|To-do list for Islamic feminism:|
Expand Section on MPL/Sharia
The section on MPL/Sharia needs fleshing out - a break down of the main issues in Sharia/Personal Status Law that Islamic Feminists are campaigning around would be good eg.
List of Notable personalities in the IF movement - it's very messy and probably needs some accompanying explanation for why these people are included
Hello, we are students at Colgate University. We are editing this article as part of our class, Women in Islam. Our names are Mick Moran, Caroline Potolichio, and Maddy Tennis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtennis (talk • contribs) 16:02, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
- 1 Women in Islamic Golden Age?
- 2 Totally disputed
- 3 Shariah section
- 4 To Do List to improve article?
- 5 New lead definition?
- 6 Re-add queer
- 7 Strange edit buttons
- 8 MPL
- 9 Re-add section on sexuality
- 10 Where does non-Qu'ranic feminism by Muslim women fit?
- 11 Islamic vs Muslim
- 12 Male/Female Allah
- 13 Islamic Feminism Symbol
- 14 Qassim Amin was NOT Feminist
- 15 uhmmm divorce is not necessarily liberation
- 16 the term 'western world'
- 17 source
- 18 source
- 19 History
Women in Islamic Golden Age?
I'm a bit confused, here. Why is Nana Asma'u being discussed in the section on feminism during the Islamic Golden Age? Nana Asma'u wasn't born until 1793, and the Golden Age of Islam is commonly considered over when the Mongol Horde marches into Bagdhad in 1258. In fact, the sections on education, civil / military work and Marriage rights seem out of place here, as they jump around in timeline, refusing to commit themselves, pretending to fill in the void that exists between 1258 and the Nineteeth Century. Are there not enough Islamic Feminists between these two time periods to warrant its own section? Jmgariepy (talk) 08:09, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
I added this tag because Qasim Amin was from turn of the century (1900) Egypt... maybe the term Islamic feminism started in the 1990s but feministic Islams started earlier even according to this article. gren グレン 13:10, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
- Hi Gren, I'm not sure you can add the disputed tag because of a "see also," and what exactly is the objection to its inclusion? SlimVirgin (talk) 02:46, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
I probably could have just fixed that earlier... see what you think of my changes. Qasim Amin was turn of the century (19th) so to say it started in the 1990s is silly. However, I don't think it was called "Islamic feminism" until later. Well, tell me what you think. gren グレン 08:07, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
WHat are the source for the See also lists? I can understand how most these people are feminists, but I can't see how there are "Islamic". (Esp. Irshad Manji, who in her book tries to argue that Prophet muhammad is very much like Bin Laden)Bless sins 04:13, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
- As in she (or some feminists could be he), considers themselves secular and draw inspiration from secular sources. "Islamic" would be some one religious drawing inspiration from the Quran and have appreciation for the Islamic tradition.
- Well I am not sure that your opinion counts all that much. I agree that the vast majority of Muslims would probably agree with you. In fact I might agree with you too. But she is a Muslim, she calls herself a Muslim, she says what she is doing is Islamic. She is an Islamic feminist even if her idea of Islam is weird. It is not for Wikipedia to start takfiring people. Lao Wai 07:57, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- Thank goodness, Lao, you are keeping up on these Islamic entries in Wikipedia (nearly all articles are, IMO, non-NPOV). Irshad Manji not only self-identifies as a Muslim, she cites the Qur'an to support her belief that lesbians are as much a creation of Allah as anybody else, and she cites the Qur'an to support her belief that Muslims ought to recover an intellectual openness (Ijtihad) lost in the late Middle Ages. There is little doubt, therefore, that her feminism is informed by the Qur'an and Islamic faith; a fortiori, she is an Islamic feminist. Tm19 01:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Its a moot point since the page must, for neutrality, discuss feminist who are not muslem but whose focus is islam. You may not remove a reference to any promenent feminist whose focus is islam, even if she isnt islamic herself. Of course, you may subdivide the list into feminists claiming to be muslems and those claiming to not be muslems; however, such subdivisions are always done by self identification on wikipedia. There are plenty of liberal christians who say GWB aint a good chrisitian, but that doesnt matter when it comes to his article.
