From: bes@cco.caltech.edu (Behnam Sadeghi)
Subject: Re: Words Feminists find Demeaning!
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 08:10:51 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.145700.3200@fs7.ece.cmu.edu> locklin@henry.ece.cmu.edu (Scott Locklin) writes:
>
>Gee I love your argument that we can't understand islam because
>we don't speak arabic;what a great demonstration of the ethno-centrism
>and jingoism that makes islam so repulsive to so many. 

If Islam is repulsive to you, fine.  Let's see if this impression is
based on knowledge or unfounded prejudices:

>re:feminists/islam; your definitions of what constitues mistreatment of
>women (by YOUR I mean that of the quran & islam) are certainly much
>different than that of the rest of the world. Is it mistreatment of women to
>allow them to clother themselves as they please, hold jobs,DRIVE CARS (that
>means you saudi-arabia...) e Perhaps in the days of the origins of islam
>women were indeed considered as equals, this is certainly not the case
>in modern day islamic cultures as their lawn and customs give evidence..


Islam allows women to hold jobs.  Islam says nothing specifically about
driving cars.  However, at the time of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him),
women rided camels.    To say that the law in Saudi Arabia is an indication
of what Islam is all about is exactly like saying this:  The fact that 1/3
of women are raped in the U.S. and 1/4 female infants are sexually abused
in this country is a result of Chritianity's encouragement of these crimes.
Totally illogical, of course.    Also, Saudi Arabia is the only country
where women don't drive.  So, what you're doing is to generalize the 
culture of a few million Muslims to one billion Muslims.  Illogical again,
of course.  By this type of reasoning, it would no problem at all for me
to "prove" that Americans are all murderers, theives, rapistas, pimps, and 
prostitutes.

>While the islam of countries like america,canada and europe may indeed 
>espouse the high ideals that Sandra speaks of (probobly because of the 
>laws in these countries...), Fundamentalist islamic countries such as
>Saudi-Arabia and Iran are far from these ideals (in practice anyway)

Let's see.... in the "fundamentalist" (whatever that word means) country 
of Iran, you won't find 1/3 of women being sexually assaulted, as is the 
case in the U.S.  In Iran, there are 9 women in the Parliament which is--
both in terms of absolute and relative numbers-- greater than the number
of women in the US Sentate.  In Iran there are women doctors, engineers,
film-makers, managers, and politicians.  The also "fundamentalist" Islamic
Republic of Pakistan just had a female president, while it doesn't look
like the same will happen in the U.S. any time soon.

This is not to say, of course, that women are not oppressed in Iran.  
Unfortunately, women are oppressed in all countries.  The degree of 
oppression is dependent on many variables, including the level of
industrialization, urbanization, public education, prosperity, religious
beliefs, cultural mores, etc.   Adherence to Islam is exactly what is needed
for the liberation of Muslim women.


One question I wondered about for some time was this:  Given the fact
that women are opppressed in the U.S. as well (e.g. refer to statistics
regarding rape, wife-beating, lack of equal pay for equal work, etc.), why
is that Americans [and Westerners in general], shed rivers of crocodile
tears for Muslim women while pushing the grave problems of women in their
own countries under the rug?  I arrived at the conclusion that it is not
the status of Muslim women that these people really care about.  They don't
give a damn about Muslims, be they male or female.  All they care about
is covering up their own problems and insecurities, easing their conscience
about the miserable status of American (and Western) women, and making
themselves feel better by putting down others. 

Newsgroups: alt.atheism