Answer A Few open to a kind reader on status of women (and girls) in Islam
Dear friend, Welcome
. I read carefully your answer. I do not think we are so far away As for ideas, at least not on every point.
You're right, for example, on women commodified, the carriers of ass I mentioned in my previous post (note linguistic thought that the spelling of words continues to emphasize the word
Job !)
fact, women are objectified and sadly reduced to a fraction of their own physical . I did notice that the first give opinions on this or that body part is something human, and on the other hand, wanted to be strictly against even a beauty contest
should irritate the eyes. Not deny that Muslim men also have their fees in order to judge a woman "piece by piece" even if it remains "the street" and has not yet arrived at a program that gives prominence to the thing. And I guess also some Muslim women to judge when the man "in pieces". (For example, the beloved and popular singer Amr Diab has not stooped and stortignaccolo, far from it - is due only to the beautiful voice of its success?). So from a purely physical side of the appreciation of the buttocks is not necessarily a sign of decadence, and, if it is a sign of decadence as a single body part is used as the sole yardstick of a person, this you still even in Islamic countries. In short, played down a bit '.
to topics deeper, which ignore the specific issue of the buttocks exhibited on television.
We talk about the status of women in Islam . You're right on unreliable yardstick that is used for assessment of the freedom of women and myopic carelessness which might be incurred in doing so.
The woman is no longer free as can be discovered. Nor is achieved as can go, or in fact rises, the steps of the hierarchy of a company or a state. I am the son of a housewife who gave up working to better follow up my education and has a rich spiritual life, much more, I think, of some minister or some manager - from a similar flaw of reasoning I feel free.
and Westerners forget the surface. But you too are floating: if you were in a consistent relativist ("Muslim women have a meter, the Western another, and each is happy with what he ") should not even ask if there are so many in prominent places in the Western policy not name any women in positions of success.
If you are consistent with the reasoning of the" two meters "questions that are irrelevant. Anyway, the answer is, women in politics in the Arab world there are, yes, I know at least of those in Egypt, but before they see a presidential (such as Thatcher, as the Merkel) of a State can expect to come back to the Prophet.
specification, however, one thing
if there was an absolute yardstick ,
and based on what emerged that women in Medio Oriente sono “meno realizzate”, ebbene questo non giustificherebbe alcuna aggressione da parte dall’Occidente . Lo dico per limitare il discorso alla mera discussione sulla condizione della donna perché è chiaro che molti compiono una serie di passaggi argomentativi e ideologici del tipo “la donna nella società islamica è inferiore”
ergo “la società islamica in toto è inferiore”
ergo “si può / si deve attaccare la società islamica con la violenza o con altri mezzi”. Non sono così rozzo.
Hai anche ragione sulla
paradossale modernità del Corano a cui nessuno pensa, di primo acchito. The Koran was a big improvement, an excellent innovation, from a legal standpoint. For example he rails against the use horrible murder of female babies, in force in the time before the Prophet, that the revelations erased. The company's pre-Islamic women do not fare well at all (but still - the first wife of the Prophet, Khadija, was a rich merchant, a widow. This is another point that may reflect).
But is this that I think the strongest argument, and I want us to be focused on this. You talk too of respect for women.
If you admit that women can be respected (whatever is meant by respect), also admit that there are also cases in cui la donna può NON essere rispettata E questo può purtroppo accadere anche nell’ambito famigliare - pure il Corano menziona l’eventualità di maltrattamenti da parte dal marito (vedi IV,128).
Ebbene, in questo caso si misura la libertà e la tutela della donna (quindi il rispetto stesso!) dalla facilità che la donna ha di liberarsi del non rispetto di cui potrebbe trovarsi ad essere vittima. E qui si cade; perché le leggi islamiche nel divorzio favoriscono inesorabilmente il marito. Questo non è nemmeno uno di quei punti ambigui, moderabili (si sa che il Corano ha infatti versetti che ne abrogano o almeno mitigano altri), ma è scritto, e salmodiato, chiaro e tondo.
Il divorzio islamico, stando alle parole del Corano che ha pure una sura (la LXV) che ne prende il nome, è, sì, meno brutale di quanto si pensi ; c’è un periodo di riflessione che l’uomo deve rispettare perché potrebbe voler ritornare su suoi passi, poi la donna deve ricevere il necessario per la sussistenza, e infine si parla di trattare la ripudiata con
gentilezza -il che fu un enorme miglioramento rispetto alla società venuta prima del Profeta.
Ma si parla di ripudio solo come un atto che può provenire dal maschio. Questo ha conseguenze non trascurabili. Se un uomo maltratta la moglie questa non può liberarsene facilmente, repudiation must obtain the consent of him ...! Take then a social mechanism flawed. Unlikely that the man agrees, as the divorce is at least a nuisance, it is also not socially honorable, prompting gossips and rumors (like us). If instead of giving consent, you invent some responsibility that falls on women. Politics of the lesser evil: if social disapproval must be at least that
is seen as the wife who was wrong. And if that is the fault of the wife, or that a bad
wife, his legal position further expires. Just as the people's opinion about her, which is also influential with regard to
the chances that went to remarry, is not a minor issue: after you've been the victim of a "lack of respect", as you can get out heads held high? How can rifarti if you are a divorcee?