I agree that Irshad Manji should not be on the list. According to the entry: "Islamic feminism is defined by Islamic scholars as being more radical than secular feminism, and as being anchored within the discourse of Islam with the Qur'an as its central text." Irshad Manji certainly does not regard the Qur'an as a central text for her feminism - and that is the difference. 03:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)~~ Same w/AYaan Hirsi Ali. She is NOT Muslim!
- Yeah, I was surprised to find this article even existed, and was sort of expecting it to maybe be about "the right to not have sulfuric acid thrown in your face without first getting trial by sharia court" or something equally absurd. I have been made aware time and time again that because the islamic text hasn't been translated, there is no room for re-interpretation or possibility of errors. I have also seen this claim stated on fliers passed out on college campuses in the united states by otherwise-seeming "more liberal or moderate" islamics, which strongly gives me the impression that the only reason for being moderate is to avoid a lengthy prison sentence. I wonder why this article has not been nominated for replacement with a redirect to oxymoron. Zaphraud (talk) 02:58, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
There might be a need for a shariah section for this entry, but what is there at the moment is problematic. The repeated references to "Islamic feminists believe", "Islamic feminists do", etc are misplaced in an academic entry. There are no references for these. Certainly some Islamic feminists might "believe" or "do" what is being suggested, but these sweeping statements are incorrect.
The whole discussion about which countries have adopted what degree of "shariah" is also not really relevant to this entry.
The Qur'an does NOT say anything about breastfeeding women having to be paid; this is a scholarly opinion, not from the Qur'an. Such a serious error seems to indicate a level of ignorance about the issue from the writer.
- Hi Amandla,
- Regarding this passage - "Some Islamic feminists have taken the attitude that a reformed MPL which is based on the Qur'an and Sunnah, which includes substantial input from Muslim women and which does not discriminate against women is possible"
- My understanding of Islamic Feminism is that it rejects Sharia completely and where no Sharia/MPLs exist, campaigners do not in any way wish to see them implemented because there is a recognition that any MPL will be discriminatory - I have heard this view from several IFs and scholars including Dr Nayereh Tohidi, Margot Badran, Shaheen Sardar Ali - This is a difficult topic to find online references for and much of my studying has been through attendances at conferences which often don't publish papers so I realise it's a bit tricky to find references but could you perhaps make reference to where this view is held?
- I'm keen to see this article expanded as much as possible because it is currently very very short and not very substantial - perhaps we could come up with a TODO list of sections to work on for this article? I'll start another section in the talk page when i've got a couple of ideas to start with!
- Regarding section on BreastFeeding, it was perhaps a bit silly of me to include it without confirming, it was from a source, Balghis Badri (Sudan) at the II Congress on IF in Barcelona last November but I didn't verify it. Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gazzelle (talk • contribs) 15:54, 10 January 2007 (UTC).
- Dear Gazelle. We should be careful of homogenising Islamic Feminisms and Islamic feminists. That would be dangerous mistake. On the issue of the Shariah, I do not believe it is correct to say that Islamic Feminisms "reject Shariah completely". Some Islamic feminists would argue that by definition they have to be consistent with the shariah but would, at the same time, argue that the implementation of Shariah in various parts of the world is unIslamic. Hence their attack is not against the Shariah per se but against its (mis?)implementation. But, also, we shouldn't be tempted to conflate "shariah" with Muslim personal law. MPL is a small subsection of the Shariah. Some IFs that might reject the notion of the application of "Shariah" in a society might nevertheless believe that a reformed MPL can deliver justice to Muslim women.
