Afghan women jailed for moral crimes rises

[Ashotep]

All I can say is thank god I don't live in the middle east. It would be a living nightmare. Can you imagine being checked to see if your still a virgin or being arrested just because you left your abusive husband or didn't want to be forced into marriage. I'll stop with that because the reasons for being arrested if you are a woman would be so long.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/21/number-of-afghanistan-women-jailed-for-moral-crimes-like-fleeing-abuse-rises-sharply/

[+and-then]

All I can say is thank god I don't live in the middle east. It would be a living nightmare. Can you imagine being checked to see if your still a virgin or being arrested just because you left your abusive husband or didn't want to be forced into marriage. I'll stop with that because the reasons for being arrested if you are a woman would be so long.

http://www.rawstory....-rises-sharply/

When I see women in the west stand up and proclaim how wonderful Islam is for women I sincerely wish for them they will have an opportunity to live under the full benefit of it's grace some day.

[Ashotep]

When I see women in the west stand up and proclaim how wonderful Islam is for women I sincerely wish for them they will have an opportunity to live under the full benefit of it's grace some day.

They have been brainwashed into thinking that. If they had to live like these women do they would be horrified. They need to wake up and smell the coffee.

[Mr Walker]

I appreciate your concern but it is much wider than islam. Western men do not love and respect their women enough either. I have cared for children and women abused by their menfolk and taken some to hospitals and refuges. I see young men and women relate in destructive ways based on power and authority, both physical and sexual.

it is not even an exclusively gender issue. Violence is prevelant in young people, men and women. We all have to relearn our relationships with each other. I could no more hit (Or use any form of coercion on) my wife or any other woman, than on my self. The only reason I would harm anyone is to protect the innocent from those deliberately trying to do them harm.

[dekker87]

I appreciate your concern but it is much wider than islam. Western men do not love and respect their women enough either. I have cared for children and women abused by their menfolk and taken some to hospitals and refuges. I see young men and women relate in destructive ways based on power and authority, both physical and sexual.

it is not even an exclusively gender issue. Violence is prevelant in young people, men and women. We all have to relearn our relationships with each other. I could no more hit (Or use any form of coercion on) my wife or any other woman, than on my self. The only reason I would harm anyone is to protect the innocent from those deliberately trying to do them harm.

riiight....but islam actively promotes a patriarchal society and a system where women are lawfully seen as 'less' valuable than men.

[Mr Walker]

riiight....but islam actively promotes a patriarchal society and a system where women are lawfully seen as 'less' valuable than men.

The patriachal system predates islam and comes from the structure of a pastoral /agrarian society. It will not and cannot be sustained in a modern industrial or post industrial /technological society.

However many muslim countries are so wealthy they bring in outside workers rather than employ and educate their women. And remember about 100 years ago all western societies were very similar to this model, and only 40 years ago my wife could not open a bank account or leave the country, without my consent. Neither could I be charged with raping her, because marriage was considered an ongoing act of consent to sex, and a man had a "right" to expect sex of a wife on call. So we are not really very far form the cultural values of islam ourselves.

In a modern society women ARE as valuable as men, as commodities/labour sources and tax payers, because of their education and skills. Consequently they are given equal rights to reflect that increased value to society. (to take an honest if slightly cynical view) Eventually women are expected, then required, to go out and become wage earning members of society; and the freedom to do otherwise is taken from them by either law or economic and social forces.

It is not entirely true to say islam does not value women. In some senses it values them more than we do, but uses a different currency ( we have debased a woman's role as mother, nurturer, teacher, homemaker and wife, for example, in our societies) but putting women on a special pedestal may elevate, them yet still restrict their freedoms.

[Lilly]

I'm an adult human being. I don't need anyone to "take care of me". What I do need is equal access to education, employment, social justice. I don't see Islam as offering women anything of the like. As bad as western society can be, it's at least better than enslavement thinly *veiled* (excuse the pun) as being some kind of protection. Frankly, I'd choose death rather than to live in such a system.

