On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Dwi Soegardi<soega...@gmail.com> wrote: > Meninjau kembali Debat Doha yang terakhir, Mei 2009 yang lalu, > dengan tema: Apakah Muslimah bebas memilih calon suaminya?
Masih seputar Debat Doha, ada ulasan cukup menarik di blog Muslimah Media Watch berikut ini: http://muslimahmediawatch.org/2009/07/02/muslim-women-and-choice-in-marriage/ Muslim Women and Choice in Marriage July 2, 2009 Posted by Fatemeh in Events, Television. Tags: Doha Debates, marriage trackback This is a slightly edited version of an article written by Sahar, which originally appeared at Nuseiba. You can also read Yusra’s take on the debates. Recently, I saw the Doha Debates, which is a show that debates controversial political, social and religious issues. Journalist and mediator Tim Sebastian proposes a motion and the speakers on the panel discuss the topic at length. The audience then has an opportunity to respond to the panel. The latest motion proposed: “This house believes that Muslim women should be free to marry anyone they choose.” There were four speakers on the panel. For the motion there was American Muslim feminist Asra Nomani, who has authored several books. Also for the motion, there was Dr. Muhammad Habash, a member of parliament and a cleric. Against the motion were Shaykh Yasir Qadhi and Dr. Thuraya Al Arrayed, a Saudi writer, columnist and member of the advisory board of the Arab Thought Foundation. Nomani began the debate with an emotional tone, declaring that Muslim women face barriers and that “just about every Muslim woman” encounters these barriers and internalizes them, and that she does not have the right to choose when it comes to marriage. She then directly addresses Muslim women and reassures them that she doesn’t wish that they suffer forced or loveless marriages. With the way Nomani is carrying on, you’d think she was convinced she was shaking the very sheltered world of Muslim women. Apparently, we’re not aware of our rights! In her self-aggrandizement, Nomani homogenizes Muslim women’s experiences and assumes that every Muslim woman has had the same experience as her. That yes, we are all doomed to the same fate. True, there are Muslim women like Nomani who marry either through some sort of coercion or just to keep their family happy–I also agree with her point that these women will be the ones who share their bed with their husbands at the end. However, Nomani seems to think that these experiences are the experiences of the vast majority of Muslim women–where we are helpless beings who are victims of our community and our imposing families, who Nomani assumes don’t want the best for us. She thus undermines the importance of family within the context of Muslim marriage. I’m not saying women have to follow the decisions of their families, but many women and men will be thinking that family does matter in many of the decisions we make for ourselves, including marriage. In other words, choice comes with responsibility and it does at times mean we consider everything, not just ourselves. Nomani’s entire argument is predicated on a particular construction of the Muslim woman which she deploys to legitimize her claim: she is just chattel, in shackles, and silenced by her subjugation. Nomani belittles the minds of Muslim women because she assumes they lack agency of their own and cannot comprehend their supposed suffering. In doing so, Nomani constructs herself as their savior, the enlightened one who recognizes their oppression– the liberal light at the end of this oppressive dark tunnel that is their unfortunate experience. I found it interesting that Nomani’s extremely liberal position was juxtaposed with the other Muslim woman, who was opposed to the motion. Dr. Al Arrayed opposes the motion because she believes that anyone 27 and under bases their decisions on physical attraction and that they are not responsible enough to be making important decisions like this– so the role of the family is essential. Her simplistic position is mired by her lack of faith in young Muslim women and their responsible attitude to such issues like marriage—which a woman in the audience pointed out. However, I do agree with Dr. Al Arrayed’s overall point that family is important in these decisions and it is dangerous to deny this reality because it could lead to women being isolated. What was interesting is the issue of children did not come up in the debate. For me, my decision to marry a Muslim man is affirmed when it comes to the faith of my children. I would not want my children to belong to any other faith but Islam. Keep in mind, this is not only an issue women who marry non-Muslims have to face but also men who do. Supporting the motion, Dr. Habash begins his defense declaring there is no compulsion in religion and so we should extend this to marriage, too (I think he was a little confused with his position and often would agree with the opposing side). However, no compulsion in religion does not mean a Muslim shouldn’t abide by the laws of her religion—she has the choice not to, of course, but if she wishes to practice her religion, there are certain rules and practices that need to be followed as part of worship. Sure, a Muslim woman can marry who she wants, but the question here is, is there religious justification for this unlimited freedom? Dr. Habash refers to the hadith of when the Prophet was approached by a woman who told him of how she was forced to marry but later agreed with her father’s decision. The Prophet then told her he’ll absolve the marriage but she assured him she was now happy in her marriage but wanted to let women know that the father has no right to do such a thing which the Prophet agreed. Habash takes from this hadith the principle that women should be able to choose who she