In the post 9/11 scenario, the developed world has come to have a closer look at Islam. The curiosity has been, in media and the general public, more than ever before. But it certainly amazes one that such attention has only been able to “detect” some “flaws” in the societies that have existed for thousands of years. With this have come the continuous efforts to change the social norms and customs and also, to wrongly relate them to the religion. Among many of the sympathies that the West has been trying to bestow upon Muslims, the most vocal is women’s liberation. The male-dominated society in Muslim countries is under strict criticism, some of which relates to such “victims” of “oppression” who do not even welcome such criticism. After Afghan “liberation” from the Taliban regime, for an instance, the majority of women still prefer to clad themselves in Burqa on their free will. The idea of liberation goes back to the movement of feminism in the West that demanded equality of rights, non-dependence on men, legalized abortion, and an end to human sacrifice. What has advanced is that now this “freedom” is being imposed on other societies that are alien to the liberal secular environment. There is no denying the fact that Muslim societies have male dominance and non-equality of rights. But is it something peculiar about these societies or Islam? The answer, after acknowledging the history of these regions and also after observing the state of women in Western secular societies, is certainly not that simple. This is most important to realize that the instinct of men to impose their superiority is natural and does not relate to any particular region, religion, and society. Non-equality of rights exists, but feminism is not the solution, for in its simplest form feminism is even destructive for the status of women and the idea is contrary to the natural human values of sacrifice, love, and family. The roles of man and woman as defined by nature are decisive in the social structure.
The convincing idea is strengthened by Yvonne Ridley. In “How I came to Love veil”, she says: “Violent men don’t come from any particular religious or cultural category; one in three women around the world has been beaten, coerced into sex or otherwise abused in her lifetime, according to the hotline survey. This is a global problem that transcends religion, wealth, class, race, and culture.” The urge to “liberate” the women in the East has come primarily from western feminists, who include males and females alike among the advocates of the idea. What they present as an ideal is a so-called liberal and secular society that the West has been able to develop over the years. But the figures prove the contrary. This is a little task to prove with evidence that men in the so-called developed liberal society are more violent and disrespectful to women than their “third world” counterparts. There have been numerous surveys according to which women in civilized societies experience serious assaults, in form of abuse, rape, and violence. Women are killed by their husbands and partners every day in liberal societies (Ridley). The statistics at the US department of justice give scores of data to confirm these statements. A report of the early nineties showed that 683,000 women were raped in the United States every year. One can only expect this rate to have increased over the years since the West seems to have gone deeper into the idea of radical feminism that has only destroyed its family structure and made sexualized.
One fails to understand what form of liberation has been awarded to western women. In the name of liberation, western feminism has only tended to make females sexual commodities. Women are half-dressed in name of integration and social relations but less paid for equal work. Maryam Jameela also confirms the idea in her article “The feminist movement and the Muslim Woman”. She says, “What is the end result of the radical feminist movement? What kind of society does Women’s Liberation seek to obtain? Thus women for men are alternatively angles and slaves to be worshipped one minute and spurned and exploited the next but seldom treated as equals.” Both Jameela and Ridley agree on the fact that the western male is no better than the eastern counterpart.
Feminism had come as a reaction to all the injustice that women faced prior to development in the West. As late as 1960, women were not to be admitted to Oxford. Females of the society, which already had got rid of religion and natural values from affairs of the state, could only come up with the system that ensured non-dependence on men. Dependence is considered as contrary to the ego of the woman in the idea of feminism. Family and its roles are altogether denied and rejected by feminists. But the western version of women’s liberation is not a solution, as Maryam Jameela says: “Feminism is an unnatural, artificial and abnormal product of contemporary social disintegration, which in turn is an inevitable result of the rejection of all transcendental, absolute moral and spiritual values.” A glimpse of the western take on women’s liberation is also to be found in Ridley’s experience as she started to wear the headscarf. The western idea of equality is limited to the physical appearance, social integration, and free life for women void of any boundaries and values. One who is not an advocate of such feminist traits is immediately an alien who needs liberation in the view of feminists.
Decided that feminism is not the solution, then where is the way? Maryam Jameela takes a strong stance that the role of the family as defined by Shariah is the ultimate solution (Jameela). Although the feminism that has crept into Muslim societies lately advocates for no or least dependence on males and a disregard for family, what the western imposers of feminism (and their eastern representatives)fail to understand is that the very foundation of eastern societies is based on the central role of the family. The male head of the family is responsible for earning and the whole family depends on him, as Ali Gomaa asserts: “Islam made it obligatory for men to support and care for women; this is one of the rights that women can demand of them. While women are permitted to remain at home, men are obliged to seek a means of sustenance for them.” This is important to note the words “permitted” and “obliged”. Women are permitted to remain at home, not obliged. What is the better place for her rests on her decision.
Western societies also had the phenomenon of the family that greatly benefited the individuals in many aspects. As Jameela has noted, medieval European society enjoyed the human values of love and sacrifice when the family was central to the social structure. But the modern western experience and brief experience of liberalism in the east also bear witness to the fact that a strong family structure collapses as soon as the woman rejects the idea of family and dependence on man. The idea is that the roles of man and woman are not competing; rather they are complementary to each other (Jameela 4). A woman has her real place in her family, and without family is like a fish without water. Western feminists, in their quest for equality with men, have strived to do all those things and duties that men can do. The result is a sense of deprivation and assault at the workplace, as well as a broken family structure.
The quest of western feminists for imposing feminist ideas on eastern societies is certainly not as simple as it may seem. There might be some other forces at work that initially brought down the social structure in the West and now are striving hard to do the same with eastern Muslim societies. These forces, rather intentionally, only observe earnestly all miseries inflicted upon women like forced marriages and having to stay at home, but they fail to observe all the repercussions that western youth is facing due to false liberalism. Drug use, rape, depression, and failed marriages are some very common traits still uncommon in the east. There has been considerable success in this respect. More and more Muslim women are accepting this idea of false equality and independence. Hijab and Niqab are being rejected as symbols that do not matter in social relations. The idea that women inside homes are oppressed until they come out to work is taken from the west as it is. What they think is that they are struggling against social norms that are redundant and primitive. But while doing so, what they are actually doing is rejecting the fourteen hundred-year-old definitions of women’s role and sanctity. What has resulted is a confused generation that is neither liberal nor Islamic. They increasingly try to dress, talk and act like western liberal females and while doing so fall on a middle ground that satisfies neither of the ideas of radical feminism and Shariah.
There is no denying the fact that Muslim men must reevaluate the role and honor of women in society and family, but at the same time, women who are victims of discrimination due to social norms intermingled with lack of education should look to find a perfect model of the family in Shariah rather than western feminism.
Bibliography
Ridley, Yvonne. “How I came to Love the Veil.” Washington Post 2006. Web.
Kamrava, Mehran, ed., The New Voices of Islam: Rethinking Politics and Modernity (New Voices) Published by I.B.Tauris, 2006.
Jameela, Maryam. The Feminist movement and the Muslim women. Web.
Gomaa, Ali. “Gender Equality in Islam.” Washington Post. 2007. Web.