[Mr Walker]

I'm an adult human being. I don't need anyone to "take care of me". What I do need is equal access to education, employment, social justice. I don't see Islam as offering women anything of the like. As bad as western society can be, it's at least better than enslavement thinly *veiled* (excuse the pun) as being some kind of protection. Frankly, I'd choose death rather than to live in such a system.

Actually its got nothing to do with you being an adult human being and everything to do with the social welfare network of the country you live in IF you decide to have children. A mother can not work and provide for herself and a young child or children effectively while raising nurturing and educating children up to school age at a minimum and so someone has to "care for her" (or else provide care for he children) That might be her partner her family or the state.

I am not disagreeing with your basic premise The bottom line is freedom for a woman (or anyone) to make informed and real choices.

All of us in the west have more freedom, but still we are often constrained in ways we do not recognise because we live within those constriants.

For example after working for 20 years when we married(in 1976) my wife decided never to work again, because it made her job available to a woman with greater need, and because I could support her and myself. ALos she wanted to concentrate on our home, garden, and animals We've been married nearly 40 years and she has never worked for pay in that time (but cared for people, young and elderly, within or home as a very full time job for many years)

When she first gave up work she was severely criticised (even abused) by women who claimed she was letting down the sister hood) Today the economic structure of a country makes it hard for people on one wage (even a good one) to live comfortably if they want to live as their neighbours do. So freedom in the west is not absolute, either.

Edited May 27, 2013 by Mr Walker

[libstaK]

I cannot believe the insane level of petty judgement and vitriole that has to have been shown by those who accuse these women of the crimes they are alleged to have committed. Being arrested for leaving a physically abusive husband is akin to enabling slavery of the lowest and meanest kind. It makes my skin crawl that there are men who think they are justified first in abusing women and secondly in gaining assistance from the law to have the women penalised for running from that abuse.

The list of atrocities beggars belief - and most accusations are simply taken at face value aka: someone claims the woman is guilty therefore the law and even her own family punishes her as though she is - it is hell manifest on earth for the victims and even the perpetrators can have nothing of peace and genuine joy in their life to believe what they do and behave as they do to others.

Edited May 27, 2013 by libstaK

[Ashotep]

Actually its got nothing to do with you being an adult human being and everything to do with the social welfare network of the country you live in IF you decide to have children. A mother can not work and provide for herself and a young child or children effectively while raising nurturing and educating children up to school age at a minimum and so someone has to "care for her" (or else provide care for he children) That might be her partner her family or the state.

I am not disagreeing with your basic premise The bottom line is freedom for a woman (or anyone) to make informed and real choices.

All of us in the west have more freedom, but still we are often constrained in ways we do not recognise because we live within those constriants.

For example after working for 20 years when we married(in 1976) my wife decided never to work again, because it made her job available to a woman with greater need, and because I could support her and myself. ALos she wanted to concentrate on our home, garden, and animals We've been married nearly 40 years and she has never worked for pay in that time (but cared for people, young and elderly, within or home as a very full time job for many years)

When she first gave up work she was severely criticised (even abused) by women who claimed she was letting down the sister hood) Today the economic structure of a country makes it hard for people on one wage (even a good one) to live comfortably if they want to live as their neighbours do. So freedom in the west is not absolute, either.

I bet if you beat her or stoned her to death you would be arrested in Australia or any western country and charged with murder but not there because it is you right as a husband. She is also free to leave you, work or not if she wants, go to school but not there. Edited May 27, 2013 by Hilander

[Mr Walker]

I bet if you beat her or stoned her to death you would be arrested in Australia or any western country and charged with murder but not there because it is you right as a husband. She is also free to leave you, work or not if she wants, go to school but not there.

Yes i am quite aware of that, but I dont stone my wife because of laws, but because i love her She doesnt cheat on me because she might be stoned but because it would go against her ethics andd moralities and because she loves me.