- You mentioned Shaheen Sardar Ali. She has been campaigning against Pakistan's hudud law arguing that it is actually not consistent with the Shariah and with the Qur'an (the primary source of the Shariah). Such an argument is not a complete rejection of Shariah. In South Africa where the MPL debate has been raging for a while, there is a difference of opinion among Islamic feminists (all of whom believe in a just shariah) about whether the way to deliver justice to Muslim women is through a reformed MPL or by simply recognising Muslim marriages and allowing the civil courts to deal with the consequences. In Nigeria, Islamic feminists engage the so-called shariah laws and attempt to cerate spaces within them rather than trying to ignore and reject them completely. Whether they all would like to reject the shariah law or not is open to debate, but in the real world in which they live, they prefer to engage and win victories in that way.
- The website of the Barcelona conference has a number of online resources you can check out. Look particularly at the articles (linked there) of Margot Badran and Na'eem Jeenah. I refer to these because both of them attempt definitions for what IF is and who IFs are.
- On the breastfeeding issue, I don't know what exactly Ms Badri said, but you would be correct if you said that a large of (classical) Muslim scholars have the position that breastfeeding mothers are entitled to financial compensation for the breastfeeding. I think this point should be made in a section on the position of IFs on women and the home (something to that effect). However, I must say that I haven't come across any opinion that says that it is definitely the responsibility of the mother to breastfeed; it is always supposed to be her choice. Remember that in the tribal Arab society (like that of Muhammad), if the mother didn't want to breastfeed, she (or hubby) would get a wetnurse. Amandla 14:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- Amandla, regarding: "Hence their attack is not against the Shariah per se but against its (mis?)implementation" - I would agree, I get the impression that's a central aspect of IF in the sense that it is a feminism rooted in the Quran and Islam itself - my understanding is that a lot of IFs are using the concept as a tool to fight oppression that is carried out in the name of Islam like the Hudod laws in Pakistan you cited that are completely unIslamic. I think this is probably an important point to expand on in the entry - what do you think?
- "...large of (classical) Muslim scholars have the position that breastfeeding mothers are entitled to financial compensation for the breastfeeding. I think this point should be made in a section on the position of IFs on women and the home (something to that effect)" - YES! sounds good! Re "I must say that I haven't come across any opinion that says that it is definitely the responsibility of the mother to breastfeed; it is always supposed to be her choice." I didn't think i said that in my previous entry, oops if i did because i am aware of that! Having had a look around on google for issues about breast-feeding and Islam, there's quite a bit of US blogs/sites spouting crap about the issue, so it would be good to clarify it here on WP. Sounds like we've got a Breast-feeding section from this discussion anyway. Gazzelle 14:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
To Do List to improve article?
It would be good to see this article expanded, here's a TODO list that maybe we could work on gradually. Any suggestions? Here's a bunch of suggestions for sections (although not the section headers...)in no particular order:
- History and development of the idea - perhaps that's already covered by the introduction?
- Opposition to the movement - key forces opposing the movement eg. some ulamas & imams & govts
- Key ideas of Islamic Feminism - i think the article still lacks some basic explinations of the aims of campaigners/scholars in the movement so it would be good to clarify this
- More on Sharia - perhaps a break down of the main issues in Sharia/Personal Status Law that Islamic Feminists are campaigning against eg. Polygyny, marriage/divorce laws, child custody issues, zina/adultery, family planning and abortion, stoning/lashing (would be good to give examples of cases?)
- Distinction between 'Muslim Feminists' and 'Islamic Feminists' although this is quite a minor distinction, it might be helpful for people confused (like me!) about exactly what that distinction is...
- Distinction between Islamic Feminism and Islamism - because it's not the same thing!
