Thank you Nicole for this post - it is thoughtful and completely on target
To add...let me again voice my concern over this notion of the need for
"liberating all these women"...Western media discourse on Islam (I have
recently
studied this discourse between the years of 1994 and 1998) has in general,
subsumed all the diverse interpretations, strands and varieties of Islam
under this "Taliban model" of Islam. In other
words, in the final analysis "Islam" is blamed for the oppression of
women, the denial of women's rights, and the mandating of veiling and
female
circumcision/genital mutilation, for example. This, as Nicole has pointed
out, is erroneous --- numerous Muslim feminists have also noted this,
again, I suggest the work of Leila Ahmed in this context. Moreover, it is
dangerous, for as I have argued
elsewhere, the creation of this "Islamic other" merely serves to justify
and perpetuate Western neocolonial efforts in so-called Islamic countries,
including US foreign policy pronouncements against so called "Islamic
countries". Let me also add that this notion of "liberating all these
women" may also be taken as yet another example of a Western
feminist neocolonial venture towards "other" women....in other words,
it can be taken to mean that we (the West) must go in and "save" these
"Third World"
"backwards" women, who are represented as deviod of agency and lacking the
awareness to "save"
themselves. This also has the effect of ignoring and de-legitimizing
previously existing grassroots, local efforts at addressing issues of
concern to women. We must, in closing, look farther then the media
rhetoric on Islam or any other issue, and always investigate the agendas
behind particular representations of "others".
Jessica
On Fri, 12 Mar 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 3/12/1999 7:23:04 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> << How about liberating all these women from the yoke of shariat while you are
> there Nicole? Please be mindful of ending the sunna once and for all. No more
> circumcision! >>
>
> Uhm,
>
> "ending the sunna"? Let me share a "little" bit with you:
>
> Sunnah are the words or acts that Prophet Muhamad (SAW) did or agreed to and
> it is optional for muslims to follow, and it is only said that those who do
> will receive extra rewards from Allah. In some cases they are legally binding
> precedent however - there are many recorded sunnah, some are valid and some
> have been made up to advance ideologies or simply as confusions. I suggest
> before you comment on the Sunnah, or cut and paste comments, you gain a fuller
> awareness of what is actually in the sunnah, what is valid, what is not valid.
>
> Have you ever read the Koran in full? In translation? In Arabic? If you did,
> you would be aware of a chapter loosely translated as "she who argues" in
> which a woman felt that she was not receiving a fair judgement on an issue,
> and she directly challenged the Prophet and was proven correct - and the
> Prophet Muhammad changed his decision and noted that it was she who proved his
> enlightenment. This reflects a significant sensibility that is as much part
> of Islam as any. The Koran contains numerous statements which clearly state
> that not only is a woman a muslim in her own stead, but a creation of Allah in
> her own right - not a creation from the rib of a man.
>
> You certainly need to be aware that there is no islamic "command" to
> circumcise women.
>
> Circumcision is NOT done only by muslims - in fact, it was also done in some
> capacity by the ancient egyptians, and is cultural to SOME ethnicities among
> Africans, Arabs, Indians, Asians.
>
> Your comment about the shariat is a very malinformed and "sweeping" superhero
> type statement. You also wrote of Afghan women " They have this to say about
> Shariat: "Today, with shameless backing of their foreign masters, Taliban
> consider it their first duty to deny our women their most basic rights and
> keep them in medieval fetters. Cynically exploiting popular beliefs they
> justify their ever increasing pressure on women in the name of Islam and
> Sharia. "
>
> Even in your quote, please note that it was said "in the name of Islam and
> Sharia". People who have more than a cursory understanding of Islam know that
> what the Taliban have instituted is NOT in line with Islam. If you do further
> reading on the topic, you will learn that most of the Taliban are illiterate
> and among their first tasks were to attack, murder, exile the educated and
> literate - those able to read the koran and who held far different views. This
> is strange given the definition of the word Taliban - and that discrepency
> indicates a lot about the situation. They are acting on their demented view of
> islamic texts that most of them cannot read, have never read directly. They no
> more act in the spirit and text of Islam than do neo-nazi christians act in
> the spirit and text of Christianity
>
> Sharia is Islamic Law, based upon the Qur'an and the Hadeeth. The hadeeth are
> traditions, commonly referred to as the traditions of the Prophet (swt). They
> are in two forms; orally, stories of the Prophet, what he said, did, or gave
> appoval to, passed down from one generation to another - and of course the
> question of validity and interpretation exist.