In middle eastern (and many other cultural traditions) a woman is the property of her father, then her husband. He is responsible for caring for her and also for her behaviour. This isn't a religious belief. It is a cultural one We had the same beliefs and laws in the west until recent years.

I was expected to ask my wife's father (in 1974) for permission to court and marry her, and he "gave her away" at our wedding in 1976,; and we are both fourth generation australians of scottish/english descent. It came about because women never had the opportunity to earn a significant income and thus to live independently. They stayed at home until they were married. Thus the responsibility for their care and protection was transferred from father and brothers, to husband.

Of course in the last 60 years or so, a lot has changed for the better .

I am just pointing out that we shouldnt judge islam too harshly, because it is culture and circumstance which proscribes the rights of women, children and even men.

We have to be careful not to look back from our last half century of improvements, on cultures still a century behind us and criticise them too strongly. Yes we have to move them forward, but really we are neither that superior nor really that advanced ourselves yet. We perhaps should concentrate on improving the freedoms and lives of our own women and chidren first.

Sadly, no, a man would likely not be arrested or charged for beating his wife. I have dealt with many, incuding giving some refuge in our own home and getting others to safe houses and shelters. For a variety of reasons it is very rare for the man to be charged, arrested or tried. They may be given a restraining order for a time. The priority is the protection of women and children.

Edited May 28, 2013 by Mr Walker

[Black Red Devil]

Jadidism was gathering momentum during the 19th and 20th centuries as a progressive and modern alternative for Islamic society but ended up fizzling out and unfortunately, since then, the Ulama's have taken over that part of the world.

[Clarakore]

Am going to love the day Afghanistan fully and continually recognizes the UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women.

It seems just like us, in America, they are having their own issues with this according to the link in the OP.

Edited May 29, 2013 by Leave Britney alone!

[Yamato]

All I can say is thank god I don't live in the middle east. It would be a living nightmare. Can you imagine being checked to see if your still a virgin or being arrested just because you left your abusive husband or didn't want to be forced into marriage. I'll stop with that because the reasons for being arrested if you are a woman would be so long.

http://www.rawstory....-rises-sharply/

Your money is paying for that; congratulations. The human rights record in Saudi Arabia is abysmal and the anointed one just handed them the largest arms contract in US history. Your money paid for that too. How many women in Saudi Arabia are getting beaten and forced into slavery today while we think about something else?

[Yamato]

Afghanistan is a failed state.

[meryt-tetisheri]

Jadidism was gathering momentum during the 19th and 20th centuries as a progressive and modern alternative for Islamic society but ended up fizzling out and unfortunately, since then, the Ulama's have taken over that part of the world.

Some of those who advocated a more progressive Islam and an interpretation of Sharia more in tune with modernity in the 19th and 20th centuries were ulama, such as Tahtawi, Mohamad Abduh, al Afghani...etc. This movement not just fizzled out but got swamped by a regressive theology as arid as the desert sands it blew from!

[Clarakore]

Afghanistan is a failed state.

Any solutions that you had in mind?

[Clarakore]

Some of those who advocated a more progressive Islam and an interpretation of Sharia more in tune with modernity in the 19th and 20th centuries were ulama, such as Tahtawi, Mohamad Abduh, al Afghani...etc. This movement not just fizzled out but got swamped by a regressive theology as arid as the desert sands it blew from!

At one time in Rome it was an oppressive environment for women even within religion so when this new one came along that was liberating to women many joined helping make it popular. That religion was Christianity.

Yesterday's liberator becomes today's oppressor.

[meryt-tetisheri]

At one time in Rome it was an oppressive environment for women even within religion so when this new one came along that was liberating to women many joined helping make it popular. That religion was Christianity.

Yesterday's liberator becomes today's oppressor.

