Do not hide the woman in Islam, they were the first believers.

[Rival]

Thank you for the info

Welcome.

 

[ChristineM]

Really? If anything, an unmarried women would seem to have more trouble, it would seem. Celibacy, for religious reasons at least, is not allowed in Islam. She would probably be viewed with more suspicion of sexual immorality, as well.

When I say unmarried i mean elder unmarried.

 

[ChristineM]

I understand your view on this, But if i can ask, do you not think it is more a male issue that a islam religious issue? That the problem is more within the culture that has risen over many years?

It is a male dominated religion.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

When I say unmarried i mean elder unmarried.

I would guess they are more likely living in poverty.

 

[Kooky]

How many men have to wear the veil/hijab/niqab/etc ?

You seem to have intended this to be a rhetorical question, but I believe in Tuareg culture, which is predominantly Muslim, it is traditional for men to cover their faces and heads both, while women typically only cover their hair. There live about 3 million Tuareg in total, and exact demographic data is hard to come by, so probably around 1-1.5 millions?

Tuareg people - Wikipedia

 

[ChristineM]

I would guess they are more likely living in poverty.

Probably but there are a few who break the glass ceiling

 

[Shakeel]

Wow, what a revolution in women's rights!

Your revolution in women's rights is to prevent them from covering themselves.

 

[Shakeel]

I contend that nobody needs to obey anybody at all. If a woman feels like obeying her partner, or vice versa, then that should be the result of their independent desire and their own free will.

And if a person, woman, man, intergender or other, is not feeling like covering themselves, then nobody has the right to make them - just as the reverse is true, in that if a person desires to cover themselves, nobody has the right to keep them from veiling themselves.

Which doesn't relate to Islam at all.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Your revolution in women's rights is to prevent them from covering themselves.

Nah, women can wear what they please. I prefer not to see people dressing in a wide variety of ways (like street trash with their pants around their knees, hoochies, bums, unkempt, etc.) but you can't control what people wear, so you just get on with your life. This is America.

 

[ecco]

Despite misconceptions, the status of women in Islam is that of a beloved equal.

Uh-huh...

But why were women not allowed to drive? The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia follows a particularly strict brand of Islamic law known as 'Wahhabism'. It says that men and women should be kept separate and what women should wear veils to cover themselves.
​

Beloved equal? Really?

 

[sun rise]

First, if we consider the historical context when the Quran was written. Wikipedia points out:
Arabs used to bury their female daughters alive in sand. After revelation to Muhammad, burial of female daughters was stopped.[3]

Killing of women and children is strictly forbidden during Jihad.[4]

During the Pre-Islamic Era, women did not have the right to divorce and were not guaranteed any share of inheritance. After the advent of Islam muslim women got both the rights[3] before western women, who got their rights in 19th Century.[5]

Then I found the discussion here to be illuminating: An-Nisa, 34 - Wikipedia because of the different ways that the word 'strike' can be translated into English.

Often people apply ahadith to illuminate the meaning and use how Muhammad treated his wives as a guide.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Uh-huh...

But why were women not allowed to drive? The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia follows a particularly strict brand of Islamic law known as 'Wahhabism'. It says that men and women should be kept separate and what women should wear veils to cover themselves.
​

Beloved equal? Really?

You must ask the human in Saudi Arabia about it, they have extreme strict rules, and honestly it seem viered that woman should not be allowed to drive a car.

 

[Shakeel]

Nah, women can wear what they please. I prefer not to see people dressing in a wide variety of ways (like street trash with their pants around their knees, hoochies, bums, unkempt, etc.) but you can't control what people wear, so you just get on with your life. This is America.

Maybe you haven't heard of restrictions on how much a Muslim can cover.. It's a thing though and definitely plenty of people in America would make it a law immediately if they could.

 

[Shakeel]

Uh-huh...

But why were women not allowed to drive? The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia follows a particularly strict brand of Islamic law known as 'Wahhabism'. It says that men and women should be kept separate and what women should wear veils to cover themselves.
​

Beloved equal? Really?

There is no wahabbism and both rules are from Islam; from the Quran and the sunnah.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Maybe you haven't heard of restrictions on how much a Muslim can cover.. It's a thing though and definitely plenty of people in America would make it a law immediately if they could.

No, they can't make such a law in the US as it would be a First Amendment violation. We're very into our civil liberties here. Many of us would like the "refugees" from places like Somalia who are flooding into the Midwest and taking over whole areas of cities, to go, however. They treat women quite disturbingly.

 

[ecco]

It sound not nice, i agree on that. But does it actually mean strike with hand or a stick. or does the word strike means something else?

Maybe the word used in Arabic does not mean strike? That i must look in to.

Honestly i am not sure it means strike with hand, i think this strike is different. more like a punishment but not with voilance (my understanding so it might be wrong)

It's not just a matter of translation, it's a matter of interpretation.

