Archive for the ‘Gender’ Category
The Goatmilk Debates: “Islam is Incompatible with Feminism” – Mohamad Tabbaa For the Motion
“THE GOATMILK DEBATES” will be an ongoing series featuring two debaters tackling an interesting or controversial question in a unique, intellectually stimulating manner.
Each debater makes their opening argument, followed by an optional rebuttal.
The winner will be decided by the online audience and judged according to the strength of the respective arguments.
The motion: “Islam is Incompatible with Feminism”
For the motion: Mohamad Tabbaa
Against the motion: Katrina Daly Thompson
“God is not dead; and neither is He a feminist” by Mohamad Tabbaa
God has not died, just yet. But there is a real push to kill Him. And it’s gaining popular support. I’m sure we’ve all noticed the modern tendency to ‘reconcile’ Islam with almost everything; democracy; liberalism; homosexuality; heck, even Christianity. And now feminism. So what’s the problem, exactly? Surely any right-minded individual would openly embrace the move to bring Islam into modernity, while only a backward Wahhabist regressive fundamentalist caveman would resist, right?
Well, not exactly.
You see, there are a number of fundamental flaws inherent in many of the arguments put forward to ‘modernise’ Islam. I will highlight some of these flaws — especially as they relate to feminism — and argue that not only are Islam and feminism not compatible, but that our actual attempts at reconciling Islam with modern ideologies is futile and misguided.
Rather than launch into definitions of what Islam and feminism mean, I believe it’s important that we first take a step back. This debate, after all, is not really about Islam and feminism per se; this debate is more to do with epistemology. Epistemology, otherwise known as “the theory of knowledge”, is the study of the creation and basis of knowledge itself.[i] Epistemology concerns itself with questions such as: What are the structures and conditions of knowledge? How is knowledge constructed and justified? Does knowledge lead to truth? What are the limits of knowledge? And does God play a role in this process?[ii]
The question being debated here, namely is Islam compatible with feminism, is one which can only be answered by first exploring the epistemological and methodological assumptions underpinning the call for Islamic reformation, and what these mean in the greater scheme of things.
Feminism, in all its variations, depends very heavily on postmodern theories of knowledge; namely that there is no ‘objective’ or transcendental truth; that all realities are merely constructed, contextual and relative, and therefore subject to change; and that all knowledge is intrinsically biased.[iii] Utilising poststructural methods of deconstruction, postmodernists argue that all knowledge is influenced by power, personal interest and especially language, and that therefore no knowledge can claim to be impartial.[iv] It is upon this basis that feminists (rightfully) critique the dominant liberal discourse as being male-oriented and oppressive towards women.
So, while the core concern of feminism might be women’s equality, rights or humanity, postmodernism (and hence, feminism) itself teaches us that one cannot judge an idea based solely on its ‘abstract’ theory, but must instead deconstruct its underlying assumptions in order to ascertain what that idea is really advocating or producing. For example, renowned feminist scholar Margaret Thornton argues that, despite its proclaimed concern of ensuring equality between males and females, liberalism is inherently biased against women; not because of its ‘abstract’ theory, which is neutral, but purely because of its underlying assumptions – its epistemology – which are male-oriented.[v] Likewise, in order to properly assess both the nature and impact of feminism, one must necessarily look past its purported aims and concerns, and instead investigate its philosophical basis. Read the rest of this entry »
The Goatmilk Debates: “Islam is Incompatible with Feminism” – Katrina Daly Thompson Against the Motion
“THE GOATMILK DEBATES” will be an ongoing series featuring two debaters tackling an interesting or controversial question in a unique, intellectually stimulating manner.
Each debater makes their opening argument, followed by an optional rebuttal.
The winner will be decided by the online audience and judged according to the strength of the respective arguments.
The motion: “Islam is Incompatible with Feminism”
For the motion: Mohamad Tabbaa
Against the motion: Katrina Daly Thompson
Feminism and Islam are compatible
Katrina Daly Thompson
There are two groups who might argue that feminism and Islam are incompatible: Muslims who don’t understand what feminism is, and feminists who don’t understand that Islam is open to interpretation, including feminist interpretations. I’ll address each of these groups in turn.
Many people, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, don’t understand what feminism is. They might think it’s a Western idea focused on man-hating, female superiority, or bra burning, but none of that is accurate. There are three definitions of feminism that inspire me; the first defines feminism as an idea, the second as a movement, and the third as an intellectual approach.
