RubySoho
Winston
On Things That Infuriate Me
August 24th 2009 20:17
Even as women's rights groups in Afghanistan were protesting against a new law which effectively makes it legal for Shia Muslim men to rape their wives, women in the landlocked African country of Mali were also protesting a new law. But in Mali's case the new law actually strengthened the rights of women by giving them equal rights in marriage and strengthening their inheritance rights as well as those of children born out of wedlock.
So why were these women protesting? Because they, as part of the tens of thousands who attended protest rallies across the country believe the new is un-Islamic. From the BBC:
One of the most contentious issues in the new legislation is that women are no longer required to obey their husbands.
Hadja Sapiato Dembele of the National Union of Muslim Women's Associations said the law goes against Islamic principles.
"We have to stick to the Koran," Ms Dembele told the BBC's Focus on Africa programme. "A man must protect his wife, a wife must obey her husband."
"It's a tiny minority of women here that wants this new law - the intellectuals. The poor and illiterate women of this country - the real Muslims - are against it," she added.
Putting aside that this woman is glorifying ignorance and illteracy, what exactly is she protesting? It's not as if someone is going to be knocking on people's doors ensuring that the dwellers within are engaging in a relationship of mutual respect and consideration. I'm fairly certain that those who wish to obey their husbands every command and forgo their right to autonomy are free to do so. But why should that 'tiny minority' as Dembele calls them, submit when they do not want to? Laws are designed to protect everyone- minorities included. The few women (if indeed there are only a few) who wish for equality should not be denied because the majority happen to think that women are second class citizens.
The oppression of women everywhere is a vital issue. And when that oppression is endorsed and perpetuated by women themselves it is particularly infuriating. A man must protect his wife? But what if what a wife needs protecting from is her husband? Who will protect her from the man she 'must' obey?
These protests are a blow to the women of Mali and to all those who claim that Islam delivers more rights to women than other religions.
So why were these women protesting? Because they, as part of the tens of thousands who attended protest rallies across the country believe the new is un-Islamic. From the BBC:
One of the most contentious issues in the new legislation is that women are no longer required to obey their husbands.
Hadja Sapiato Dembele of the National Union of Muslim Women's Associations said the law goes against Islamic principles.
"We have to stick to the Koran," Ms Dembele told the BBC's Focus on Africa programme. "A man must protect his wife, a wife must obey her husband."
"It's a tiny minority of women here that wants this new law - the intellectuals. The poor and illiterate women of this country - the real Muslims - are against it," she added.
Putting aside that this woman is glorifying ignorance and illteracy, what exactly is she protesting? It's not as if someone is going to be knocking on people's doors ensuring that the dwellers within are engaging in a relationship of mutual respect and consideration. I'm fairly certain that those who wish to obey their husbands every command and forgo their right to autonomy are free to do so. But why should that 'tiny minority' as Dembele calls them, submit when they do not want to? Laws are designed to protect everyone- minorities included. The few women (if indeed there are only a few) who wish for equality should not be denied because the majority happen to think that women are second class citizens.
The oppression of women everywhere is a vital issue. And when that oppression is endorsed and perpetuated by women themselves it is particularly infuriating. A man must protect his wife? But what if what a wife needs protecting from is her husband? Who will protect her from the man she 'must' obey?
These protests are a blow to the women of Mali and to all those who claim that Islam delivers more rights to women than other religions.
| 167 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Morgan Bell
Science News
Deep Pencil
Business News
Movie Train
there are so many things admitted to in this one bizarre statement
1. only poor and illiterate women are "real" Muslims
2. religion is anti-intellectual
3. intellect and religion are incompatible
4. religion prevents the majority of women from being intellectual
the woman sounds like a hypocrite: while declaring a "real" Muslim woman must submit to and obey her husband only, the lady is running a Muslim women's group . . . what is the point of such a group if you are only to act as your husbands proxy? seems redundant
Comment by Journeywoman
Great Hair Style Tips
The Mama Sutra
I Dream of Hollywood
Fashion Peach
(btw the first link didn't work, not on my computer at least)..
Thanks for drawing attention to this issue Ruby.
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
Yeah, that woman is basically saying don't educate yourself if you want to be considered a muslim. It's the same reason why the Taliban try to stop women from getting an education- they claim it's un-Islamic, but really they know it's because an educated woman is one who is less likely to let herself be controlled by the men in her life. Or other women for that matter.
