Shattering
Illusions - Western
Conceptions of Muslim Women
"Islam in its original state
gave women privileges and imposed no harsh restrictions or double standards upon
them.," says Saimah Ashraf, a 1997-98 winner of the Stanford
University Boothe Prize for Excellence in Writing.
"Rose Hamid is as American as they come. She drives a Ford
station wagon, leads a local Girl Scout troop, shops at the Gap and just
attended her 20-year high school reunion" writes Laurie Goodstein in a
recent New York Times article (A1).
From this brief description of Rose, readers may have formed a
particular picture of her in their minds. If they were told, however, that
"Rose Hamid wears a head scarf in keeping with her Muslim faith,'"
that picture might take a drastic turn (Goodstein A1).
She's Muslim? Images of suppressed, meek, black-enshrouded women
submitting to the demands of their dominating husbands race through some
readers' minds. But why is this the case? Would we see Rose any differently if
she were Christian or Jewish? The answer is probably no, but since she is a
Muslim woman, it is difficult not to have some preconceptions of her.
I don't understand why, in the West, Muslim women are clumped
into one large group and viewed as homogenous clones of one another, while their
Christian and Jewish counterparts are rarely ever stereotyped in this way. Many
people don't realize, due largely to biased media interpretations, that there
are a large variety of Muslim women around the world, from areas such as the
Middle East, South Asia, South East Asia, Yugoslavia, Northern Africa, and the
Southern parts of the former USSR, just as there are Christian and Jewish women
in various countries.
For instance, one probably wouldn't classify a Mexican woman with a French
woman, though both may be Roman Catholics and hold the same beliefs. In the same
way, American Muslim women are different from Pakistani Muslims, who are
different from Saudi Muslims. In these three countries, women are accorded
different rights and privileges because of the government and customs in the
area. For example, many American Muslim women are discriminated against because
they cover their heads; Pakistani women have political rights but are often
exploited by men; Saudi women have no public role, yet they are
"protected" by Saudi men.
The negative stereotypes of Muslim women probably arise from
this varying treatment of women. The Western media, for some reason, latch on to
a few examples of unjust behavior in the Islamic world, brand Islam as a
backwards and "fundamentalist" religion, especially in its treatment
of women, and ignore that it was the first religion to accord women equal
rights. While Christian and Jewish women were still considered inferior, the
originators of sin, and the property of their husbands, Muslim women were being
given shares in inheritance, were allowed to choose or refuse prospective
husbands, and were considered equal to men in the eyes of God. However, through
time, slowly changing customs, and the rise of male-dominated, patriarchal
nation-states, Muslim governments began placing restrictions on women which had
no grounds in the Quran, the Islamic holy book; or the hadith, the teachings of
the Prophet Muhammad. On the other hand, Christian and Jewish women in the West
have slowly been awarded rights not called for in the biblical tradition.
Traditionally, Judeo-Christian women were thought to be inferior
to men and were given a low status in society. These negative attitudes toward
women arose because Judaism and Christianity placed such a heavy emphasis on
Eve's role in the expulsion from Paradise. Because Eve, rather than Adam, was
the first to be seduced by Satan and eat fruit from the Tree of Knowledge, she
supposedly caused the fall of mankind. Therefore all women, as the descendants
of Eve, were thought to be evil and morally weaker than men (Sherif 2). In the
Bible, there are several references to women in this uncomplimentary light:
"I found more bitter than death the woman who is a snare, whose heart is a
trap and whose hands are chains. The man who pleases God will escape her, but
the sinner she will ensnare" (Ecclesiastes 7:26-28). "No wickedness
comes anywhere near the wickedness of a woman. . . .Sin began with a woman and
thanks to her we all must die" (Ecclesiastes 25:19,24). Early church
fathers such as St. Tertullian reiterated these negative concepts of women by
making statements such as, "Do you know that you are each an Eve?. . . .
You are the Devil's gateway. . . .You destroyed so easily God's image, man. On
account of your desert even the Son of God had to die." In Christianity,
women carried the extra burden of causing the death of Christ, as Tertullian
points out (Sherif 2). Because Adam and Eve passed on their sin to all future
generations, Jesus had to purge humankind from this "original sin" by
sacrificing his life (Sherif 2). Thus, by causing the fall of man, Eve also
caused the death of Christ. In the Jewish tradition, women receive no less harsh
treatment. Because of Eve, all women have to face punishment on Earth including
pregnancy, pain in childbirth, menstruation, and subjugation to men (Sherif 3).
