Al-Risala (English), November 1989

Woman in Society

1989 11 November 13-22 Woman in Society (3723) In almost every inhabited corner of the globe, the societies of ancient times regarded the status of women as being inferior to that of man. “In Athens,” says the Encyclopaedia Britannica, “woman’s status had degenerated to that of slaves. Wives were secluded in their homes, had no education and few rights, and were considered by their husbands no better than chattels. …..In ancient Rome, a woman’s legal position was one of complete subordination, first to the power of her father or brother and later to that of her husband, who held paternal power over his wife. In the eyes of the law, women were regarded as imbeciles.”1

The reason for the ill-treatment of women in ancient times was the prevalence of superstition. There were, in fact, very few matters upon which irrational beliefs of one sort or another had not been adopted. Such perverted thinking became elevated to the status of religion and, as such, had pervasively baneful influence upon all human relations.

Speculation was another mode of thought which produced strange, and often pernicious results. Ridiculing the thought processes of the ancient Greeks, Bertrand Russell writes, “Aristotle maintained that women have fewer teeth than men; although he was twice married, it never occurred to him to verify this statement by examining his wives’ mouths.”2

Christianity did little to improve this situation, having given great importance, in the very first book of the Bible, to the erroneous belief that it had been Eve’s wrongdoing which had caused Adam’s ejection from the garden of Eden. Referring to women in general in this context, the Encyclopaedia Britannica says, “(According to Christianity) they were regarded as temptresses, responsible for the fall of Adam, and as second class human beings.”3 With such a myth ever-present in the collective consciousness of society, it is little wonder that women were allotted an inferior position in both religious and secular matters. In the first letter addressed to the Corinthians, St. Paul says, “For the man is not of the woman but the woman is of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.”4 In this, St. Paul is simply reaffirming what is laid down as gospel truth in the Old Testament Book of Genesis.

Women’s Status in Islam

In ancient times, thanks to the unreasoning and unreasonable approach fostered by superstition, speculation and other forms of irrational thinking, woman came to be considered inferior, one distressing result of which was that she was deprived, among many other things, of the rights to inherit property. She was entitled to no share even in family property. How great an incapacitating factor this was may be judged from the neglect and degrading treatment which women had to suffer for centuries. It was not until the advent of Islam, that, for the first time in the history of mankind, women were given their due legal rights over property. The famous historian, J.M. Roberts Writes:

Its coming was in many ways revolutionary. It kept women, for example, in an inferior position, but gave them legal rights over property not available to women in many European countries until the nineteenth century. Even the slave had rights and inside the community of the believers there were no castes nor inherited status. This revolution was rooted in a religion which – like that of the Jews – was not distinct from other sides of life, but embraced them all.5

The same point has been made about ancient India by a retired Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, Mr. Rajinder Sachar:

‘……. historically, Islam had been very liberal and progressive in granting property rights to women. It is a fact that there were no property rights given to Hindu women until 1956, when the Hindu Code Bill was passed, whereas Islam had granted these rights to Muslim women over 1400 years ago.’6

This is not, however, just a matter of anteriority. What is significant is that, in granting women equal status and their proper rights, Islam set up an important precedent which had as far-reaching an effect on the civilization of the times as western civilization has had on the world of today. If Islam was able to accomplish such a revolution in human affairs, it was because Islam did not remain just a philosophical creed but it had conquered most of the parts of the inhabited world of the times.

In the world of today, even those commentators who generously acknowledge the virtues of Islam, often repeat this phrase that Islam has conferred an inferior status upon women. But these two things that Islam gives woman a share in property and that Islam has degraded woman are contradictory. Because from ancient times till today, the question of inheritance has been the most important social issue. The issue of inheritance might well be considered the sole criterion of status in society Contrary to the custom of the time, the entitling of woman to have a share in property is a clear proof that Islam had no desire to degrade woman. Had this been so, the first demonstration of this desire would have been reflected in her being deprived of her share in property, which would have been considered quite correct and justifiable according to the traditions of the times.

