Cruel Parents - Bad Names

[DanaC]

lol Sundae.

I have no issue with Muslims outside of their hatred of women (which is not exclusive of just Muslims),written right inside of the Koran, which I read.

Hatred of women is not written into the Koran. A patriarchal attitude to women is not the same as hatred. The Koran was written at a time when that perception of women was the norm and indeed the Koran was fairly forward looking on the subject compared to contemporary thinking. Even passages which to a modern reader seem woefully misogynistic can also be read as a softening of a much harsher, prior conception of womanhood. There is an oft-quoted passage which tells husbands they may chastise their wives with a stick as thick as their thumb. What is less often noted is the exhortation to try other methods first. The passage tells men not to immediately resort to violence with their wives. It places physical limits on that violence (in a similar way to the way laws on chastising children still do in many countries) such as limiting the size of the stick and prohibiting its use on certain parts of the body.

In sixteenth-century England, there was a popular rhyme: A woman, an asse, and a walnut tree, Bring the more fruit the more beaten they bee.

The Koran is of its time. As indeed is the bible. We cannot look at the eras in which they were written and make a blanket statement that women were hated in that time. Even the men who wrote these books should not be dismissed simply as misogynists, though I am sure some of them might have been. They reflected their times. They reflected custom and practices. In many cases they softened earlier customs: think about the attitude in both the Koran and the Bible towards forgiveness for the repentant believer; think about the attitude to the poor in the Bible, to the socially despised in the Koran; to theft when it is borne of starvation and need, the protections against moneylending; the right of a woman to seek a divorce if her husband does not satisfy her needs.


The patriarchal views of the Koran and the Bible both, are dangerous, in my opinion. Far from softening earlier customs, they are now being used by some men (and some women) to revert to an earlier, more patriarchal, harsher, less forgiving and less tolerant attitude towards women (amongst other things). I find it very worrying and it saddens me greatly. But the Koran was not written as a misogynistic tract.

[classicman]

Dana, Is the muslim attitude towards women one where they are trying to level the field and "give them", for lack of a better term, equality or are women still viewed as subservient?
If so, that alone is enough of a reason to me.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by DanaC

snip~
There is an oft-quoted passage which tells husbands they may chastise their wives with a stick as thick as their thumb. ~snip

Is that where the "rule of thumb" came from? I've heard a lot of different stories about the source of that, but they were conflicting.

[Sundae]

Originally Posted by classicman

Dana, Is the muslim attitude towards women one where they are trying to level the field and "give them", for lack of a better term, equality or are women still viewed as subservient?
If so, that alone is enough of a reason to me.

Depending on how fundamentalist you are, the Bible teaches that women are inferior to men too. St Paul specifically.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Not inferior, just lower status.

[Cicero]

lol!
Here's what they think. (the women in question)
http://www.qantara.de/webcom/show_ar...7/_nr-3/i.html


Anyway....

When people start throwing around the term "obedience" (to their husband) it gives me the creeps. Outside of the beatings.


Back on point, I don't think she wants to name her kid a Muslim name for a variety of reasons. And like I said before, I don't think it's a good idea, and not lucky for as person living inside the United States at all. Clod was right. You got this idea that the name was Aisha. I have no idea how you got that, and I will reiterate that I don't want to mention the real name. (for my privacy as well as hers) mmm'k?

I just like how sure of yourselves some of you sound right now. Good luck with that.

And maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it is the size of the stick that counts.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Thanks for the clarification. I had gone back several times to find when Aisha was given as the girls name, unsuccessfully. Thought I was losing it.

[Sundae]

I used Aisha as an example of a Muslim name.
It is a name acceptable to Muslims that is in wider useage.

So is your friend going to change her child's name?

[DanaC]

Anyway....

When people start throwing around the term "obedience" (to their husband) it gives me the creeps. Outside of the beatings

Not remotely unique to muslim cultures.

I just like how sure of yourselves some of you sound right now. Good luck with that.

And maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it is the size of the stick that counts.

As in the size of the stick up your arse currently? :P Nobody sounds so sure to me. As far as I can tell people are throwing out thoughts and ideas and responses as in any other discussion.

And....at the risk of repetition: the stuff about the stick in the Koran, was there to illustrate how context is important to any understanding of an ancient text. In late-antiquity and early medieval cultures, the idea of setting limits to a man's rights over his wife was a bold one and one with which the mosem world led the way a millenia ago. You cannot point to a text written over a thousand years ago and expect it to conform to our modern conception of woman.

Like any of the great religions, there are those who read that book and interpret in ways you and I would no doubt approve of and others who read it and attempt to apply ideas that are a thousand years out of date. The Koran is no more guilty of misogyny than is the Bible. The Anglican Church is still tearing itself apart in my country over the horror of women bishops.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Like any of the great religions, there are those who read that book and interpret in ways you and I would no doubt approve of and others who read it and attempt to apply ideas that are a thousand years out of date. The Koran is no more guilty of misogyny than is the Bible. The Anglican Church is still tearing itself apart in my country over the horror of women bishops.

The Anglicans are having the argument, however. My church (RC) isn't having the argument in any real way and won't ,remarkably, last as more than a shadow of itself after a 2K year run. A lot goes into whether religions are flexible enough to adjust to modern times, without losing their values. The Catholic Church being a top down organization run by celibate males won't adjust, despite the pragmatism of the adherrents.

Islam, organizationally, is a whole other ball of wax. Personality cults can develop around any suitibly powerful or charasmatic leader. When you have illiterates enforcing Sharia, as in Afghanistan, there will be no progress. The question becomes, which adherrents of Islam are exposed to modern thought and what is their reaction to it? Who are the muslim migrants? Does Western Civilization have the vitality to absorb them? Does right wing conservatism, which seeks to defend the West, reflect Western values? Shit... always more questions than answers.

[DanaC]

I may already have mentioned this somewhere, but Ch4 did a really interesting documentary recently, about the Qur'an. I think it's actually called Qur'an.

A really fascinating part of the documentary looked at what sharia actually is and the various potential interpretations of the law. It showed it in practice in a modern state setting (I can't remember which country), where private and domestic arrangements are governed through the sharia courts. So, we saw a sharia court making decisions on child maintenance, and whether or not a particular woman could divorce her husband (he'd withheld the fact he was infertile from her until after the marriage).

What was so interesting about this, was how ordinary it all was. The reception/office and waiting areas were busy with people going about very ordinary business, much like a magistrates court over here.

The way the Koran has been interpreted by some is vastly different in tone to the way it is interpreted by others. One interpretation calls for violent and merciless punishment for pretty much everything a human being can do 'wrong';, the other also keeps in mind the caveats that the Koran puts to each of those, that if the transgressor is truly repentant they should be forgiven.

Really, really interesting programme. I don't have access to youtube to see if its on there.

[Cicero]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Not remotely unique to muslim cultures.

I already said that many posts ago when I first mentioned it.


Here:

Originally Posted by Cicero

(which is not exclusive of just Muslims).

As for what is up my butt...
Well..that's not a stick.:p

Why do I seem snitty?

People shouldn't jump to conclusions and start screaming racist because they have an uninformed opinion, and have jumped to a ridiculous conclusion with dire consequences. I get all bent out of shape over that. I'm not perfect but I am no racist. I never have been and never will be. That reminds me of the time someone from the NAACP came by our office at the time, to mention they were going to tell the media my boss was a racist if they didn't get what they wanted. (my boss was orthodox jewish) Too irksome and silly.