Orthodox Jewish males still recite in their daily prayers: "Blessed be God
King of the Universe that Thou has not made me a woman . . . . Praised be God
that he has not created me woman" (Menahot 43b)
These early prejudiced attitudes gave rise to discriminatory
treatment of women. Because the Judeo-Christian tradition spans such a vast
amount of time, it is difficult to deal with the condition of women in any
specific period. Therefore I will deal with women mostly as they are referred to
in the Bible and by influential church fathers and rabbis. Often, the
discrimination against females began immediately upon birth since baby girls
were thought to be shameful, a view found several times in the Bible: "The
birth of a daughter is a loss" (Ecclesiasticus 22:3). Jewish rabbis also
expressed displeasure at the birth of a female, saying that boys brought peace
into the world, whereas girls brought absolutely nothing (Sherif 4). This
unhappiness at a female's birth arose partly because of the large dowry that had
to be given to a Jewish or Christian girl's husband upon marriage, a tradition
adhered to until recently (Sherif 8). Hence, a girl was often thought to be a
"liability and no asset" (Sherif 8).
Additionally, as Kevin Harris, senior lecturer at the University
of New South Wales, puts it, "women are portrayed in the bible quite
consistently as appendages of men; as possessions of men; as goods which may be
sold, disposed of, given away, traded, or just ordered about by men" (30).
One section in the Bible which is a testament to this view is Exodus 21.7, which
expressly condones a man selling his daughter into slavery or concubinage:
"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as the male
slaves do." A man also controlled the sexuality of his daughter, as can be
seen in the case of Lot (among many others), who offered his virgin daughters to
the homosexual men of Sodom in Genesis 19.8: "I have two daughters who have
not known a man. . . . do to them as you please." When a woman was married,
in which she usually had little or no say, she became the property of her
husband rather than her father, and he then had the right of "purchasing
and selling" her (Schmidt 127). He owned not only her person, but also all
of her property. "The household articles, even the crumbs of bread on the
table [were] his. Should she invite a guest to her house and feed him, she would
be stealing from her husband" (San. 71a, Git. 62a). A woman could regain
her property only upon divorce or her husband's death, but she was never allowed
to inherit any of his property (Sherif 8). In fact, Western women had no
property rights at all until the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
Because of the inferior status of women in the Judeo-Christian
tradition, there often existed a double standard between men and women,
especially in areas of sexuality. For example, if a woman was not a virgin at
marriage, she could be taken to her father's house by her husband and stoned to
death (Schmidt 112). The man, on the other hand, was never subjected to this
punishment or indeed to any codes of conduct governing his sexuality (Schmidt
112). In fact, even if he raped or deflowered a virgin, he was not put to death
but was instead forced to marry her and give money to her father, which seems
more of a punishment for his female victim than him! (Harris 57). After
marriage, a Hebrew male could arbitrarily accuse his wife of adultery, even with
the slightest suspicion, and make her take the humiliating
"bitter-water" test to determine her innocence or guilt (Schmidt 121).
If she was found guilty of having slept with another man, regardless of his
marital status, she would be stoned to death (Sherif 6). A Hebrew man, whether
married or not, on the other hand, was only said to have committed adultery if
he slept with a married woman (Schmidt 118). As Vern Bullough, author of
Subordinate Sex, explains, "Adultery was not a sin against morality, but a
trespass against the husband's property" (Schmidt 118). Since the wife was
the husband's property, she could not be violated without his permission. This
view of adultery changed with the advent of Christianity, when Jesus introduced
the idea that adultery could be committed against a woman also, but later many
of the church's theologians "reverted to the patriarchal understanding of
adultery" (Schmidt 122). In present-day Israel, however, the old law still
pertains. A married man can have an affair with an unmarried women and have
children that are considered legitimate (Sherif 6). If a married woman, on the
other hand, has an extramarital affair, her children "are considered
bastards and are forbidden to marry any other Jews except converts and other
bastards" for ten consecutive generations (Sherif 6).
Judeo-Christian practices also often ignored women's rights in
cases of divorce. In original Christianity, divorce was expressly forbidden, and
Jesus supposedly said that "anyone who divorces his wife, except for
marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who
marries the divorced woman commits adultery" (Matthew 5:32). This harsh
view failed to take into account the possible incompatibility of a man and woman
and condemned unhappy couples to stay together against their wills. This
situation was especially difficult for women because society did not allow them
extramarital relations but condoned the relations of married men with
prostitutes and other single women (Schmidt 50). In Judaism, divorce was allowed
and even encouraged at times. Early Jewish scholars disagreed over the reasons a
man could divorce his wife, and their views can be found in the Talmud:
"The school of Shammai held that a man should not divorce his wife unless
he has found her guilty of some sexual misconduct, while the school of Hillel
say [sic] he may divorce her even if she has merely spoiled a dish for him.