It is interesting to see the reverse side of the coin as presented by a recent convert to Islam, namely, the English pop singer, Cat Stevens, now known as Yousuf Islam. Asked by a Jewish woman how he intended to deal with the problem of Islam’s ‘degradation’ of women, he said that he had not actually made a study of women’s status in Islam, but that for his own part, he had, since his conversion, asked his mother to come and stay with him and that he loved looking after her. His relations with his wife had also considerably improved.

In its assessment of the status of women, the western mind has made the same error as ancient man: it has formed opinions based on irrational beliefs. This accounts for latter-day distortions of thought in the advanced western countries on the balance of power between the sexes, and for the resultant grave distortion in the concept of women.

Woman in Modern Civilization

Where modern western man fell deeply into error was in his blind acceptance of the concept of the equality of the sexes without giving due consideration to what equality – in it best sense – ought to mean, or to what in practice it entails. According to modern thinking, according equal status to women meant bringing them out of their homes and standing them face to face with men in all facets of life without any regard for the practical and moral problems which might ensue. Islam, on the other hand, defines separate roles, and, therefore, separate spheres of work for men and women, since it is natural and realistic to do so. The other great error made by modern western thinkers was to assume that a role which was separate and different, and played out in other than traditionally masculine strongholds, was necessarily of trifling importance – in short, inferior. As such the west concluded (because of separate role) that Islam gives an inferior position to women. On the contrary, since it is being said (in theory) that women must be given place in every department of men, so they conclude that the west gives her superior position. So modern man imagines that his feminine counterpart has in actuality been accorded a superior position. But let us examine what, in fact, is the state of women’s affairs. In the societies of the west, which have attained a high level of material development, theory has not been put into practice, and men and women still live and work in their own very separate domains. The status of women is only marginally better than it was in ancient times, there still being mutually exclusive divisions into male and female spheres, with the corresponding attitude still very much in evidence. If this were not so, what need would there be for ‘women’s lib.’?

Fourteen hundred years ago, Islam launched a much-needed ‘women’s lib’ movement, whose purpose was to free women from artificial curbs, and to give them the position which any normal human being should have in society. (One instance, for example is to give them share in family property). This movement increased their status without any sacrifice of feminity or traditional values and without creating any perversion in society.

The fact that Islam launched its movement under the guidance of revelation, its exponents were in no doubt as to what limits should be set to societal change. The west, however, in its preoccupation with modernity, plunged headlong into experimentation with the old order of values, sweeping away traditional moral precepts and ‘restrictive’ conventions. All of this was done under the banners of ‘reason’, ‘empiricism’, ‘logic’ ‘liberalism’ and so on, but, in actual fact, the whole ‘liberation’ movement has been so swamped in a welter of emotion that what is supposed to be acceptable in terms of normal human standards is once again becoming obscured, and the problems created in society by morally rudderless individuals are becoming legion.

Unnatural Equality

Selected readings from the Quran were prepared in English by the English orientalist, Edward William Lane and were first published in London in book form in 1843. In his foreword, Lane wrote that “the fatal point in Islam was the degradation of woman.” Since then this remark has been regularly taken up as a stick with which to beat Islam. In fact, whenever Islamic affairs were mentioned, it became such a common observation, that not only the enemies of Islam, but also relatively just writers such as the historian, J .M. Roberts, who did justice to Islam in pointing out its virtues, mentioned it as if it were an established fact.

We have shown in detail, at another point in this book, that this allegation is entirely baseless. The facts are quite the reverse. Islam has, in actual fact, raised the status of woman. If the truth were told, woman’s degradation has come about at the hands of two major civilization, one ancient and polytheistic, the other modern and atheistic. The former has been culpable both in theory and in practice, while the latter has been so in practice, despite its theorizing to the contrary.

We must never lose sight of the fact that what governed the ethics and lifestyles of ancient polytheistic civilization were myths. Certain highly fanciful, but obviously baseless suppositions were believed in as truths, and all aspects of human existence were subordinated to them. For instance, ancient man regarded certain natural phenomena, such as the sun and the moon, with the awe of ignorance and venerated them as deities. Conversely, he supposed certain other phenomena to be inferior, therefore, undeserving of respect. It was into the latter category that women fell, possibly because menstruation and their inability to fight alongside their menfolk were interpreted in an adversely superstitious manner. Woman was regarded as the inferior sex and, therefore, deserving of degrading treatment by men.

