From: m21757@mitre.org (G)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: Re: **Female Pakstudent and burqa
Date: 1 Apr 92 14:19:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: linus.1992Apr1.141916.14288
Organization: The MITRE Corporation

In article <kthc80INNkf1@pageboy.cs.utexas.edu> hyder@cs.utexas.edu (Syed 
Irfan Hyder) writes:
> Do people think that the concept of "segregation" in Islam is
> discriminatory? I have found in my observations for the

yes. But the real question is how much of the segregation that you see in 
'Islamic' societies today is from the prophet's (PBUH) time and how much 
of it is add-ons from subsequent interactions with other cultures?  For 
instance as I recall, (this is from a hadith, from memory now) the 
injunction for Muslim women to wear a cloak was for the purpose of 
delineating them as 'free' women, who should not be harassed.  As it seems 
that if you were not of a certain social class men were free to approach 
women and 'posture' in a gross sexually implict fashion and otherwise 
harass them.

> last four years in USA, that the so called "liberation" of
> women has resulted in nothing but her "cheap and easy availability
> as sexual objects to be enjoyed and discarded". It is this
> same observation which has galvanized and motivated  the
> Christian extreme right in this country (typified by
> Pat Buchanan) to take up cudgel agains the so called "liberators".

With every good also comes bad, and vice versa.  I also don't like the 
"cheap and easy availability as sexual objects to be enjoyed and 
discarded".  So do we get rid  of that mindset and call men to task for 
this (stopping it at the source),  or do we throw out the baby with the 
bathwater?

> 
> Only yesterday, on PBS was the timely documentary of Bill Moyers
> titled "Families First"! The Florida Judge, the "Home Buiders"
> (name of the social group working for mending the faimilies) and
> the Govt. officials were all unanimous in saying that there
> is (i) no substitute for a family
>    (ii) a "Foster home" can never be a substitute for the family.
>    (iii) Family is the most efficient unit economics has ever
>          known.
>    (iv) Just watch the emotional torture of the children
>         given in foster care and one will realize the folly
>         of deriding the family.

It is unfortunate that the women's movement may have belittled the family, 
however, today's women do not belittle the family.  Women today _have_ to 
work along with their husbands just to stand still in economic terms.  
Also if it is possible to have an emphasis on the extended family that 
would lessen the burden on the family as a whole.  When you say foster 
care, I assume you mean day care is that correct?  After all the prophet 
(PBUH) was sent away for 'foster care' for x years in his early, early, 
life.  I think the main intention of the women's movement was for equal 
economic opportunity, not the debasement of women.


> 
> >A woman who is prepared to invest her time and money in university
> >education will most probably try to seek employment on completion of her
> >education. 
> 
> Just see the time and energy and the cost associated with the
> effort of re-mending the broken family, and you will realize that
> how big  a productive share in the national budget a family
> means. See in the above documentary, the skills needed for
> being "simply a traditional mother", which lib derides so much.
> As if what they are doing is worthless, and all worth lies in
> becoming a "secretary", "operator",or  a single parent "executive".

These days  a woman needs to be economically viable for herself as well as 
for her family.  The idea of a woman staying home and solely taking care 
of the kids is for well-off people who can afford it.  
> 
> 
> >So a separate university would hamper her ability to cope with a
> >situation where places of work entail interaction between sexes. Also 
its
> >rather unfair to spend millions of rupees on a luxury such as this 
while sacri-
> >ficing the larger interests of basic education for women.
> 
> If you are looking at the larger interest of women in Pakistan, then
> still the statistics will tell you that most women in Pakistan are
> more comfortable in segregated institutions. 
> 
> The final myth
> about the need for accustoming women for 'workplace' is in its
> last throes of death. For the workplace of future will be the
> home and not the office place. The networks and computers will allow
> you to transfer most jobs to people's own homes rather than the
> workplace!!!!!!!!!!!

That is assuming that they have the education needed to use the computers. 
 If solely segregated schools exist then there is no reason to believe 
that women's universities and colleges will get the equipment and training 
needed to then finally do work in their homes.