Rabbi Akiba says he may divorce her even if he simply finds another woman more
beautiful than she" (Gittin 90a-b). The Hillelite law predominated among
the Jews and now Jewish men can divorce their wives for any reason whatsoever.
The Talmud even obligates divorcing a woman if she "ate in the street drank
greedily in the street suckled in the street" or if she does not bear a
child within ten years of the marriage (Sherif 9). A Jewish woman, however,
could not and cannot divorce her husband. He must give her a bill of divorce
voluntarily and even the courts have no power to make him do this (Sherif 9). A
man may desert his wife, marry another woman or simply live with one, and have
legitimate children, while his first wife is trapped because she cannot have
extramarital relations (Sherif 9). This sort of woman is known as an agunah
(chained woman); there are approximately 1000 to 1500 Jewish agunah women in the
United States today and around 16,000 in Israel (Sherif 9).
Suffering such blatant discrimination, it seems amazing that
most Judeo-Christian women have overcome the odds and achieved equal rights with
males. However, this has been a fairly recent development, largely occurring in
this century. Within the past hundred years, women began to be considered
citizens of states, were given voting rights, property rights, and easier access
to divorce. Now many Muslim women hold the former position of Judeo-Christian
women, but generally all they receive from the latter is scorn, derision,
misunderstanding, or pity. It is ironic that the religion which significantly
improved the status of women as compared to both Judaism and Christianity, and
indeed was the first religion to grant women equal rights in all areas of life,
including religion, sexuality, inheritance, and law, is now regarded as one that
oppresses women.
One of the basic principles of Islam is justice for all humans
and equality in the eyes of God. Women are considered no less than men in
aspects of religion and are not denigrated anywhere in the Quran. First of all,
in the Quranic Creation story, Eve is not mentioned as being seduced by the
Serpent and taking the first bite of forbidden fruit. Rather, it says: (my
italics) "by deceit he [Satan] brought them to their fall: when they tasted
the tree their shame became manifest to them (7:19:23). Both Eve and Adam were
held equally responsible. Hence, women in Islam do not bear the stigma as the
daughters of a sinful Eve nor are they to be blamed for corrupting innocence (Sherif
3). Nor were women created as inferior to men, or solely for pleasure and
procreational purposes as the Judeo-Christian scriptures sometimes imply
"the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man
created for the woman; but the woman for the man" (Corinthians 11:3-9). In
contrast, the chapter in the Quran entitled "Women" begins with the
passage saying, "O humanity, be reverent to your Lord who created you from
one soul and created its mate from it, and from these two disseminated many men
and women." Here, in very blatant terms, it is stated that women and men
are made from the same soul, and therefore, how could one gender possibly be
inferior? In fact, neither gender is inferior, as the Quran states: "And
their Lord answered them: Truly I will never cause to be lost the work of any of
you, Be you a male or female, you are members of one another" (3:195).
This concept of gender equality in Islam begins immediately upon
birth. When baby girls were born in Pre-Islamic Arabia, they were often buried
alive to prevent shaming the tribe or family. In response to this infanticide,
the Quran forbade treating a female child as disgraceful and states that both
baby boys and girls are equally a blessing from God: "To Allah belongs the
domination of the heavens and the earth. He creates what He wills. He bestows
female children to whomever He wills and bestows male children to whomever He
wills" (42:49). Prophet Muhammad even guaranteed Paradise to those fathers
who bring up their daughters with "benevolent treatment" and also
encouraged both males and females to pursue knowledge and education (Bukhari,
Muslim).
Furthermore, in Islam girls are not considered the property of
their fathers and have complete control over their sexuality, in contrast to the
Judeo-Christian tradition (Sherif 8). A free woman can never be sold it would be
abhorrent for a father to sell his daughter as a concubine nor can she be
married against her wishes, or the marriage can be annulled. After the marriage,
a woman does not become the possession of her husband and is supposed to retain
her own name and identity. "An American judge once commented on the rights
of Muslim women saying: A Muslim girl may marry ten times, but her individuality
is not absorbed by that of her various husbands. She is a solar planet with a
name and legal personality of her own'" (Sherif 8). Additionally, Islam
does not imply that a woman is made entirely for the pleasure of her husband but
refers to spouses as equal partners: "They are your garments and you are
their garments," the function of garments being to protect, cover, and
adorn (Quran 2:187). Today, Western media often convey the idea that Muslim
women are completely submissive to their husbands, but in fact, even the wives
of the Prophet Muhammad (the most important and noble man in Islam) used to
fight with him if they didn't get their way; they were far from the submissive,
meek stereotypes of Muslim women today.