>
> People study years to obtain an understanding of islamic law, as they do with
> the law within other countries - and for you to decide that you know enough to
> make a judge on what it is, what it says about women, is ridiculous if you
> have never read any aspect of the sharia, most certainly if you have not read
> the actual arabic text.
>
> It is fine to read an article or even several articles about the Taliban, or
> other islamic issues, and form an opinion, even be outraged or disturbed by
> what you read, but unless you have a substantive knowledge of such issues,
> texts, as well as of the cultures within Islam (as each country has its own
> interpretation, application and traditional non-islamic culture that it brings
> to it) then when you go beyond just commenting , your opinions don't carry
> sufficient credibility to address the situations in a meaningful way. Your
> lack of knowledge renders you incapable of solid analysis of articles on the
> topic - which can be biased or incomplete, or even when it is a direct quote,
> (as I noted above) instead you can easily make statements that are severly
> lacking in coherence and accuracy. This does not help the issue, as you say
> you want to do. You are also in no position to advise anyone beyond the
> superficial.
>
> You commented on reproductive freedom - I note to you that both christianity
> and judaism have severe flaws in their interpretation of such. However, it is
> worthy to note that in Islam, even abortion is allowed when it is to be done
> for the health of the mother - because her preservation is considered
> foremost. Invitro fertilization is allowed, when it is the egg and sperm of
> the married couple - because a marriage contract is between two people. On a
> brief note, the Koran does not promote polygamy - it actually identifies a
> marriage of two people as ideal and since Islam entered into a culture that
> already had polygamy, it actually regulates the terms of polygamy and applies
> numerous strict conditions on it - most of which were meant to protect women,
> and meant to encourage the ending of the practice. The koran outlines
> protections for the money of women from men - even their husbands, their
> ownership of land, and their right to spousal/child support in the event of a
> divorce. Yes, divorce is actually allowed in Islam. A tiny, but worthy,
> example of a sensibility within Islam is that even with the prohibition
> against eating pork and drinking alcohol, if you are starving or thirsty with
> risk of severe discomfort, illness, death, then Islam requires you to break
> those prohibitions. This tiny example reflects a fundamental perspective on
> the spirit of Islam, as oppose to what is simply what is in the text and what
> divided into Fard, Halal, Haram and Makruh and Mandub.
>
> The Taliban enforce strict codes a woman's covering and being "hidden" In
> Islam, in regards to covering up and being isolated - the text specifies hijab
> - the word coming from the arabic word "hajaba" which means modesty - in
> behavior and dress, applies to both men and women, and can refer to a curtain
> to an article of clothing to way of speaking. Haya is a term which covers a
> large number of concepts which are to be taken together among them are self-
> respect, honesty, modesty, bashfulness, scruples, etc.
>
> According to the Koran, Allah does not say "wear hijab," or "cover your head."
> What allah does say is:
>
> Tell the believing women to lower their gaze, protect their gentials, and
> display only that which is ordinarily visible of their beauty, and to cover
> their chests with their coverings (24:31)
>
> Oh Prophet, tell your wives and daughters, and the women of the believers to
> lengthen their outer garments so that they will be recognized and not molested
> (33:59).
>
> I have translated the above from the clear Arabic in the Koran. It is not
> unlike the view of many women in the west who don't reveal all of their bodies
> and take caution about how they dress when they go different places, formal,
> informal, and judging by the audience and type of people around - especially
> in male environments (say military bases). The koran also specifies the
> responsibility of men not to molest women, regardless of how they dress. Allah
> does say to guard the private parts, and specifies the "furuj" or gentials,
> and to cover the (women's) chests. Aren't there some women who wear shirts and
> who don't like to wear low cut clothing or have "nipple sightings"?
>
> In addition, Allah is attribute with saying to make our outer garments
> (jalabib) lower to the ground (yudnina). Allah does not mention 'hijab' as
> some specific piece of clothing as the chador or covering the head. This is
> just one brief example of the way in which the Taliban are not following
> Islam, either in text or spirit, when it urges different and restrictive
> practices against women.
>
> There is a strong understanding among most Muslims that Islam puts forth
> values such as justice and equality, gives us goals, targets that are to be
> achieved for positive behavior - that despite areas where the koran (like
> other religious texts) is not just to women, that the path is shown to follow
> the spirit and intent as our goal, not as a derogation from the koran but to
> follow the text more faithfully.