should marry, regardless of the faith of the person. However, as Shaykh Qadhi points out, we cannot be selective with our religion because Habash is ignoring what Islam has to say about a woman marrying a non-Muslim. As I listened to Nomani’s concern over the depressing fate of Muslim women, I thought, why isn’t she mentioning the importance of recognizing cultural ideas and customs that have infiltrated how we conceptualise and perceive Islam? Her analysis was simple: Muslim women are downtrodden; there was no attempt to contextualise and understand this further. To compensate for Nomani’s reductive observation, Shaykh Qadhi and Dr. Al Arrayed point out that yes, there are women who are oppressed in our communities in the name of religion, but Islam is not responsible for any oppression that occurs, rather it is cultural and tribal prejudice which justify oppressive practices. These practices are the antithesis to Islam’s principles of equality and justice which are protected in its law. Importantly, Shaykh Qadhi explains how this is not a problem of the uneducated In our community but those who have committed themselves to the study of religion, who may consciously or unconsciously introduce their own cultural prejudice that affects how they view Islam. This was imperative to the debate I thought because of the dichotomy that Nomani was desperately trying to establish. Nomani posited herself as the liberal defender of Muslim women against the oppressive religious leadership that Shaykh Qadhi—with his long beard (as opposed to the more subtle beard of Habash) represented. When Shaykh Qadhi objected to her removal of any boundaries and warned that limitations are a part of our religion, she would turn to the audience and say “that is their interpretation” in her attempt to marginalize him. In fact, she was well prepared for this response and early on in the debate warned of the theological arguments that she claimed lay the barriers for women. Shaykh Qadhi undermined this false dichotomy in pointing out that there are elements of the religious establishment who are tainted by cultural understandings and that we should resist this. However, Nomani wasn’t interested in hearing a shaykh criticize women’s oppression in our community— that was simply not the role Nomani had decided for him. In the end, the motion was passed (62%). I was actually surprised, but Shaykh Qadhi explains in his piece on the debate that it was likely to be because of the vagueness of the motion which stressed freedom to choose rather than Shariah ruling on the issue. But the fact that these kinds of discussions are taking place between Muslims (both men and women) is a step forward in providing a space to discuss issues that impact on the lives of Muslim women. > > - video dapat dilihat di youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9CHEhZL0OA > (cukup lama debatnya, lebih dari 45 menit videonya) > sekalipun debat cukup hangat antara pihak yang pro (aktivis perempuan > Asra Nomani) > dan yang anti (ulama konservatif Yasir Qadhi), argumen kedua belah pihak > masih kurang menggigit. > Pada tataran praktis, menikah dibatasi oleh hal-hal: agama, adat, > sosio-ekonomi, > sampai politik. Dalam debat ini, fokusnya terutama perempuan muslimah > masih lebih banyak batasannya > dibanding laki-laki dalam memilih pasangan, antara lain yang paling > ditentang oleh kaum konservatif > adalah menikah dengan nonmuslim dan menikah sesama jenis. > > - Mayoritas audiens debat mendukung mosi dengan suara 62:38. Tampaknya > audiens yang mayoritas > berusia muda mempunyai pandangan yang lebih terbuka dan bebas. > > - Polling/survey dilakukan dengan responden di dunia Arab, di luar > audiens Debat Doha, pada awal Juni, > hasilnya menunjukkan lebih dari 85% responden menolak mosi Debat Doha, > terutama > kalangan perempuan tidak setuju bahwa muslimah bebas memilih calon > suami nonmuslim > dengan alasan adanya larangan yang tercantum dalam al-Quran. > Hanya sebagian kecil, 25%, yang berpendapat adanya ketidakadilan bahwa > laki-laki muslim > dibolehkan menikah dengan perempuan nonmuslim. > > http://www.thedohadebates.com/news/item.asp?n=4800 > > Arabs reject Doha Debate vote on Muslim marriage > > Wednesday, June 17 2009 > > ARABS REJECT DOHA DEBATE VOTE ON MUSLIM MARRIAGE > > Doha, Qatar, June 17, 2009: Arabs across the Middle East have voiced > serious opposition to a recent vote at the Doha Debates that Muslim > women should be free to marry the man of their choice. > > An opinion poll, commissioned by the Qatar-based debating forum, > revealed over 85 percent of Arabs against the proposition, with the > strongest objections coming from women. > > The finding stands in stark contrast to the result of the last debate, > held on May 25th in Doha, when 62 percent of the mainly-Arab audience > voted to remove all restrictions on a Muslim woman's choice of > husband. > > In the poll carried out by YouGov, 89 percent of women said it was > prohibited for Muslim women to marry outside their religion, with the > majority citing the Koran as the reason for their conviction. > > More than 800 respondents from North Africa, the Gulf, Levant and Iraq > took part in the online survey between June 4-9. > > A large majority opposed arranged marriages, while a quarter thought > it was unfair that Muslim men could marry outside their faith at the > same time as women were facing restrictions. > > On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 10:47 PM, Dwi Soegardi<soega...