Another area in which Muslim women had greater rights than those
of Judeo-Christian women is property. In an Islamic marriage, rather than paying
the husband a dowry, the wife receives a substantial gift from him which then
remains under her control, not his or her family's, even if she is later
divorced. "In some Muslim societies today," Dr. Mohammed Sherif,
author of the published essay entitled "Women in Islam Versus Women in the
Judaeo-Christian Tradition: The Myth and The Reality" says, "A
marriage gift of a hundred thousand dollars in diamonds is not unusual"
(8). Any other property a woman may happen to own at the time of the marriage is
also exclusively hers and the husband has no right to use it. Even if she earns
her own income, it is the husband's responsibility to maintain her and the
children, and she has no obligation whatsoever to provide for the family.
Furthermore, a woman in Islam can inherit money or property from any one of her
relations, including her husband.
In the early years of Islam, a woman's rights were also
protected concerning sexuality and divorce; a double standard did not exist
between males and females. According to Islam, both genders are supposed to
remain chaste until marriage, not just the women, and adultery consists of any
married person engaging in sexual intercourse with someone other than a spouse.
The punishment for both men and women who commit adultery, if the actual act is
witnessed by four other people, is death by stoning. If a husband arbitrarily
accuses his wife of being unfaithful, they both take an oath upon God, and if
the wife swears that she is innocent and the husband swears that she is not, the
marriage is irrevocably over and the woman is not considered an adulteress.
However, throwing loose accusations around about any woman is highly discouraged
in Islam. A woman's dignity should not be toyed with and one should not, under
any circumstances, speculate about her sexual conduct without very secure
evidence (Quraishi 299). The Quran sets forth a very harsh punishment for those
people who do: "Those who defame chaste women and do not bring four
witnesses should be punished with eighty lashes, and their testimony should not
be accepted afterwards, for they are profligates (24:4). Asifa Quraishi, author
of "Critique of the Rape Laws of Pakistan," writes that, "In the
face of any hint of a woman's sexual impropriety, the Quranic response is: walk
away. Leave her alone. Leave her dignity intact. The honor of a woman is not a
tool, it is her fundamental right" (299).
A similarly just attitude prevails in cases of divorce. First of
all, divorce is not at all encouraged in Islam but allowed under compelling
circumstances, and both men and women are allowed to obtain one. The Prophet
said that "among all the permitted acts, divorce is the most hateful to
God" (Abu Dawood). Couples are told in the Quran to live with one another
in kindness: "Live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If you
dislike them it may be that you dislike something in which Allah has placed a
great deal of good" (4:19). In the hadith, this view is reiterated:
"The believers who show the most perfect faith are those who have the best
character and the best of you are those who are best to their wives (Tirmidthi).
However, in some cases, divorce is inescapable, and Islam attempts to make it as
amicable as possible.
The last way I will mention that Islam uses to protect women is
the hijab, or the veil. This is ironic because Western media often portray the
Muslim veil as a suppressive force in a woman's life. Every Muslim woman is
required to wear a scarf or some sort of head-covering and loose-fitting, modest
attire. This is not a means of controlling a woman's sexuality or suppressing
her but rather, is used to protect her. It is hoped that by dressing this way
she will not be seen as a mere sex symbol but will be appreciated for her mind.
Furthermore, it will not subject her to unwanted sexual advances or harassment.
It is interesting to note that the head-covering for women is not an Islamic
innovation but was practiced by Judeo-Christian women centuries earlier, and yet
is scoffed at by the West today (Sherif 15). Dr. Sherif says: "It is one of
the great ironies of our world today that the very same headscarf revered as a
sign of holiness' when worn for the purpose of showing the authority of man by
Catholic Nuns, is reviled as a sign of oppression' when worn for the purpose of
protection by Muslim women" (16).
Hence, Islam in its original state gave women privileges and
imposed no harsh restrictions or double standards upon them. However, with the
progression of time, the rights of Muslim women began deteriorating, and today,
very few Muslim countries adhere to the Islamic ideal in their treatment of
women. This deviance from Islam can be seen when evaluating the rights that
women possess in different countries. The three main countries I will deal with
are the United States, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia simply because I am familiar
with them, having either lived or visited each extensively.