>
> The word Ijtihad means "interpretation from religious source texts" - a
> mujtahid is a person skilled in the practice of interpretating from religious
> source texts (hadeeth, sunna, koran) - and can be either male or female.
> Ijtihad is a method of using the same methodological rules to interact with
> the text in a different way to reach a different fatwa (formed legal opinion
> by a qualified specialist), to teach a different opinion or islamic
> interpretation. To change the methodology itself is another area. However, it
> is useful to understand that the ability in Islam to use ijithad this way is
> fundamental islam, and something that most people - especially non-muslims and
> those who do not study Islam, are unaware exists in Islam.
>
> There is a massive question about Itjtihad and about changing the
> methodological rules of Usul al-fiqh (codifed principles of textual exegesis,
> or rather simply the science of jurisprudence, foundation of jurisprudence)
> and usul al-tafsir (principles for expounding explanatory commentary on the
> koran).
>
>
> Some important points:
>
> 1) the Qur'an was recorded within a few year after the Prophet's death under
> 'Uthman
>
> 2) the Hadeeth was recorded two or three hundred years after the Prophet's
> death, so the Hadeeth, all of Sunnah, was an oral history for between
> two/three hundred years before it was written/recorded.
>
> 3) all of the founding jurists of Islamic jurisprudence, notably Al-Shafe'i,
> who is the founder of usul al-fiqh, did their work 150 years to 250 years
> after the Prophet died. Muslims lived as a muslim community without the term
> usul al fiqh, being known or used anywhere - shari'a was not known or used at
> all.
>
> The thrust of such an analysis is that there are some who want to work within
> the Usul al fiqh and some who want to change it - and to change usul al-fiqh
> is not against Allah, because it is clearly a manmade science, not divine, not
> in the Quran, not in the Sunnah. There are numerous scholars, include many
> muslim women from africa, arab countries, india and asian cultures such as
> malaysia who are doing strong work to go beyond whatever paradigms that are
> anti-women set down within usul al-fiqh, not just evaluating what can be done
> within the boundaries.
>
> There isn't even a problem that there are not ijtihad about the strong rights
> of women in islamic societies. The problem is the acceptance in some
> countries, among some leaders, of this ijtihad. Within a society where the
> state is trying to monopolize power, has it own institutions which claim to
> know best what Islamic Law is - or has its own illiterate Taliban. This can
> apply to any country in the world, regardless of religion where the leaders,
> or virulent members of society, religious groups, political groups, abuse
> power, malign human rights, even women's human rights - Australia, England,
> the United States, Russia, China, Japan and so on. It is even an issue within
> many religions and branches of religions, many political systems, cultures.
>
> I find that I am more coherent when discussing this topic because I study
> Sharia, the Koran, etc. with a concentration on women and governance, and can
> make informed commentary on both the existing text as well as situations
> regarding islam. It must seem a bit strange to you and joe dees, but I kind of
> like, really need for comfort, to have some substantive knowledge of what I am
> ranting about, whenever I chose to rant, rave, argue, debate, correct, comment
> - open my mouth.
>
>
> Even without challenging usul al-fiqh, I can analyze and present a new ijtihad
> or present one of the many from a variety of powerful women scholars on the
> topic. There are quite a few ijtihad of note which have been created by women
> to advance their rights (without the liberation of non-muslims or chris).
>
> Because I do care, personally and professionally, I work as part of Islamic
> women's groups, African women's groups, contribute to discussions on the
> topics between males, females, scholars, government officials, in the
> Organization of Arab States, the Organization of African Unity, the Economic
> Commission for Africa, etc. As part of the African caucus, which includes
> women of African descent from around the world - much of the "arab" world is
> in Africa and especially the gulf states where we have many black women - born
> and raised - that is a consistent part of our agenda to analyze, address and
> lobby governments, regional organizations on such topics. We also recognize
> that such issues, violence is found all over the world, against women, against
> men, done by not just Islam, but westerners, environmentalists, ecofeminists,
> etc. - and we address those issues as well - actively, not via superhero
> challenges, but on through grass roots, ngos, governmental/national, regional
> and international.