What does feminism mean as an idea? “Feminism,” Cheris Kramerae wrote, “is the radical notion that women are human beings.”[i] It’s that simple. Feminists argue that human beings should not be discriminated against on the basis of their sex or gender. For Muslims, this should be an easy argument to get behind. After all, the Qur’an tells us,
“Verily, for all men and women who have surrendered themselves unto God, and all believing men and believing women, and all truly devout men and truly devout women, and all men and women who are true to their word, and all men and women who are patient in adversity, and all men and women who humble themselves [before God], and all men and women who give in charity, and all self-denying men and self-denying women, and all men and women who are mindful of their chastity, and all men and women who remember God unceasingly: for [all of] them has God readied forgiveness of sins and a mighty reward.”[ii]
In other words, the Qur’an teaches that God treats all human beings equally, whether we are men or women, not differentiating among us by sex or gender but rather by the extent to which we’ve surrendered, believe in God, are devout, truthful, patient, humble, generous, modest, and worshipful. We are all subject to the same rewards from God. God, we might say, is a feminist. The Feminist. Read the rest of this entry »
“Girls Fight Back!” by Mariam Azam
Advice to Fathers: Teach your Girls to Fight
By Mariam Azam
I grew up as the eldest of four girls in a Muslim South Asian immigrant family. ‘Gender’ has always forcefully been at the nexus of my self-identity and social consciousness. From a very young age, I grappled with cultural restrictions, biases, and over-sheltering due to the fact that I am female. In some ways my Baba (father) is a product of the prevalent ideology. Paradoxically, he is also a kick-ass feminist who vehemently did not want his girls to limit themselves and to reach for the moon, as in literally, by becoming astronauts (he’s sort of a space fanatic).
Baba fostered a tough ‘can-do’ attitude in all of us. This is poignantly illustrated by a lecture I received from him when I was in the 4th grade emphasizing that if someone were to throw a punch at me, I had to fight back. This was atypical advice for a 9-year old, non-aggressive, glitter makers and ‘Hello Kitty’ obsessed girl. But, it worked. Soon after this talk, I ended up in a skirmish with red-headed Ronald as we walked back from school. He kept kicking into the heels of my shoes, despite my insistent pleas for him to stop. Then the moment came: I turned around, looked him square in the eye and called him “freckle-juice.” I should add that Ronald was slightly geeky, very skinny and, well, very freckled. Also, we were at the age were the girls typically were taller than the guys.
I was the tallest in my class.
I’m guessing it was for this reason that although Ronald did not retaliate, his accompanying friend, Brianna, closer to my physique, did. Before I knew it the kids surrounding us started chanting ‘fight, fight, fight.’ It was on. Brianna and I took our places. I put my fist up and tried to remember the moves I learned in karate class. She swung at me. I put out a strong kick. The crowd grew bigger as more of the kids in the south Los Angeles apartment complex came out. More punching. A few minutes later, Brianna ran back to her home. They tried to dispute who won. But, I saw it as obvious. Hey, I was still standing. I played it cool. No need for wild celebration. That was too easy, I thought to myself. With that, I went home with a smug smile on my face.
The little Indian girl got skill. Bring it. Now, I’m not the confrontational type. Really, more of a peace lover. But, that moment lives within me forever. It’s given me guts. It’s true, I’m very much in favor of kindness, compassion, and diplomacy. Easy-going to the point that I might have you fooled. However, when the moment to stand up and speak out comes….like the time when all of the other kids in the playground were alienating Arlene from four-square, or when I felt that the housemaids in India was getting an unfair deal, or a brazen client walked into the health clinic which I worked at and started strongly insulting the volunteers…or moments closer to home, I raise my voice. Loud. Sorry, Baba, I never made it to NASA. But, thanks to you, I know that when the moment comes to fight….I fight back. Like every girl should.
‘Formula for a Successful Marriage’: Mariam Azam
Recently I was forwarded this article on what makes a ‘successful marriage’ :
The piece is written by Yasmine Mogahed, whose popular work includes an article in response to Amina Wadud’s leading of Islamic prayer back in 2005-”A Woman’s Reflection on Leading Prayer” http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/13883/
Mogahed commonly adopts a ‘cultural feminist’ view that reflects an essentialist notion of gender by emphasizing what are seen as innate and undeniable differences between men and women.
To answer her question on “What is going wrong when so many of our marriages are ending in divorce?” Mogahed states that “According to Dr. Emerson Eggerich, author of Love & Respect: The Love She Most Desires; The Respect He Desperately Needs, the answer is simple. In his book, Eggerichs explains that extensive research has found that a man’s primary need is for respect, while a woman’s primary need is for love. He describes what he calls the “crazy cycle”—the pattern of argumentation that results when the wife does not show respect and the husband does not show love. He explains how the two reinforce and cause one another. In other words, when a wife feels that her husband is acting unloving, she often reacts with disrespect, which in turn makes the husband act even more unloving.” http://loveandrespect.com/
Mogahed writes in her typical eloquence, citing hadiths and spiritual reflections along the way. It is easy to be taken by the purity in her tone. Many actually do buy into it.