Though the United States is not a Muslim country, it is supposed
to be the "land of freedom," and it is interesting to see how Muslim
women are treated here. A Muslim woman is allowed to practice Islam without
restrictions placed upon her by the government. As an American citizen, she has
the rights of any woman to vote, to voice her opinions, and to move around as
she pleases. Rose Hamid, the woman mentioned earlier, is one such American
Muslim. This is not to say, however, that American Muslim women do not face
prejudice, and Hamid is a good example of this. When she began wearing a
headscarf recently, she was promptly fired by her company of ten years. Anjum
Smith, another American Muslim, faced this same problem as did Shabana who was
fired from her job at The Gap because, with her headscarf, she was an
"undesirable" saleslady. There have been reports that women with
covered hair have been "spit on, denied service, and [had] their scarves
pulled off" (Goodstein A1). Goodstein reports that "Recently, on a
highway near Orlando, Fla., one driver in a head scarf was stopped and berated
by a state trooper who later formally apologized" (A1). This
discrimination, even if unintentional, is rampant in the US; people just don't
treat you the same once you start covering your hair: "They try and cheat
me out of change. They think I'm a foreigner, and I've been here a long time. I
wear American clothes, but I wear a scarf. The scarf changes everything,"
says Tayyibah Taylor, editorial director of Sisters! A Magazine of Dialogue
Among Muslim Women (Goodstein A14).
In contrast, Saudi women are compelled by law to cover
their hair, and they are instructed to wear a black cloak known as the abaya to
cover their bodies. Saudi Arabia is one of the most "fundamentalist"
Islamic nations in the world, and it supposedly implements Islamic law to ensure
peace and justice. Yet, many of their laws, especially those geared at women,
are unjust and stem from patriarchal customs. For example, the covering of a
woman's face is not a requirement in Islam, yet many times women are harassed by
the mutawa, or "purity police," for not doing this. Furthermore, women
are not allowed to sit in the front seat of a car or walk alongside a man if he
is not her husband or close relative; nor are women allowed to drive. Havva
Kurter, author of the essay "An Outline History of the Oppression of
Women," exclaims, "The Saudis think that women will go make sin if
they drive a car! Now some non-Muslims may think of this as part of Islam"
(116). But to give the Saudis some credit, women there are given certain
privileges not awarded to Muslim women of other countries. First of all, Saudi
women are almost never harassed (it is usually the foreigners who encounter
this) and are extremely protected by their families and government.
Additionally, in accordance to Islamic law, they are offered dowries, often very
high ones, and are entitled to keep their own wealth.
This is hardly ever the case in Pakistan. Most women have
virtually no control over their own property and are usually accorded minimal
dowries unless they are of the upper classes. What is usually the case is that
the bride's family has to provide all sorts of gifts to the husband and his
family. These gifts, which range from money to cars to houses, are often what
determines the choice of a bride. This obviously is not an Islamic practice but
one that stems from the Hindu culture of nearby India. Moreover, women in
Pakistan are often exploited by the law, sexually harassed, or raped, many times
by police officers and other influential government officials (Quraishi 291). It
is ironic, then, that Pakistan has surpassed even the United States in gender
equality in that it has had a female head of State: the former Prime Minister,
Benazir Bhutto. In fact, there are quite a few influential female politicians in
Pakistan. Among other rights Pakistani women retain is their freedom of dress;
most Pakistani women don't cover their hair and no type of dress code is
enforced upon them, but this is not to say they won't be harassed if wearing
revealing clothing in public. Additionally, women are allowed to drive, vote,
attend co-educational universities, and hold paying jobs. However, this blend of
restriction and privilege still does not make Pakistan's treatment of women very
Islamic.
In fact, I can't think of any country that really treats Muslim
women the way they are supposed to be treated as stipulated in the Quran and
hadith. Most Muslim countries' approach to women falls between the two extremes
of complete oppression and encouragement to behave like Western Judeo-Christian
women, which is certainly not what Islam intended. I have dealt, to some extent,
with the former case and believe that most people who read this paper will
sympathize with the plight of these Muslim women. Their solutions might involve
the "modernization" or "Westernization" of these women, but
this is not at all what I am advocating. It's true that Western Judeo-Christian
women have achieved freedom and independence for themselves, but has this
necessarily been beneficial for them or society? One look at the ever-rising
statistics for rape, sexual harassment, divorce, broken homes, latch-key kids,
teenage pregnancies, and AIDS cases in the West indicates that something is
definitely not right in society. Is it just coincidental that many of these
issues became actual problems only after the Sixties' Sexual Revolution and
feminist movement arose? Are these social problems just part of a growing trend
in modern society or do they have some direct correlation to "women's
liberation?" These are some questions we need to ask ourselves before we
prescribe the "Western remedy" to any other society. The last thing
Muslim women need to add to their problems at this point is more problems.
Rather, the solution for achieving true freedom, independence, and happiness
must come from within from the teachings of the Prophet, from the depths of the
Quran, and from the wealth of rich Islamic tradition.