Gazzelle 16:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- Gazelle, I think this is a good start for a TODO list. Perhaps we should just work on this before adding any more tasks. Just 1 or 2 comments. Firstly, even before "Hist an Dev", and perhaps within the intro, we should have some discussion about what exactly the animal is. What is the definition of Islamic feminism? Is this a contentious issue? If so, why? etc. Secondly, I suggest we dont make the distinction between IF and Islamism an issue just yet. Thats because Islamism itself is a contested term and some IFs might actually also self-identify as Islamists. (Perhaps I should hop over to the Islamism page and see what it says :). In South Africa, eg, some progressive Muslims who feminists and have been involved in the anti-apartheid struggle call themselves Islamists - because they have been calling themselves that for the past 2 decades - before the term got aligned to the Bin Ladens and their cronies. Amandla 13:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- Amandla, I agree that there needs to be a more substantial definition however i feel a bit wary of doing this myself, i'm quite new to wikipedia editing so i don't exactly have amazing WP writing style, but i'll have a think/read about it and post some ideas here. In terms of Islamism, the key distinction that i have found throughout my studying of IF is that Islamists are not working for full equality for women and men but rather equality in the public sphere eg. jobs, entry to military, voting rights etc. From what i understand, they do not wish to challenge the position of women or gender roles in the personal sphere and this is a considerable difference and arguably not feminist. Perhaps the definition could include a reference to Muslim Feminism as i mentioned in the todo list.Gazzelle 14:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- One place to start with the defintions issue is the sources I mentioned earlier. But I will also gie it a thought. As to the Islamist vs IF thing: again, your contention about Islamists is not true for all Islamists. It certainly is true for some, but then if we want to make this point, it needs to be clear that it is some. In my opinion, omitting trying to distinguish between IF and Islamism doesnt lose any value. Amandla 14:23, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- As per BrainyBabe's suggestion, i've added a TODO list at the top of the page that is more permanant and workable. Please use that to add to or remove or modify this todo list! Gazzelle 13:51, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
New lead definition?
Can we use this as a starting point - thought i'd pop it in here before editing:
Islamic feminism is a form of feminism that aims for the full equality of all Muslims, regardless of sex or gender, in public and private life. Islamic feminists advocate women's rights, gender equality, and social justice grounded in an Islamic framework. Although rooted in Islam, the movement's pioneers have also utilised secular and western feminist discourses and recognise the role of Islamic feminism as part of an integrated global feminist movement. Advocates of the movement seek to highlight the deeply rooted teachings of equality in the Quran and encourage a questioning of the patriarchal interpretation of Islamic teaching through the Quran, Hadith and Sharia towards the creation of a more equal and just society.
Thought the stuff about Qasim Amin could then be moved to a more appropriate section on History and Development... I'll wait a couple of days for comments before making any changes on this bit.Gazzelle 22:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
I have just re-added the word queer. The editor who removed it stated it was slang and redundant (to homosexual and bisexual). I believe that it is neither. The meaning of the word has changed significantly over the past generation, and while it is still in some contexts and from some people a term of abuse, it has also been reclaimed (as indeed has the word "gay"). See queer theory and queer studies. It does not mean the same as homosexual and bisexual either -- queer politics, for example, do not emphasise same-sex marriage in the heteronormative manner of mainstream gay politics. Therefore the word adds something different and useful to the article. BrainyBabe 09:53, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- see new section below BrainyBabe 10:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
I can see no edit button by the top of the first section, but two at the top of the second section. I have never seen this fault on any other page. Can others see this, or is it just me? Does anyone know how to fix it? Thanks BrainyBabe 09:55, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- It may have been a product of the template obscuring an edit button. It looks okay to me now. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Re-add section on sexuality
I have re-added the section on sexuality that was recently deleted. We may have a disagreement of perspective so fundamental that compromise is impossible - but I still hope, optimistically, to learn from the experience! So, what follows is why I see a political understanding and discussion of sexuality as intrinsic to feminism:
Women are socially "constructed" as different from men, in societies all over the world, based primarily on their biology and what follows from that -- i.e. the ability to bear children and the need to raise them. Reproduction comes from sex -- we are not an asexual species. Men want to know who their children are, and in the millenia before DNA tests, the easiest way to achieve this was to control women's expression of sexuality, whether that be pre-marital or extra-marital. Social systems in most of the Islamic world accept this, as does much of the rest of the world too in different ways, although not universally. Within this system, a woman's reproductive potential belongs not to her individually, but to her husband and his family; if she divorces, the tendency is for the children to stay with him. Likewise her sexuality is seen collectively; if she has sex before marriage, she brings shame on her family. If she falls in love with another woman, she must hide it. If she decides she wishes to become celibate, temporarily or permanently, her husband is unlikely to respect her decision. One of the functions of feminism is to examine the socal systems women live under, and point out their disadvantages and unfairnesses.