Hi JW,
link is fixed, thanks for that. And yes, it is incredibly sad. But as I said, it is also infuriating because it seems that those with narrow minds insist that everyone be as small minded as they are. I disagree that women must obey their husbands. But if that is truly how they wish to live, then they should be able to. But why try to stop other women gaining rights if those women want them? These who are protesting are effectively saying that no woman deserves to be treated as an equal. I just can't get my head around it.
Comment by Janet Collins
Acceptable Etiquette
The Social Critic
Janet Collins Blog
I dare say that western societies are just as good at putting women into subordinate positions but it is much more hidden. That is not to ignore the very grave situation for women in other countries, but it still exists here as well.
Thank you for that thought provoking post.
Comment by Queenie
Quirky Folk
Quirky Queenie
Growing up in a small racist, sexist and homophobic country town, it was inevitable I would become a feminist from a young age. I remember being taken aside by a teacher and being told my political beliefs were holding me back from making friends. She preached about how much she was against feminism. What angered me was she was happy to disparage feminism - the very beliefs that brought her freedoms I am sure she enjoyed such as the right to have a career of her own. I have yet to meet an anti-feminist who is NOT a hypocrite.
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
but this story blew me away for how blatant it is. i can't tell you how many debates i had in my uni days with my more religious fellow muslim students (this was before i became an outright atheist and was still a muslim in name anyway), where i would tell them my biggest contention with islam was its subjugation of women. of course they would insist i was mistaken, women are highly valued, men must respect their wives and mothers, blah, blah, blah.
then stories like this come to light and not only are women ridiculed if they have the audacity to get an education but they are accused of not being real muslims because they are not poor and illiterate.
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
yep, it seems some women are happy to reap the rewards of feminism like the ability to achieve almost equal pay and independence whilst still claiming not to be feminists.
what is really frustrating is that so many who disparage feminists do not even realise that its feminist's who also fought and are still fighting for things like maternity leave. we're on your side ladies! whether you want us to be or not.
Comment by Jose
Orb of Insight
Political Writing
Though many of us would disagree with a lot of the Dutch politician Geert Wilders political positions, he was once heard to remark "I don't want to fight the battle for women's emancipation all over again." I agree.
Comment by Chris Champion
LettersToNorm
Vyoos
Zoomies
Bloggercises
The Blog of Lists
This is a big battle which I guess must be won in small steps. Fundamentalist attitudes, be they Islamic, Judaic or Christian or whatever, survive more easily in poor and repressed communities. The quickest way to social enlightenment in Afghanistan and Mali is probably through better education and economic management.
And through strong women writing strong words like yours.
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
I think all religions have a lot to answer for during the time of the Caliphate. I certainly don't think Islam was any worse than the Catholic Church at the time. I do think the primary goal of religion is control of the masses and when half the population is controlled by simply being told they are inferior and that questioning their status is a sin, then it makes that goal much easier to obtain.
The sad thing is Mohammed actually really did improve the status of women in his time. He disapproved of honor killings and whole body coverings for women which were both cultural practices that predated Islam. I know much is made of his allowance of four wives for avery man but what many people don't realise is that before Mohammed men were permitted as many wives as they wanted which made the quality of those womens lives very poor. Mohammed limited the number to four. It was a massive step forward at the time as I am sure you can imagine that many men would not want to give up the privelege of having a harem.
Mohammed was actually a progressive for his time. His wife Aisha even fought alongside him in battle. I think his biggest mistake was not naming a successor, someone who would continue his work. I think that had he done that Islam today would be very different to the one we are seeing now.
As for Geert Wilders, my impression of him is that he is using the womens rights struggle as an excuse to demonise Islam on a basic level. I have seen his film and it is not constructive in the slightest. Simply calling for all Muslims to be expelled from the West is not going to help the cause of those Muslim women who seek emancipation. Conversely it will actually worsen their plight. It's like the banning of the burqa and the burqini in France. As much as I am not a fan of those two items of clothing I fear that banning them in public will result not in women roaming free of them but in women being confined to the house even more than they are now.
And as much as I disagree that women must obey their husbands, if some women wish to live that way, then who am I to stop them? My gripe is when they attempt to legislate their religious beliefs when even those who dare not share them must abide by a religion they do not believe in.
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
I completely agree that education is the key and progress comes in baby steps, not giant leaps. The problem is how do you encourage education and knowledge in an environment where they are treated with such suspicion as to be deemed in this case, unIslamic? Not that this problem is confined to Islam. The US conservative Christian movement is always rabbitting on about "liberal" universities and "public school indoctrination centres".
We think we are immune in the West? Hardly. What's the difference between the protests in Mali and all the anti-gay marriage protests and legislation in America and even Australia?
Comment by Postmodern Critic
Postmodern Critic
Relativity Watch
Padsoc