Modern western civilization has hardly produced a better result in ostensibly exalting the status of women. It my have pronounced men and women equal in every respect and decreed that all work that can be done by a man can be done by a woman too, it may have encouraged women to come out of their homes and try to find a position equal to a man’s in every department of life (hence the slogan, Don’t make coffee, make policy.’); but, in practice, this concept of equality has done more to degrade her than any traditional view could have done.

The next chapter deals with this topic in detail.

What is the reason then for this state of affairs? The reason, to put it briefly, is the erroneous concept of sexual equality held in western countries. Even the equality that allegedly exists between men, which we tend to take for granted, needs careful examination. Let us suppose that equality truly exists between one man and another. We should then be able to take an Einstein, put him in the boxing ring with the world heavy weight champion, and expect him to last out at least for several rounds. We should also expect the boxer to be able to hold his own while presiding over international scientific conferences. This may seem laughable, but that is what absolute equality would mean. Obviously, there are degrees of equality and different varieties of equality, just as there are degrees and kinds of excellence. When we want an accurate picture of equality, we have to think in terms of status and not in terms of the workplace. Equality does not mean that the president should be interchangeable with the dustman. It means rather that every man should be looked upon with same respect and should be able to expect the same treatment, legally and morally.

The error into which the west has so lamentably fallen is its attempt to establish an unnatural equality of the workplace for men and women. The result is as might have been expected: the greatest inequality in human history has developed between men and women. If men and women are of two different sexes, it is because they were created to serve separate purposes. Place them then in their respective fields and they will be equally successful, although in different ways. But, place them in the same field, and neither the men nor the women will be able to make the best use of their respective creative faculties and general abilities. In such a situation, it is the women who will inevitably find themselves forced into inferior positions.

Inspired by false notions of equality, many girls have left home only to find that the independent life they hoped for had to be gained at the expense of their intrinsic feminity and a consequent loss of values. In extreme cases they found that the only way to survive was to become the play-things of men. In which case it was they themselves, led on by an erroneous belief, who brought about their own degradation. Where restraints would have saved them, liberty ruined them.

Women’s emancipation has led to a whole new set of social problems, the most persistent, and most deleterious in effect being that of pornography, which must be seen as one of the more baneful results of freedom having given way to license.

Pornography may be defined as the obscene representation of erotic behaviour in books, pictures, films, etc., with the intention of causing sexual excitement. “Pornographic matter has fallen under legislative prohibition in most countries in the world on at least one of the following assumptions:

Pornography will tend to deprave or corrupt the morals of youth, or of adults and youth;

Consumption of such matter is a cause of sexual crimes.”7

The demand for pornography has become so great that, in western countries, it has developed into a regular industry. In America itself this industry has an annual turnover of 8 billion dollars. The problems created by it were of such magnitude that an eleven-member U.S. commission headed by the Attorney General, Mr. Edwin Meese, had to be set up to look into them. Its final report stated that available evidence strongly supports the hypothesis that substantial exposure to most pornography “bears some causal relationship to the level of sexual violence, sexual coercion or unwanted sexual aggression.”

The commission also concluded that there were ties between the pornography industry and organized crime. “There seems strong evidence that significant portions of the pornography magazine industry, the keep-show industry and the pornography film industry are either directly operated or closely controlled by La Cosa Nostra members or very close associates.”

The introduction to the final report urges not only action against the pornography industry, but more severe penalties for violation of obscenity laws. Mr. Edwin Meese, in fact, has called for a law enforcement of unprecedented scope against this industry. It is significant of the changes in modern attitude that this commission’s conclusions, which were reached” unanimously and confidently” conflict with those of a 1970 presidential commission that found no link between pornography and violence or other anti-social behaviour. Even more significant is the statement made by the commission that most pornography in the United States would be classified as “degrading, particularly to women.”

The Consequences of Unrestricted Freedom

Women’s emergence from their homes, the free mixing of the sexes, and the pervasiveness of pornography add up to a situation in which sexual excitement is inevitable. The institution of marriage having proved inadequate for the satisfaction of such artificially stimulated and now unbounded sexual urges, free sexual relations have gradually become the order of the day, and in the modern west, there seems to be no limit to the occasions on which sexual liberties may be indulged in. By representing free relations between men and women being as harmless as shaking hands with one’s friend, books, films, plays, etc., have played a major role in encouraging the acceptance of such behaviour as the norm.