While I agree with you that there is value in lessons learnt from ‘comparative history’, I still can’t resist the impulse of adding: “but that was then, and this is now”. The plight of women in these countries is real, and can no longer be explained in terms of cultural relativity. While the whole world is moving forward, these societies are galloping backwards and the scope of their oppression of women is both increasing, and spreading its influence to other societies too. Underlying the discriminatory legal systems, the physical and sexual abuse, sexual harassment, virginity tests by authorities, child marriage, honor killings…etc., is a dehumanizing view of women. For those who subscribe to this regressive reading of Islam, the sum total of woman is “awra” and she should live and be treated as such.

The etymology of the term accord to Wikipedia is:” In Arabic, the term 'awrah or 'awrat (Arabic: عورة‎) derives from the root ‘a-w-r which means "defectiveness", "imperfection", "blemish" or "weakness". However, the most common English translation is "nakedness".[1]

In Persian and Kurdish (Persian: عورت‎) as well as Urdu, the word 'awrat derived from the Arabic 'awrah, had been used widely to mean "woman". Consulting Mohammad Moin's dictionary of Persian, 'awrah leads to two significations:

1.Nakedness, shame

2.Young woman.“ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Awrah

I should stress that this is not an absolute universal view shared by all Muslims, but the danger is that fundamentalists are ascending to power and are attempting to roll back whatever gains women achieved during the last century. Here is an example:

http://www.egyptindependent.com/news/salafis-demand-end-women-s-rights-body-ballet

Edited May 30, 2013 by meryt-tetisheri

[Clarakore]

While I agree with you that there is value in lessons learnt from ‘comparative history’, I still can’t resist the impulse of adding: “but that was then, and this is now”. The plight of women in these countries is real, and can no longer be explained in terms of cultural relativity. While the whole world is moving forward, these societies are galloping backwards and the scope of their oppression of women is both increasing, and spreading its influence to other societies too. Underlying the discriminatory legal systems, the physical and sexual abuse, sexual harassment, virginity tests by authorities, child marriage, honor killings…etc., is a dehumanizing view of women. For those who subscribe to this regressive reading of Islam, the sum total of woman is “awra” and she should live and be treated as such.

*snip*

Thank you for sharing your knowledge. It is refreshing but the topic is not. Women must achieve equality there and we should help change their societies without suppressing or blaming every Muslim especially those here in the West.

We also have a responsibility since we first funded the Taliban. It is true many there in that society no longer want them. They thrived in the conflict between us and the Soviets using thir land as a proxy. They thrive now in the chaos we revisted them with in this conflict. Hope when we withdraw the soldiers that we do not withdraw our presence but exchange it for funding for schools open to all sexes.

You are right. That was then, this is now. Islam once provided for liberal societies when Christianity was in the darkest of ages. A return is due and can be achieved even if it means those societies deemphasize religion and strengthen secularism.

Edited May 30, 2013 by Leave Britney alone!

[meryt-tetisheri]

Thank you for sharing your knowledge. It is refreshing but the topic is not. Women must achieve equality there and we should help change their societies without suppressing or blaming every Muslim especially those here in the West.

We also have a responsibility since we first funded the Taliban. It is true many there in that society no longer want them. They thrived in the conflict between us and the Soviets using thir land as a proxy. They thrive now in the chaos we revisted them with in this conflict. Hope when we withdraw the soldiers that we do not withdraw our presence but exchange it for funding for schools open to all sexes.

You are right. That was then, this is now. Islam once provided for liberal societies when Christianity was in the darkest of ages. A return is due and can be achieved even if it means those societies deemphasize religion and strengthen secularism.

In all fairness, the oppression of women far predates any involvement of the West in these countries. Giving credit where credit is due, the West did contribute, directly or indirectly - by setting an example, or raising awareness- to the liberation of women. Some of the ulama I mentioned in an earlier post here studied in Paris for several years. However, recently western Machiavellian politics have helped make life a lot more difficult for women.