There is a one-way, an imbalance in the Islamic divorce in marriage but in general, which has never considered carefully. Women praising Islam, belonging, and underestimate this point, or are living according to Islamic laws Western (because translated, because immigrants) or living in Islamic law but selfishly and think naively that it is irrelevant because both their husband could never give them reason to want divorce: in any case a form of selfishness and shortsightedness. Note that the imbalance that exists in marriage is also reflected in its beginning, since it is not the woman he chooses. And this is a point not to be overlooked.
then tell me who you roll with laughter reading that I think that an imam "nuisance", as if it were my innocence ... The imam (another word that emphasizes word! You should do a study of cultural anthropology, this ) imams, I said, this business, "you have to behave as a" deal indeed. Not necessarily good. If you want to use then unfortunately the bad hard for anyone to stop them. You can not deny their very strong social role and not always positive.
return to the issue of women in relation to this last point in the Arab world if there were measures that have been carried out to protect more and more women regarding divorce, are certainly not been carried out by the imam. The woman, in society which they control, and respect (at least according to criteria intra-Islamic), however, "men are a step higher" God's words through the mouth of Muhammad (Sura II, 228). If it is argued on this basis it is difficult then you should consider the status of women as something which can be modified.
and real estate is not mai un valore positivo. Rispetto vuol dire non solo
garantire una condizione ma anche problematizzarla, metterla in discussione,
sapersi chiedere se va bene così o se per caso non si può fare qualcosa di più - però se si è convinti che la condizione è quella perfetta, in quanto stabilita da Dio, non vi si pone mai mente in modo flessibile. La si dà per scontata. Dare per scontato qualcosa non vuol dire prenderlo sul serio.
Un'altra riflessione, sempre in questa vena. Parliamo di chi vive non con addosso il semplice velo, ma
completamente coperta . Una donna celata da un
niqab è sì tutelata da certe osservazioni pesanti o dal condizionamento esteriore e superficiali da parte della moda. Non corre il rischio di essere come quelle tristi ragazzotte di Salsomaggiore. Ma è anche una donna di cui non puoi vedere se piange, o se è pallida perché sta male, è un essere a cui tu (uomo o donna) non puoi offrire il tuo aiuto - perché non ti accorgi facilmente che ne necessita!
Vi rendete conto della distorsione percettiva e quindi delle idee, della sensibilità , che è indotta dalla pratica di coprire le donne dalla testa ai piedi? Come si fa relazionarsi alla donna con consapevolezza se le "donne" sono innanzitutto "quelle di casa mia" e per il resto sono "quell'insieme indistinto di esseri coperti di stoffa che vedi fuori"? Which have a face only within the walls of the house, you think so "if they have problems they will think their fathers or husbands?. I find that full coverage is a double edged sword, protecting, yes, it can be argued with some effectiveness, but also leaves terribly alone, and leads to being ignored by others. This meant when he spoke of "negative identity" because of
burqa or niqab
. I do not think an argument can be easily settled. Or, again, it is assumed that a woman will not stand evil, will never have a hardship, and that if everything has to be solved and can be solved in the family? Or they will say "Well, if una donna ha bisogno di aiuto te lo chiede?". Miseri, egoistici ragionamenti...
Un altro paio di notazioni: se si dice che la donna coprendosi, è protetta e rispettata, questo significa anche che si ha una concezione non lusinghiera del maschio, come se potenzialmente la visione di qualunque porzione di pelle femminile scoperta facesse di lui un bruto, come se l'irrispetto fosse una tendenza irrefrenabile il cui scatenarsi è direttamente proporzionale alla visibilità del corpo femminile. Ben misera visione allora! Oppure la donna è coperta perché sia vista solo da uno, il marito? Quindi nel matrimonio la donna è
cosa del marito?
Si noti che sto parlando della copertura totale, which, however, is not uniquely prescribed by the Koran , which orders the use of cloaks
(
jilbaab - XXXIII, 59), and cover the "beautiful pieces" (XXIV, 31). So then a fundamentalist tradition, to be sure, (and, I suspect, even for the socially caged woman), has seen fit to cover all
. Instead, I believe that the veil
(and sober clothing: I'm not at all supporting a
put from Salsomaggiore!)
is acceptable, provided that take is the result of genuine choice , and tell you more, a position that perhaps scontenterà some, even if I have strong objections as compared to religion, I also accept it pragmatically
in schools. We finally an example of inaction harmful, returning on '
infibulation (also corrects word word ...) which you are silent, perhaps because you are uninformed. (And if you are not, I wish you were expressing in this regard). And 'a practice that has no basis in the Koran
(and which may also be adopted by the Christians of those latitudes, which is why the title would have been better to speak of Arab society in general).
in the practice of stitching or female genital mutilation, performed on girls (and therefore is imposed, because per le bambine non si può parlare di scelta consapevole). Non c’è paragone con la circoncisione (anch’essa peraltro discutibile)
in quanto è molto più dolorosa e nociva alla salute - se non vogliamo parlare della vita sessuale anche solo dal punto di vista della meccanica dell'atto riproduttivo e non del piacere . Essa è almeno in alcuni Stati formalmente proibita. La conseguenza è che la si pratica negli ospedali sottobanco, o la effettuano delle praticone di villaggio prive della benché minima nozione di anatomia e di profilassi - ammesso e non concesso che una mutilazione genitale in ambiente antisettico e in anestesia sia accettabile. Questa pratica, lo ripeto, non ha base coranica ma solo una ambiguous justification in tradition. Well, I bet that the initiatives that led to the formal prohibition ineffective, again!) Of this practice have not been carried out mainly by the imams, who also should not just keep the word of God but also distinguish it from spurious additions;
and all this if we really want to put it in terms of religion without considering the suffering of the maimed, which are obviously the most important thing .
And I suspect also that the principle of opposition to this practice, although it is not widespread among the imams. The argument is far from exhausted, but for now here hoping to term enough to have clarified my position and have provided some food for thought in more.
Thanks again for having given me this opportunity and soon, to your blog.