Understanding a Difficult Verse, Qur'an 4:34 | Muslim Sexual Ethics | The Feminist Sexual Ethics Project | Brandeis University

There is a sharp divide between traditional interpretations of this verse, which stress female obedience and male authority, and contemporary interpretations, which emphasize the financial component of men’s marital duties and the limits on a husband’s power over his wife. Many Muslims have gravitated toward the latter views, as they are more in keeping not only with modern sensibilities in general but also the Qur’anic portrayal of women in other verses as full human beings and partners in the relationship of marriage. Yet, however convincing one finds the progressive arguments that a man’s striking his wife is not permitted by Q. 4:34, it is impossible to remove all difference or hierarchy from this verse without doing violence to the Qur’anic text itself.
​

Perhaps Allah/Muhammed intentionally used words that could be interpreted in many ways so as to placate many different kinds of men.

Those who just want to chastise their wives can do so and argue that is what the Koran intended.
Those who want to physically hit their wives can do so and argue that is what the Koran intended.


In any case...

admonish them, and abandon them in bed, and strike them. If they obey you, do not pursue a strategy against them. Indeed, God is Exalted, Great."
​

it's quite clear that men have the right to put down their women until the women obey. I doubt you can find a verse that gives women the same "equal" rights.

 

[Spirit of Light]

It's not just a matter of translation, it's a matter of interpretation.

Understanding a Difficult Verse, Qur'an 4:34 | Muslim Sexual Ethics | The Feminist Sexual Ethics Project | Brandeis University

There is a sharp divide between traditional interpretations of this verse, which stress female obedience and male authority, and contemporary interpretations, which emphasize the financial component of men’s marital duties and the limits on a husband’s power over his wife. Many Muslims have gravitated toward the latter views, as they are more in keeping not only with modern sensibilities in general but also the Qur’anic portrayal of women in other verses as full human beings and partners in the relationship of marriage. Yet, however convincing one finds the progressive arguments that a man’s striking his wife is not permitted by Q. 4:34, it is impossible to remove all difference or hierarchy from this verse without doing violence to the Qur’anic text itself.
​

Perhaps Allah/Muhammed intentionally used words that could be interpreted in many ways so as to placate many different kinds of men.

Those who just want to chastise their wives can do so and argue that is what the Koran intended.
Those who want to physically hit their wives can do so and argue that is what the Koran intended.


In any case...

admonish them, and abandon them in bed, and strike them. If they obey you, do not pursue a strategy against them. Indeed, God is Exalted, Great."
​

it's quite clear that men have the right to put down their women until the women obey. I doubt you can find a verse that gives women the same "equal" rights.

I do agree with the first part of your post. you have a point in that how a person intepretate the scripture will have something to say how he treat woman. A person who strictly read every word and only do as the exact words are written might be a bad person for a woman, i do see that one.

I believe(without direct evidence) that the Quran is more as a guide than a direct commandment of this is the only possible way to live as a good muslim. within Sufism we do study the quran, but we look out in to the world too, how to be as best we can in loving every human being, and with not harming others, this is different than example any sunni or shia muslims would see it.

 

[ecco]

The status of women in Islam is good. But one needs to understand, this doesn't mean it is identical to the westerners, whose status is not good.

Not good? Compared to Islam? Really? Let's just look at what you wrote...

Yes, women are respect and women need to obey their husbands. No, women shouldn't be abused and women cannot decide on divorce on their own. Yes, women can go outside and they have to cover themselves if they do. Yes, they can work, but not without their husband's permission.

You have made it clear that in Islam, women are subordinate to men.

In the west, the man has become the wife and the woman has become the husband and the divorce numbers keep soaring as the "equality" increases.

There are many reasons for divorce. One reason is a man cheating on his wife. Another is violence of men toward women if the man suspects that his woman cheated on him. Even many Christians believe that a woman should be subordinate to a man.

 

[sun rise]

I see the same kind of literalist arguments in Christianity with respect to the Bible.

The Abrahamic religions have been male dominated for a long time. Islam is no different than the others in that respect.

The Quran raised the status of women from what it had been in Arabia so for its time and place it was a step forward.

To me, it needs to be looked at with different eyes in the 21st century.

 

[Spirit of Light]

I see the same kind of literalist arguments in Christianity with respect to the Bible.

The Abrahamic religions have been male dominated for a long time. Islam is no different than the others in that respect.

The Quran raised the status of women from what it had been in Arabia so for its time and place it was a step forward.

To me, it needs to be looked at with different eyes in the 21st century.

I believe that even the teaching is many years old, it i timeless, so yes it should be possible to make it work today and not doing wrong according to the teaching. Of course this is only my understading and others may see it different, and that is ok