I am not claiming these issues are exclusive to Islamic feminism -- far from it. But these issues, of the control of women's sexual and reproductive power, exist in most (all?) societies, and are dealt with differently according to cultural norms, religious edicts, local scientific understanding, etc. And so the way in which issues of sexuality are discussed and treated within Islam, and are critiqued by feminists within that tradition, seems to me to be a vital part of the equation.
I hope this makes my position clear, and I look forward to constructive and thought-provking debate. BrainyBabe 10:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not going to be very thought provoking BrainyBabe because i largely concurr with what you're saying. Sexuality, particularly female/women's sexuality is intrinsic to the discussion of all feminisms including Islamic Fem. This is recognised among Islamic Feminist writers/scholoars/activists and is thus very relevant to this article. The debate on homosexuality/queer issues within IF is a much smaller discussion thus far within the IF debate but none-the-less it does exist and should also be included.Gazzelle 17:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. I have another question but will start a new thread. BrainyBabe 22:16, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Where does non-Qu'ranic feminism by Muslim women fit?
This is a philosophical or Wikipedic-structural question. There are Muslim women who agitate on behalf of women's rights and/or call themselves feminists, but do not explicitly cite the Qu'ran, or do not base their whole critique on it. Where do they fit in? I'm not entirely comfortable with the intro as it stands, because it seems to squeeze out Muslim women "doing feminism" outside the mosque, as it were. I am thinking of 1st or 2nd generation immigrants in the West, as well as the somewhat secularised and well-educated elite in Muslim countries. These women live in a largely Muslim ghetto or almost totally Muslim society. They identify and analyse the problems around them. Without blaming Islam per se, and without turning to the Qu'ran, they seek solutions. They themselves may be devout or not. There will always be those who call them, and any woman who opens her mouth, "un-Islamic" -- that proves nothing. For example, the two presidents of Ni Putes Ni Soumises (Neither Whores Nor Submissives), the organisation that started with young women in the mostly Muslim ghettos of France to resist gang-rapes, the curtailment of education, coerced marriages, and pressure to wear the hijab: Samira Bellil and now Fadela Amara. Do they count as Muslim feminists? Any thoughts welcome. BrainyBabe 22:38, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmm, i'm still newish to Wikipedia so not really sure on the procedure for changing a part of the page as important as the intro so i put it up on this talk page a couple of months ago for people to discuss but no-one did so i just ended up doing it the other day - I wasn't happy with the previous intro but by all means lets improve it - i'd love to see this article grow.
- Anyway, to answer your Q - I've hinted at this issue before in my suggested TODO list (above) - what is the difference between Islamic Feminists and Muslim Feminists. The impression i have so far gotten from people involved in this movement is that IFs are grounding their arguments/campaigns in Islamic principles/texts where Muslim Feminists are Muslims who are feminists but do not necessarily ground thier debates in Quranic teachings per se. I'm not exactly clear on this though and don't claim to be spot on but i think it's worth clarifying in the article and perhaps in the intro also. However, I have heard this question posed to a panel of IFs and there were broadly differing viewpoints so it's not so simple i guess. Additionally, i have got the impression that to be an Islamic feminist, you dont necessarily have to be a Muslim, just someone who respects the religion/teachings/scriptures and who cares about equality, thus IF can incorporate more than Muslims. Gazzelle 19:54, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- You say you are new, but I think you have obeyed the spirit of Wikipedia better than I have in this case! I should have read more of the debate above. BTW There is a template for TO DO, which goes at the top of some talk pages to focus efforts. The advantage over a simple item in the list is that it stays visible at the top.