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Debat Doha (http://www.dohadebates.com) adalah forum debat bebas bagi >> masyarakat umum di dunia Arab membahas masalah-masalah di wilayah >> tersebut. >> Topik-topik yang pernah dibahas antara lain: >> - Apakah negara-negara Arab perlu menyerahkan Presiden Sudan untuk >> diadili di Mahkamah Internasional? >> - Apakah Islam politik ancaman bagi Barat? >> - Apakah perkembangan demokrasi terhambat di Arab? >> >> Debat-debat ini dapat dilihat videonya maupun didengarkan mp3nya. >> >> Untuk bulan ini topiknya adalah "Apakah muslimah berhak memilih siapa >> yang akan dinikahinya?" >> Hasilnya forum menyetujui dengan suara 62:38. >> >> >> >> http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=293103&version=1&template_id=36&parent_id=16 >> >> Muslim women should be ‘free to choose a husband’ >> >> The panel last night: Asra Nomani; Mohammed al-Habash; Tim Sebastian; >> Thuraya al-Rayed and Yasir Qadhi >> >> By Peter Townson >> >> The Motion ‘This House believes that Muslim women should be free to >> marry anyone they choose’, was passed resoundingly by 62% to 38% at >> the final episode of the fifth series of the Doha Debates last night. >> >> A lively audience questioned the panellists on a highly emotional >> issue, with a number of young Qatari women arguing staunchly for their >> right to make a choice about who they should marry. >> >> First to speak for the motion was journalist and author Asra Nomani, >> who spoke about her personal experiences as a young Muslim woman who >> was pushed into a loveless marriage. >> >> “I wish we could have been having this conversation 25 years ago,” she >> said, “and I want to ensure that no other young Muslim women have to >> go through the suffering that I went through”. >> >> “Religion is not supposed to bring about suffering,” she argued, >> “marriage is about love, passion and kinship and all our daughters of >> Islam deserve this”. >> >> She was followed by the Muslim American cleric and dean of Academic >> Affairs at Al Maghrib Institute, Yasir Qadhi, who stated that to >> support the motion was both illogical and impractical. “To be a Muslim >> means to submit,” he argued, saying “it is illogical to say you are a >> Muslim and then try and destroy the rules upon which the religion is >> based”. >> >> He also argued that it is also impractical for people from different >> religions to sustain a marriage in the long term, but pointed out that >> he was not opposed to women’s rights being increased, but rather “I am >> opposed to the idea of unconditional freedom”. >> >> “Muslim women are not allowed to marry non-Muslims, just as they are >> not allowed to marry other women – this is the Islamic law which is >> supported by unanimous consensus.” >> >> Next to speak was the general director of the Islamic Studies Center >> in Damascus and Member of the Syrian Parliament, Mohammed al-Habash. >> His argument focussed on the fact that there is “no compulsion in >> religion” and women should be free to choose who they want to marry. >> >> However, he qualified his statements with the condition that the woman >> should still take the advice of her parents and family, as well as the >> wider society. Rather confusingly, he appealed to the teachings of >> Islam that say “people of scripture” should be accepted, but then said >> that the people in question would have to affirm their belief in God >> and the Prophet Mohammed. >> >> The final speaker was Saudi columnist, poet and member of the advisory >> board of the Arab Thought Foundation, Thuraya al-Rayed, who stated >> that she would argue against the motion “not on religious grounds, but >> as a woman”. >> >> “Whether Muslim or non-Muslim, woman or man, we want marriage to >> result in sustained happiness,” she said, adding “but freedom must be >> embedded with controls to prevent abuse”. >> >> She argued that young men and women are not experienced enough to make >> a wise decision, claiming that they are distracted by physical >> attraction, and proposed instead that it is the concerned parties’ >> families who can make the “right decision” in the long term. >> >> “We need to think of future consequences, such as children, and how >> their lives will be affected,” she argued, claiming that any marriage >> needs to be a “win-win situation” for everyone involved. >> >> However, it soon became clear that Al-Rayed’s approach upset a number >> of audience members, who were keen to point out that they were capable >> of making their own decisions and bearing the responsibility attached. >> On a number of occasions she was accused of “belittling” or >> patronising the young women in the audience, which cannot have done >> her cause any good when it came to voting. >> >> And so it was the side for the motion who emerged successful, mainly >> because of Nomani’s passionate defence of human rights, and her >> appeals for >> the audience to oppose the conservative and literal interpretation of >> the Qu’ran put forward by her opposition – especially Qadhi. >> >> Once again, the audience excelled themselves, signing off five years >> of free speech in the country by raising intelligent and focussed >> questions throughout, but more importantly, by having their say on an >> issue that will affect many of their lives in the future. >> > ------------------------------------ ========================================== MILIS MAJELIS MUDA MUSLIM BANDUNG (M3B) Milis tempat cerita, curhat atau ngegosip mengenai masalah anak muda dan Islam. Sekretariat : Jl Hegarmanah no 10 Bandung 40141 Telp : (022)2036730, 2032494 Fax : (022) 2034294 Kirim posting mailto:majelismuda@yahoogroups.com Berhenti: mailto:majelismuda-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.comyahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/majelismuda/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/majelismuda/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:majelismuda-dig...@yahoogroups.com mailto:majelismuda-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: majelismuda-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
