Author Archives: Ayesha Rehman

Research Journal on Ch. 2: Status of Woman in Different Ages

Posted on by

In this chapter, Maududi describes some doctrines that were prevalent in ancient Greece, ancient Rome, and Christian Europe. I will not be detailing this portion, but in a nutshell, he disproves of the many Goddesses like Aphrodite and the belief that woman was the mother of all sins. I am more interested in his criticism of equality and independence. He believes:

  1. Equality between male and female threatens the family system.
  2. Economic independence of woman also leads to the collapse of family system.
  3. Free intermingling of the sexes creates sexual chaos.

My take on this is as follows:

  1. Equality between the sexes means equal opportunity in every domain of life. It means upholding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ Establishing an egalitarian society, by definition, grants everyone fair and equal rights. It does not marginalize rights or family order.
  2. Maududi is assuming that economic dependence of women on men is the main thing that binds family. In essence, he is implying that economic dependence holds the fabric of family life intact. That is an unreasonable thing to propose.

‘The Body Evidencing the Crime’: Rape on Trial in Colonial India, 1860 – 1947

Posted on by

Kolsky, E. (2010). ‘The Body Evidencing the Crime’: Rape on Trial in Colonial India, 1860 – 1947. Gender and History. 22(1), 109-130.

This timeline summarizes important themes and concepts that I learnt from reading the article titled, “‘The Body Evidencing the Crime’: Rape on Trial in Colonial India, 1860 – 1947.” I noted that stigma attached to reporting rape has been prevalent since the colonial times. Prejudicial practices such as viewing rape victims as suspects who are prone to raising false accusations and assessing their history and social class/ status are still common in the judicial system of Pakistan.

Research Journal on Ch. 1: Nature of the Problem

Posted on by

Maududi, Abul A’la. Purdah and the Status of Women in Islam. Trans. Al-Ash’ari. Kazi Publications, 1939. Print.

In the next set of research journal entries, I will be outlining some of the main arguments of this book (one chapter at a time), and analyzing key themes. This book was originally written in Urdu and although I am reading its English translation, I am disappointed at Maududi’s language. The reason is that he emphasizes everything in terms of sexual dimorphism: man is this…woman is that… His chauvinistic viewpoint is inevitably expressed throughout the book.

Chapter 1: Nature of the Problem

The first chapter sets the tone for later arguments in favor of upholding a strict segregation of the sexes. I have briefly sketched out Maududi’s main argument.

  1. Despite making considerable advancements, humans don’t have definite answers in any field, including the sciences.
  2. Complex phenomenon is not understood accurately because of human’s inability to see all facets of a problem in one picture/analysis.
  3. In order for humans to make sense of the world, first, they have to understand themselves, which is not possible if they revert to extremes. What does he mean by extremes?
  4. To illustrate the concept of extremes, Maududi delves into describing the status of women. He states that women are either reduced to the position of maids or elevated to the levels of immoral prominence to become “Devil’s agent.” These are the two extremes, which the chapter title indicates as “nature of the problem.”
  5. He concludes the chapter by arriving at, “…the free intermingling of the sexes brings in its wake a flood of obscenity, licentiousness and sexual perversion, which ruin the morals of the community.” His proposed solution to avoid the two extremes is purdah/veil, segregation of the sexes or seclusion of women from men.

I will now raise objections to points 4 and 5 as they are directly concerned with the status of women and have underlying assumptions that can be challenged.

  1. Since Maududi’s conclusion is something based upon his experiences, one would expect a rather elaborate view on the status of women; after all, life is complex. However, his observation to categorize women’s role in two neat labels of “maids” or “Devil’s agent” shows us an oversimplified and an incomplete picture. Ignoring a whole range of the spectrum – in terms of division of labor – is silly. It is not as if Maududi collected empirical evidence on the status of women in Pakistan and has therefore arrived at such a conclusion.
  2. Sure humans are highly social animals, but we are also what Aristotle correctly described: rational! Maududi’s prediction of chaotic sexual anarchy is unfounded. It presumes that we do not control over ourselves and that we will destroy order by a “flood of obscenity.”
  3. Maududi’s solution, in itself, is an extreme view. Seclusion of women from public domain undermines the whole notion of being a productive and a dignified citizen of society. It denies women the opportunity to develop their intellectual and professional aspirations.
  4. He is placing the burden of maintaining a strict social structure, i.e. segregation, on women. What exactly justifies that is not mentioned.

 

Here is the Plan

Posted on by

1. I will begin writing my interview questions, which will be sent out to various NGOs such as War Against Rape (WAR), women rights organizations such as Women’s Forum Action (WFA), political parties such as Jama’at-i-Islami, ulemas, and authors whose work I have read. My interviews will include questions about the justification used for restrictive rape laws, why such laws are targeting towards women etc. Although one can argue that I can get that sort of information by research alone, I think interviewing will narrow down my sources. Since most of my questions will be open-ended, I will be organizing this information in the form of separate journal entries. Later, I will put them in a visual for easier comparison.

