Shattering Illusions: Western Conceptions
of Muslim Women
By Saimah Ashraf
A 1997-98 Stanford Boothe Prize for Excellence in Writing winner
"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 not only to
cover their hair, but also their faces and hands, 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.
Back to Content
|