- I hope your interpretation of IF/MF is correct. It is wide enough to make sense. Now all it needs is sources! Not my forte in this case. I tend to flit around between far-flung articles, tidying up style and grammar, and then seeing structural issues or NPOV that I want to re-balance. I don't have the expertise or books, so will leave this as it is. Good luck with this article! BrainyBabe 20:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Islamic vs Muslim
Forgive me if this is an ignorant question, but isn't the adjectival form of "Islam" "Muslim", not "Islamic"? In other words, shouldn't the title of this article be "Muslim feminism"? Webbbbbbber (talk) 18:42, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
- Muslim is most common in referring to what pertains to individuals, Islamic to the religion in general. Don't think there's a big problem with the title... AnonMoos (talk) 06:18, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
- In the context of the Arabic language, no grammatical noun can be truly "without a gender", since adjective forms and second person and third person verb forms all inflect for grammatical gender (masculine vs. feminine). I imagine that most Islamic religious scholars would admit that God is not male in any literal biological sense, but they would still consider it highly inappropriate to refer to the word Allah with feminine adjectives, verbs, and pronouns. Certainly the word Allah الله does not morphologically contain any feminine ending... AnonMoos (talk) 06:28, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, Al-Lat was NOT a female version of Allah, but rather the pagan arabs thought that she was one of Allah's daughters. The article below explains everything.
Islamic Feminism Symbol
Can we have a source on that symbol? And if it doesn't go back as far as early islam, it technically should be moved down to relevant sub-section. If a source cannot be provided, then it should be removed. Faro0485 (talk) 02:52, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Qassim Amin was NOT Feminist
Qasim Amin was not feminist, according to Leila Ahmed's Women and Gender in Islam (published in 1992 by Yale University), but colonialist. pp.155-163, 171, 179. He believed that Western civilization was necessarily more civilized. The education he said was good for women was hardly revolutionary for his time, he blames women for problems with their sexuality (even saying an Egyptian wife could not experience true love), and the complete removal of the veil, which he supported, prevents people from living important cultural and religious practices by choice. The chapters of his work that seem feminist were likely contributed by someone else. (p. 159, 161) Please either remove this man from the list, or honestly note that his works were not truly feminist. The veil does not, itself, signify oppression - only those circumstances which force a woman to don or remove it. Fennasnogothrim (talk) 12:10, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
uhmmm divorce is not necessarily liberation
if you read the actual page on taliq, women pretty much couldnt divorce men, only men could divorce women. then the men didn't have to pay for anything of theirs. . .
implying this is somehow 'superior' to 'western' culture is kind of... you know ... not neutral. i mean... yeah. think about it.
guys running around, doesnt like his wife, 'i divorce you', she is left with no money and no jobs, he can go get a new wife. you call that equality? i dont know. on the face of it, it is very worrisome to think in this illogical manner and make such a strange argument withotu much proof Decora (talk) 22:38, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
the term 'western world'
- True: Australia is, sometimes Turkey or Japan or Haiti are too. Our article Western world offers different definitions. Could you propose a wording here that might fit into the context of the article? BrainyBabe (talk) 16:09, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Here. Muslim feminists deserve to be heard" RANDA ABDEL-FATTAH AND SUSAN CARLAND January 28, 2010 Comments 92 Women don't have to give up Islam for rights, argue Randa Abdel-Fattah and Susan Carland.
- Orientalists writing on Islam and Muslims have tended to represent Muslim women as infantilised and oppressed, victims in need of rescue by the enlightened West. This is a classic example of the tyranny of self-projection, where the rescuer assumes a position of superiority so the belief systems, values and norms of Muslim women are judged against the Western experience.
Furthermore until the third through the ninth century women prayed in the mosques unveiled? This sentence is taken from a paragraph in article. In this paragraph, there's a source. Is this source a reference for that sentence? Kavas (talk) 00:19, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Aisha Abd al-Rahman was not the first modern lady to undertake Qur'anic exegesis, Táhirih came before her, and as the talk section above titled "Where does non-Qu'ranic feminism by Muslim women fit" it was indicated that even non-muslims can be considered Islamic Feminists, so surely one such as Táhirih who was born into, highly learned in, and practising Islam for a large part of her life qualifies. Daniel De Mol (talk) 13:55, 7 January 2011 (UTC)