have the other side of Islam, the side which was written and placed down by Muhammad after his exile from Mecca, which follows the course of murder, rape, pillage and war all justified by the words of God

It is that religion that the terrorists and extreme Muslims follow. It is that religion that is funded and pushed by the Saudi Imams; indoctrinating the young and disenfranchised with hate and violence in the name of Islam and Allah.

When I say that religions should not be ridiculed and people's belief systems poked at by the proverbial stick, I clearly mean the people who follow the true, peaceful and respectful message of their religions.

The rest can be treated as you wish. I have no sympathy for them.

Psychonaut
05-04-2009, 06:40 PM
When I say that religions should not be ridiculed and people's belief systems poked at by the proverbial stick, I clearly mean the people who follow the true, peaceful and respectful message of their religions.

Whence comes the differentiation? Are we to judge whether or not it is acceptable to ridicule a religion based on the level of peace practiced and espoused by said religion? If that's the case Catholicism and quite a few Protestant sects are fair game. Also, it's not only the warlike Muslims that need to be criticized. For instance, things like genital mutilation occur in both Suni and Shia regions of Africa and the Middle East. Should these Muslims be given a free pass on criticism simply because they are "peaceful"? Islam is bad for women, period. It's just a difference of degrees when looking at different sects of Islam; some are slightly better, but they're all pretty bad when judged by Western standards.

Beorn
05-04-2009, 06:58 PM
For instance, things like genital mutilation occur in both Suni and Shia regions of Africa and the Middle East. Should these Muslims be given a free pass on criticism simply because they are "peaceful"?

You sum it up for me when you later said: "they're all pretty bad when judged by Western standards"

What goes on in other spheres of this world is not for us to judge and take it upon ourselves to intervene in.

I will admit that genital mutilation is abhorrent and absolutely evil, but then I have grown up and been cultured in the western world which looks down on these actions, so am I in a position to think myself above these people and condemn them?

I personally find the tradition absolutely sickening and would do everything in my power to stop such practices from occurring on my shores, but I wouldn't use this as an excuse to ridicule the religion which practices it.

After all, there are many cases of women and families having fled the mutilation and resettled in lands safe from the extremists who practice it, yet still follow the religion which the mutilation is stemmed from.



As a final word on this whole debate about criticising religion, I perhaps have been misunderstood in my views, or haven't conveyed correctly my views.
I do not wish for people to not criticise religion in a civil and mature manner, but for people to restrain themselves from lowering themselves to the level of immature, jaded detractors of a religion.

There is a world of difference between shouting "FUCK YOUR GOD" and calmly stating that the idea of God is illogical.

Psychonaut
05-04-2009, 07:05 PM
What goes on in other spheres of this world is not for us to judge and take it upon ourselves to intervene in.

Were immigration a non-issue, I'd wholeheartedly agree with this, but since Arabs and Africans are bringing these beliefs to our shores in record numbers, I don't really see the need for restraint at all. Islam (of any stripe) has never been compatible with the West, and it won't be unless we fail where Martel succeeded.

Óttar
05-05-2009, 12:02 AM
There are two kinds of religion: The religion of ass-holes based on dogma, and the religion of introspection, purification, and developing virtuous qualities. It just so happens that the first-mentioned form of religion came about with the ascent of Abrahamic religion...But sometimes the second-mentioned commendable form of religion can persist even within the Abrahamic "faiths" as non-normative movements i.e. Gnosticism, Sufism and Kabbala.

SwordoftheVistula
05-06-2009, 08:58 AM
As regards the original article, I hardly think punishing someone for murdering an elderly relative is 'oppression of women'. What does the author expect, that she be given a reprieve just because she is a woman?


There is the religion of Islam which is peaceful, gentle and benevolent; largely following the Hadiths of Muhammad before his exile from Mecca.
Peace and equality amongst your fellow man, religious tolerance, obedience to religious virtues, etc...
Then you have the other side of Islam, the side which was written and placed down by Muhammad after his exile from Mecca, which follows the course of murder, rape, pillage and war all justified by the words of God

I don't think you can have either without the other, different remedies are given for different situations.



When I say that religions should not be ridiculed and people's belief systems poked at by the proverbial stick, I clearly mean the people who follow the true, peaceful and respectful message of their religions.

I don't think that is such a good thing-the main problem in my view with Christianity (the religion of 'the west') is that it is too 'peaceful and respectful' (at least most of the 20th century versions) and therefore unable to resist incursions from outside or corruption from within, and in many cases assists foreign invasions and internal corruption in the interest of 'advancing human rights', for example when they organize to support the resettlement of refugees from Africa in our countries, or oppose the deportation of illegal aliens.