Me- not so much. Mogahed writes as if she’s offering a dissection of painfully clear logic. However, the pervasive, gender-stereotyped, and formulaic perspective on marriage that was being promoted by the article is problematic. It can impede a couple from deeply evaluating the individual expectations and preferences that each member might have from the relationship and instead endorses a ‘rigid’ standard of conduct. It could very likely be the case that the woman senses a lack of respect and the man a lack of affection.
Gender differences are valid. I am not negating the idea that men and women may have different needs. I find beauty in the yin and yang. I am wary, however, when these differences are stated as a dichotomous straightforward reality. As we know, one’s sex is simply determined by X and Y chromosomes, while gender is much more complex and is derived from socio-cultural contexts, personal individual histories, and even varying levels of predisposed sex hormone levels. Gender sensitivities are required in a marriage; however, these should be dealt with on tangible and nuanced terms not by an over-simplified external reality of how a husband and a wife are to be differently treated.
Also, by adhering ‘respect’ for the husband and ‘love’ for the wife, Eggerich’s preconception emphasizes male authority and the notion that females need to be pampered. The purporting of respect for the husband and love for the wife, instead of the idea of a mutual level of respect and love for both, insidiously supports a ‘top-down’ power dynamic between the husband and the wife. This is cautionary especially due to the fact that many of us come from cultural backgrounds which advocate a dominating role by the husband and a subordinated role by the wife, with the assumption that this dynamic is ‘Islamic.’ To move our community towards the complementary balanced relationship that Islam does in fact advocate, I say let us become hypersensitive to any (usually well-intending, albeit) dogmatic thinking on marital relations. The answer to what makes a successful marriage is, often, anything but simple.
“Temporary/ Muta’a Marriage is Sex for Hire”: THE GOATMILK DEBATES
“THE GOATMILK DEBATES” will be an ongoing series featuring two debaters tackling an interesting or controversial question in a unique, irreverent manner.
Each debater makes their opening argument. They can elect to post a rebuttal.
The winner will be decided by the online audience and judged according to the strength of their argument.
The motion: “Temporary Marriage is a valid option for Muslims in the modern age”
Against the motion: Fatemeh Fakhraie
AGAINST THE MOTION: “Sigheh [Temporary Marriage/ Muta'a] Marriage is Sex for Hire”
Fatemeh Fakhraie
I support any way that two consenting adults can safely get it on. And so I don’t think sigheh marriage (temporary marriage also referred to as mut’a, or pleasure, marriage) is a bad idea.
In a magical, lollipop-and-rainbows land.
But in the reality where we all live? No. It’s a terrible idea.
See, in magical Lollipop Rainbow Land, men and women are equal. Sexuality is something between autonomous people who are educated enough to make intelligent decisions about their sex lives. Gender roles aren’t rigidly ascribed or enforced, and no importance is placed on virginity. Everyone respects each other and each other’s choices in this fantastical place. Sigheh marriage would be a wonderful thing in Lollipop Rainbow Land.
But, as this grumpy feminist is constantly reminded, we do not live in Lollipop Rainbow Land. We live in a place and time where women are not seen as equals and are still exploited physically, economically, sexually, etc. In this context, sigheh marriage is a sanctioned path to female exploitation—and thus, in my book, a terrible idea.
To be up front, I am an American Iranian Muslim who comes from the Shi’a tradition. Sigheh is a largely Shi’a practice, and the vast majority of my knowledge on it comes from the Iranian context. So that’s where I’m writing from today.
You can read up on sigheh in depth at Wikipedia, but the short definition is that sigheh is a way for two horny people to be quickly and cheaply married (and thus have lawful sex) in some interpretations of Islam. But the reality is that sigheh is also a largely abused practice that is usually exploitative to women.
My two major qualms against sigheh are societal and economic.
Economically, “[sigheh marriage] is largely the prerogative of wealthy married men, and the majority of women in sighehs are divorced, widowed, or poor.” In this nuanced Mother Jones’ article on sigheh, we meet Habib, who says, “I do sigheh with women who need financial help. Instead of giving money for charity, I marry them in this way and financially support them.”
But this isn’t charity; it’s a transaction. The sigheh dowry (provided he does pay it) may buy her a new stove or he may pay her rent, but she isn’t getting this for her companionship or a few kisses. A man is essentially paying a woman to be her husband in the physical capacity: he is paying for sex with her, whether she desires him or not. This is prostitution. Even if she desires him for him, in certain situations, the economic imbalance remains.
Socially, many people except clerics who extol its virtues often look down on sigheh marriage. Despite its practical legal and Islamic uses, there’s the fact that sigheh is often equated with prostitution—and who wants to be thought of as a whore? Read the rest of this entry »