The marriage bond, as a result, has come to be viewed as burden-some, superfluous and outdated. So many young men and women have started to live together without being married that the term “unmarried couple” has now come to be considered just as lawful a term as “married couple.”

Where the divine Shariah has established a balance between men and women such as renders them complements to each other, women’s lib claims that they are duplicates of each other – almost like clones. This ill judged concept has become tremendously popular in recent years, upsetting the balance, which had existed for hundreds of years between men and women. The results, however, have been no gain to humanity, and so many have been harmed by it, psychologically and otherwise, that it is difficult to see why there is not an immediate return to the status quoante.

The first and most obvious result of women’s new-found economic independence has been the higher incidence of divorce. Scientific research has proved that women are more emotional than men, and, as such, can take hasty, ill-considered decisions. Before the industrial revolution having no permanent, independent economic footing acted as a check to their emotionalism. When, for example, they felt aggrieved at what they considered the negative aspects of married life, the question of how and where they would live if they opted for divorce inevitably acted as a deterrent. But such fears have been swept away in modern times. On this point the Encyclopaedia Britannica says:

Industrialization has made it easier for women to support themselves, whether they are single, married, divorcees, or widowed. In this connection, it is interesting to note that the Great Depression of the 1930s stopped the rise in the number of divorces in the United States for a time.8

In some countries the divorce rate is as high as the marriage rate. Modern times have seen women coming out of their homes to enter every department of life. But they have not in actual fact benefited by theoretically being accorded equal status with men. Indeed, many insoluble problems have ensued, one of them being illicit sexual relationships, for the free mixing of men and women can seldom culminate in any other way.

A sexual relationship which is formed outside the fold of marriage seems initially to be a simple matter, but when a child is born in such a situation, it becomes evident – generally too late – that it is not such a simple matter, and that that normally welcome event – the birth of a child – can have the gravest of consequences both for the child and the parents. It is a sad fact that large numbers of illegitimate children are born in the west, despite contraceptive devices being in general use. An official report in 1985 revealed that nearly one in five children born in Britain was illegitimate and that nearly one in three had been conceived by unmarried parents. Such illegitimate children frequently begun their lives in ignorance of who their fathers and mothers are. They are looked after an official institutions and then enter society more in the manner of animals than of human beings.

In western countries, where the marriage bond has weakened to a very great extent, and even quite trifling differences can result in separation, divorce has become common, and the resultant broken homes have had the same disastrous effects on children as illegitimacy. It is little wonder that children, who are deprived of the normal tender loving care of a united family, degenerate into animal-like creatures and frequently develop criminal tendencies. One glaring example is Charles Sobhraj, the internationally notorious criminal. Sobhraj’s Indian father and European mother did marry, but separated soon after his birth so that he never knew what it was to live in a united home. He was brought up independently without receiving any proper education, and it is not, therefore, surprising that he gradually developed criminal tendencies. After a life of the most horrifying crime, he is now serving out a lengthy sentence in an Indian jail.

The baffling subject of juvenile delinquency has been studied exhaustively–a number of conclusions having been arrived at as to the cause. The Encyclopaedia Britannica9 presents an analysis which depicts the child delinquent as a nervous, negative creature suffering from psychological abnormalities, which can be traced to their having been deprived of their parents, and which sooner or later manifest themselves in criminal activity. In one report of the Time it is revealed that in America each year about 300 children either kill their father or mother.1O

Should not this give pause to the headlong rush into women’s emancipation and all the social instability which ensues.

Notes:

1. Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1984, vol. 19, p. 909.

2. Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society, 1976, p. 17.

3. Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1984, vol. 19, p. 909.

4. Corinthians, 11:9.

5. J.M. Roberts, The Pelican History of the World, New York, 1984, p. 334.

6. The Statesman, New Delhi, April 26, 1986.

7. Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1984, vol. 8, p. 127.

8. Ibid., vol. 7, p. 163.

9. Ibid., vol. 5, p. 273.

10. Time, October 19, 1987, p. 60.