2. I will also be reading the following books:

  • Women of Pakistan: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back? by Khawar Mumtaz and Farida Shaheeda.
  • Purdah and the Status of Women in Islam by Maududi. His philosophy was influential in the incorporation of Hudood Laws in the penal code of Pakistan. That is why I think it is important to understand his views of women.

3. My research goals:

  • Find specific instances where misinterpretation of Islamic ideas has led to restrictive laws. This will be expanding on how Zia justified his martial law, how political parties continue to promote Maududi’s ideologies, how local jirgas exploit power to carry out discriminatory verdicts.
  • Explore the clash of different legal systems (Sharia vs. secular law) and its implication for victims of rape.
  • Research the theme of how Islamic virtues are intertwined with traditional values like purdah. This will shed light on how Hinduism and Mughal’s rule has shaped accepted cultural values.

I have not set exact deadlines yet because I will be doing most of the tasks simultaneously. I will also be reading journal articles and watching documentaries to gather further information.

Research Journal on In the Name of Honor: A Memoir

Posted on by

Mai, M., & Cuny, M. (2006). In the Name of Honor: A Memoir. New York: Washington Square Press.

Mai’s memoir chronicles all the events (with exact dates and times!) that led up to and followed after the gang rape that was approved by her village’s jirga*. However, the book is not particularly critical of discriminatory laws toward women. I picked up the book with hopes of not only finding more about her case, but also understanding why the media publicized her story and how that played a role in her trial. The first reason why her story circulated around was due to the local imam, who publicly denounced the horrific crime in Friday prayers. This act held significance on two accounts: first, it was announced to the entire community and for those people who stayed away from controversial news, the imam’s public announcement rendered them to discuss the issue openly; second, when a leader (even if he/she is locally known by a small number of people) takes a stand, it influences people’s opinion.

There were some shocking parts of the story that I had not gathered from my previous research about her case. For instance, she says, “…decision to rape me was made in the presence of the whole community. My father and uncle heard that verdict along with all the other villagers…” But if that is the case, her family knowingly walked her over to where she was going to be raped. My earlier readings made it seem that along with her father and uncle she was asking for forgiveness for her brother’s alleged misbehavior when the Mastoi dragged her and raped her; in other words, they had no knowledge of what was coming. Also, if both the decision and denouncement of Mai’s rape was public, it seems that the community members of Meerwala village were aware of both sides of the story. I still haven’t answered why media took such a strong interest in Mai’s rape. For one thing, she recognized its value: “I sense[d] instinctively that I must take advantage of the presence of these journalists.”

Mai calls attention to class differences. She repeatedly mentions that since she belongs to the Gujar clan and the accused men were from Mastoi clan (rich people who owned a lot of land in the village), the police were not cooperative and sided with the Mastoi. In fact, she states that the police and all the justice system is controlled by upper class people like Mastoi. To illustrate this point, she narrates her experience at the police station where is asked to dictate her case. The policemen ask her to thumbprint the end of a few blank pages. Later, she learns that they have written things inaccurately. While you can argue this shows that justice is reserved as a privilege for the rich and educated, it also exemplifies what an average peasant, who has never been to school and who cannot read and write, is denied her right to justice.

Mai adopts a rather unusual approach/ attitude when she says, “I was born in this country, subject to its laws, and I know that I am like all other women who belong to the men of their families: we are objects, and they have the right to do whatever they want with us. Submission is compulsory (67).” This sort of echoes what Socrates said when he refused to escape his death; Socrates asserted that since the State married his parents, and had him nurtured and educated in Athens, he was bound by its laws because he had chosen to stay there after coming of age. Mai is also accepting that the laws apply to her and there is nothing she can do about it. However, she comes to the conclusion that, “But despising men is not the way to win respect. The solution is to try to fight them as equals (112).”

To sum it up, I can use Mai’s case to support my hypothesis. The jirga, which consisted of many Mastoi men, punished a peasant woman from Gujar class not because she had committed a crime, but because they sought revenge. The sad part is that such revenge was justified by the jirga because they claim to make decisions consistent with Sharia law.

*jirga: village council which makes decisions based on Sharia law.

 

Research Journal: Interpretive Frameworks

Posted on by

Khouri, N. (2007). Human Rights and Islam: Lessons from Amina Lawal and Mukhtar Mai. The Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law, 8(93), 93-109.

Khouri explains three accounts/ interpretative frameworks that are used to draw relationships between human rights and Islamic law. There are named as Clash of Civilizations, Global Legal Pluralism, and Transnational Legal Process. The following mind map briefly outlines the important components associated with each:

Frameworks

She also analyzes two case studies – Amina Lawal and Mukhtar Mai- and interprets both of them in light of the three frameworks that she provides in this article. I will only be summarizing Mukhtar Mai’s case since it happened in Pakistan and it is directly related to my topic. The other case is that of a Nigerian woman, but since the penal code in Nigeria is different, I will not go into its detail.

