Islamic Feminism
Baroness Haleh Afshari, PhD is a renowned Middle Eastern scholar. I read a chapter in her book, “Women and Politics in the 3rd World” and I was surprised by some of the things I read. The author makes several persuasive points about the emerging, or I should say re-remerging form of Islamic feminism. But first, she makes the point to first go into
detail about what exactly is fundamentalism. This is her first point. That in order to understand what may be happening today in the Islamic world we need to realize that this is a “revivalist” attempt at trying to go back to what is considered the golden years of Islam, during the time of the prophet.
The author then goes on after she has defined fundamentalism in this context to describe the role models that Islam has for its women, most notably Khadijah, Aisha and Fatima. Each of these women was noted as exemplary standards for what the author argues are the model in Islam for women to emulate. Although some disagreement exists about the role of women and what these women did, it is unmistakable that they certainly set the standard for generations to come. The author goes on to note that there is a realization and rejection of what Islamic feminism, or at least gender roles in politics should be compared to that of Western society. She goes on to note that gender roles in the two cultures vary greatly and there is no desire to become westernized in the feminist or equal sense of the word. She argues that although there appear greater freedoms under the Shahs rule (in Iran’s case), these freedoms were corrupting and ultimately counter productive to an Islamic society. She points out that Islamic fundamental feminism is its own unique brand of political theory and indeed is more desired that what is going on the west. She states that this version of gender recognition actually give the women more a status and deems them more respectable, as opposed to the western version which apparently only classifies them as sex objects. I disagree with this assessment nor do I accept that Islamic rights for women are greater than those found in more liberal societies. It is clear still that women are severely discriminated against in the legal code and societal norms. While there may be some acceptance of this fact, it does not mean that the discrimination does not take place.
A few examples of the discrimination taking place in Iran right now are those of the Qassas Laws. The laws of retribution are clearly jaded and afford men the advantage at every turning point. Women are not allowed to be judges in the IR of Iran nor are they granted the presidency or Rahbariyat. However, there appears to be some coming around and indeed when the very same arguments are used for the causes of women in politics there is no denying the Islamic roots of the precedents cited. This fact has won over very influential players in Iran of the opposite gender and may be indeed the only way to move forward under the current regime.
Thoughts?
Omid, I think that the role of women is at the heart of bringing about needed change in the Middle East and the Muslim world. Women are so critical to the functioning of civil society, that the way they are treated can play a central role in the health and welfare of that society. If they are mistreated or discriminated against then it is as if a cancer is allowed to grow in the midst of the social order. If they are respected and empowered, then this alone could well insure the viability of the society.
I would also agree that the Western model is not the only model, and that infact, there are aspects of Western feminism which are not healthy or productive. For example, to the extent that promiscuity is a by-product of feminism, then to that extent feminism has failed. Or to the extent that the children are neglected because women pursue their careers, then to that extent feminism has failed. Or to the extent that homemakers are looked down upon by feminists, then to that extent, feminism has failed.
What is good about Western feminism is that women have been empowered, and are free to pursue careers as they wish, and to make choices about their lives as they see fit, and in that empowerment they have been able to add new dimensions to many aspects of Western society. If they make good choices, then they are able to contribute positively, while not losing sight of what is important for their families and for themselves.
Muslim societies don’t have to follow the Western model, but they can certainly come to terms with the notion that women are being mistreated and discriminated against, and that this factor alone accounts for many of the problems in these societies. When the moderating influence of women is stifled, then the extremist influence of some men is necessarily allowed to hold sway. The balance between the feminine and the masculine is natural, and is essential in creating the needed balance of civil society.
And this idea about putting women on pedestals can be a bit hypocritical to say the least. It’s like putting a woman on a pedestal with a rope around her neck. “You’re very special, you say to her, but if you slip up in any way we’ll have you by the throat.” With that kind of admiration and respect, no wonder some women find themselves hopelessly depressed.
We should respect women for the good they do, and there is plenty of that. But we should not create false and unrealistic standards by which to judge them, just to see them fail, and then to relish taking out our frustrations on them. It’s time to treat women fairly, and to appreciate the goodness that they can bring to all our lives. There is no way that Islam, or any religion for that matter, can be against that.
Omid:
This book seems to be a great work. A search in some Persian e-bookshops led to no result. I strongly wish if I could have a copy of it.
Now, with regards to this Islamic Feminism, I have to add two points:
1st. Laws are under change in favor of women: some of them explicitly, and others implicitly. For example, some powerful clerics (including Hashemi Rafsanjani, the former president) are trying to balance the ‘blood money’ between men and women, and since a similar change was approved few years ago (in the case of non-Muslims vs. Muslims blood money), it’s likely to happen again, this time in favor of women. This is an example of explicit change. Another example: as you very well know, in traditional interpretations of Islam, divorce right is dedicated to men; right now, officials usually add some ‘additional terms’ to the marriage contract, which enables the wife to request divorce on behalf of her husband, even if he is not willing to do so, albeit in certain cases; this is a practical equivalent for ‘equal divorce right’ I think. I know that the situation is not yet much balanced. However, it is improving.
2nd. so, it gives rise to another question: if this movement is going to apply all the international norms to Iranian women, which characteristics make it an Islamic one? In other words, what distinguishes this movement from, say, western feminism? Let me give an example. Few years ago, I met a distinguished surgeon (a woman indeed I mean), who had lived in (as I remember) Australia for a while. His husband was a supportive, enlightened man. This surgeon used to wear Hijab. When I asked why, she replied: “I swear by the man-woman equality. That is why I wear Hijab, for if I fail to do so, I will be using my feminine attractions which consequently disturb the balance I hope to maintain.” Here I’m not to judge the position of this surgeon, though I hope it may clarify the case a bit more. I have to add, however, that Islamic Feminism is not mature yet, thus it’s likely to experience rapid shifts in the years to come.
This work tries to explain a phenomenon that many people deny its very existence. Well done, Omid.
I find it interesting the way Western Feminism is viewed. I am a women from the states and I feel it necessary to shed a little more light on how women are viewed in America. I don’t think that promiscuity is necessarily a by-product of feminism. I would say it is more a by-product of a capitalist economy. Women CHOOSE to be promiscuous or not because they can make that choice. Not all women advocate that lifestyle, however, in this country, freedom to do what you want is foremost. Women that become strippers or pose for Playboy do it because they like the male attention not because it is an aspect of Feminism. If anything, feminism in this country is more focused on establishing equality amongst the business world. Although women are capable to get the CEO position legally, they are often pushed out and kept out by the male dominated professional world. Balancing a career with a family is a problem of societal demands on women. We are almost expected to chose one over the other because there is no expectation for the man to stay home. He is almost always pushed into the bread winner role. I do not see this conflict as a feminist problem but more so a societal problem that claims freedom yet wants to live by traditional male and female gender roles.