>
> I would assuredly be foolish if I felt that I could swoop in for a brief
> period and liberate the women. When I hear or read people speaking like that,
> it makes me believe that they don't take the issues seriously and certainly
> aren't engaged in serious efforts to make changes. Such statements you have
> presented are not the kind of statements people have when they are actually
> working directly on and within such issues. It is like a vet being presented
> with a dog with a broken leg and being told to "heal" the dog. The vet will
> understand that there is a bit more intricate and detailed analysis and work
> involved, than that stated "mission" implies.
>
> If I possessed that power, I would have done it long ago - being raised around
> and among such issues - and would not need you to advise me, however
> passionately to do so.
>
> I don't know why you feel you need to direct me to have such an awareness?
>
> I asked about environmental issues, where I do not have a full background,
> especially not for that region and wanted those who did to advise me. You
> respond by giving me a lecture on the Taliban and even more strangely you
> write
>
> " Having stated your mission so succinctly, you owe us a duty to report
> backto us all on your return, how well you have carried the liberation
> forward! If you need help, you know I am here to oblige to the full. "
>
>
> There is a chance that this is an area where I have more knowledge, personal
> experience, activism, contacts and focus than you do - yet you feel qualified
> to state my "mission".
>
> You also feel qualified for me to seek help from you, and think that if I
> needed help I would go to you - assuming that I don't already have "help" far
> and away more qualified than you will most likely ever be.
>
> I have heard tell of situations in which a man feels automatically that he is
> more qualified, more knowledgeable than a woman, without any qualifications to
> truly be more, but I can't quite remember what the word is for that is,
> perhaps you can help me on that point? You may have more experience in that
> area. Or is it not my gender, but my ethnicity which makes you feel more
> qualified, without knowing my knowledge on this topic and while clearly
> outlining your lack of knowledge.
>
> I also need to let you know that I don't owe you, or that collective "us" of
> this list, anything as you have phrased it. I do however, feel I owe it to
> those women, to be substantively informed on the issue and to assist in ways
> that are somewhat deeper than an emailed statement about going to liberate the
> women while on vacation. That is why I chose my area of studies, work and
> activism long long years ago. I think such comments as you have presented
> trivilalize the situations so severely that it taxes my heart to even touch
> upon how depraved and indifferent it sounds. It seems to be a joke, which is
> also horrific because the situation is not a joke. Joe Dees, on the other
> hand, goes far beyond triviliazing into the area of venomous commentary which
> represents the very worst of the so-called liberals and "concerned westerners"
> and people like him do not care what tremendous damage those attitdues inflict
> on the lives of people they claim to advocate. Yet he howls in protest,
> curses and threatens when I tell him that he is wrong. Yet some so called
> feminists on this list feel that if I disagree with him, then I am thinking
> only concerned with my opinions - as if they would not disagree strongly with
> men who seek to oppress and insult all areas of the women's movement.
>
> Yesterday afternoon, I met with a woman, a mentor of mine, who was
> representing both the government of Yemen (yes a woman) and a Yemeni woman's
> organization as part of the current Commission on the status of women at the
> United Nations. I talked to her about my upcoming visit to Yemen, as well as
> some other things we are working on collectively - one of which is the Taliban
> issue upon which we directly focus on several fronts, with a variety of
> activities - which support the efforts and goals of afghani women, many of
> whom in the diaspora and even in the country are active in this fight. We all
> tend to address it a bit more realistically than just saying "let's liberate
> the women".
>
> Chris, you wouldn't survive very long with the type of stuff you write without
> being banished out of the groups of women with whom I work. The woman who are
> the grassroots of such issues - they are also the scholars, the doctors,
> lawyers, academics, government representatives, the women whom you think are
> sitting around waiting for you to liberate them.
>
> The issues of women in islamic society, of Sharia, Fitnah, etc. are far too
> massive and detailed to be broken down into one book, much less one email.
> However, I have sought to present a bit of a response to what you have written
> to me.
>
> I want you to understand, as this is not the first time you have mentioned
> circumcision or islam or the taliban to me, that while I respect your
> interests, please stop addressing me as if I am a child, unaware of the
> situations, histories and issues, and simply wait on your command to take
> action, wait on your insight and advisement to care, to be active. This does
> not at all reflect reality.
>
> Contrary to what Hayley has written about me, I think that when I disagree
> with someone on a topic, and I am able to present an opinion based on fact and
> experience then it is fully appropriate for me to express myself and even to
> say that someone is wrong. I urge her to think more about being objective and
> putting the burden on those who so very quickly give opinions on such issues,
> topics without a basis of fact and experience.
>
> Nicole
>