In 2002, Mai was ganged raped on orders of her panchayat (village council) in retribution for alleged zina committed by her younger brother. Khouri explains this case in view of the three frameworks.

1. Clash of Civilization

International media adopted this interpretative framework to state that Mai’s human rights had been violated as a result of Sharia law. However, this framework ignores the fact that the village council did not have any legal authority to impose Sharia. Local tribunals are not part of the federal state law or the penal code. The clash is between traditional tribal law and official state law, not human rights and Islamic law.

2. Global Legal Pluralism

Because global legal pluralism recognizes human rights and Islamic law as separate and interacting entities, it takes local political structures into account. This framework explains that while the village council did not have legal authority, it was the village imam who spoke against the sexual violence. It also considers the class differences of perpetrator and victim. Mai’s perpetrators were from Mastoi tribe and because most members of the village council were from that tribe, they issued such a horrific act of violence against Mai, who was from the socially low Gujar tribe.

3. Transnational Legal Process

This interpretative framework emphasizes the concept of norm internalization. In Mai’s case, government condemned rape, compensated her and provided her legal costs. This could be partly attributed to international pressure which emphasizes human rights norms.

Each interpretative framework provides a unique analysis, but because the global legal pluralism accepts alternative models, it is neutral and more tolerant. Of course, the relationship between human rights and Islamic law is more complex than it is portrayed in these frameworks.

Research Journal: Differences in Women’s Perspective on Legal Rights

Posted on by

Mumtaz, K. (1994). Identity Politics and Women: “Fundamentalism” and Women in Pakistan. In V. Moghadam (Ed.), Identity politics and women: Cultural reassertions and feminisms in international perspective (pp. 228-242). Boulder: Westview Press.

Resistance to government’s Islamization program has not been a unified struggle for all women in Pakistan. A sharp divide exists between women who Mumtaz calls “fundamentalists” and women’s right activists. The difference in their perspectives arises from factors such as class differences and exposure to type of education (Western education or Islamic education). Although the concerns of the two groups are the same: they call for a ban on polygamy, demand fair divorce procedures, etc., the bifurcation in their ideas emerge regarding the concept of gender equality, women’s role, legal rights etc.

Women’s Action Forum (WAF), which was created in response to Zia’s Islamization program, has been at the forefront questioning patriarchal structures and the use of misinterpreted Islam to justify restrictive legal laws. While women’s rights activists challenge strictly defined gender roles and the notion of women being nurturers and reproducers of society, “fundamentalist” women embrace these ideas. They opt for complete gender segregation. So which organizations or political party are “fundamentalist” women affiliated with? Mumtaz identifies that most “fundamentalist” women are either supported by Jama’at-i-Islami or they belong to its student wing called Jama’at-i-Talebat. Also, the party has a strong influence in urban areas that have gone through industrialization. Other religious-based political parties include Jamiat-Ulema-e-Pakistan (JUP), Jamiat-Ulema-e-Islam (JUI), Anjuman Sipah-e-Sahaba, but none of these parties have a women’s wing or women members in their higher ranks.

Before picking this book, I had incorrectly assumed that most women in Pakistan would consider the Hudood Laws to be restrictive and downright discriminatory towards women. However, “fundamentalist” women do not think that way. They argue that women should not interact with men and therefore should not pursue careers in politics, but these “fundamentalist” women –although small in percentage when compared to the party’s total members – hold positions in their party and parliament themselves.

World Philosophy Day

Posted on by

Alcoff, Linda. “What Philosophy can Contribute to the Global Resistance Against Rape?” City College of New York. New York City. 20 Nov. 2014.

“I cannot teach anybody anything. I can only make them think.” –Socrates

Yesterday was World Philosophy Day and UNESCO had organized a public talk with guest speaker Linda Alcoff at City College. Alcoff is a philosopher of epistemology, who has written on the global epidemic of rape. She talked about how social media is used in this politically complex problem of sexual violence, how society still clings to taint of the victims, though the taint has grown into a psychological one in the recent years, and she also discussed meta-lucidity and epistemic resistance.

Three themes stood out to me:

  1. It takes time to make sense of any situation, including traumatic ones such as rape. Survivors’ perspective may change, but the credibility deficit associated with women, children, slaves etc. is not grounded.
  2. She explained that reverse empiricism is unjustified in the context of sexual violence. The logic that if a woman has been sexually abused, then she can’t reason properly is not justified considering that people’s opinion change.
  3. The key solution to sexual violence is to create safe circles of discourse. She noted that sexual violence is brought up only when it serves another narrative, so one needs to think of that too.

I haven’t read any of her books or articles, but it would be a helpful resource in answering, “What can philosophy contribute to the debate on unjust and restrictive laws?”

Research Journal: Ideological-Political Positions of Muslims in Indian Subcontinent

Posted on by

Weiss, A. (1986). The Historical Debate on Islam and the State in South Asia. In Islamic Reassertion in Pakistan (21). New York: Syracuse University Press.
 

Ideological_Political Positions Before Independce in 1947