As for Muslims in the West, it is not a matter of 'branding' or slandering them, but governments should adopt a much firmer attitude towards certain practices, attitudes and beliefs which infringe on the freedom and rights of women. There should be no extenuating factors. Being PC and 'nice' or even tolerant should take a second seat to the idea that the same laws should be applied to all citizens, regardless of their origins or beliefs, and the law should regard all citizens on the same footing. Requiring a certain degree of integration is a safety valve to prevent a ghettoization or even 'balkanization' of Europe. Integration does not suppression, but a healthy ability to adopt and adapt a new homeland, while still keeping one's cultural idiosyncrasies and forsaking others. It also means accepting that eventually one's descendants will belong to and identify with THEIR home country, not with that of their grandparents. Those who are incapable or unwilling to adapt to their new countries should consider an alternative.

edited for font size!

Edited May 30, 2013 by meryt-tetisheri

[Clarakore]

In all fairness, the oppression of women far predates any involvement of the West in these countries. Giving credit where credit is due, the West did contribute, directly or indirectly - by setting an example, or raising awareness- to the liberation of women. Some of the ulama I mentioned in an earlier post here studied in Paris for several years. However, recently western Machiavellian politics have helped make life a lot more difficult for women.

*snip*

We agree to a degree. Life was harsh before the Soviets and our presence (especially that of NGOs) have given them a different view of the world. After this exposure women will not stop fighting for their rights. My previous comment was based more on our responsibility to stay and insure rights for women are achieved as well as transforming their society into a progressive one. Men who attack females just for having a job, teaching, or wanting to go to school should be punished...worldwide.

Domestically we should focus on integration without allowing any allowances for parallel legal systems even covertly. My comments before were based mainly on those who hate Muslims here for problems over there. A recent poll revealed Muslims in America are the most moderate of any. Their exposure to our way of life changed them, naturally, but no huge surprise since acculturation always does that. Which is why it is very important we maintain a presence in Afghanistan once the military withdraws. Import our way of life instead of our drones. Support their hospitals, schools, and legal systems above all especially help with reform where required.

The ghettoization is really horrid in France. Over there the rich live inside the big cities while the poor immigrants remain outside in suburbs. This cuts off many communities away from the core services within. Unsure what could connect them. Their society will have to resolve that in order to see integration.

Edited May 30, 2013 by Leave Britney alone!

[Yamato]

Any solutions that you had in mind?

To let the people decide whether or not they want to continue subsidizing foreign governments. I'm sure that when we can keep our own money we'll spend it far more intelligently than propping up oppressive regimes throughout the world.

If it's such a good idea for the US to nation-build, we should make the case that every other country of reasonable wealth should participate in nation-building too. Dump 5% of their GDP on foreign sweethearts like Karzai. At least the greatest debtor nation in the history of earth would have some company in that riffraff.

[Mr Walker]

In all fairness, the oppression of women far predates any involvement of the West in these countries. Giving credit where credit is due, the West did contribute, directly or indirectly - by setting an example, or raising awareness- to the liberation of women. Some of the ulama I mentioned in an earlier post here studied in Paris for several years. However, recently western Machiavellian politics have helped make life a lot more difficult for women.

As for Muslims in the West, it is not a matter of 'branding' or slandering them, but governments should adopt a much firmer attitude towards certain practices, attitudes and beliefs which infringe on the freedom and rights of women. There should be no extenuating factors. Being PC and 'nice' or even tolerant should take a second seat to the idea that the same laws should be applied to all citizens, regardless of their origins or beliefs, and the law should regard all citizens on the same footing. Requiring a certain degree of integration is a safety valve to prevent a ghettoization or even 'balkanization' of Europe. Integration does not suppression, but a healthy ability to adopt and adapt a new homeland, while still keeping one's cultural idiosyncrasies and forsaking others. It also means accepting that eventually one's descendants will belong to and identify with THEIR home country, not with that of their grandparents. Those who are incapable or unwilling to adapt to their new countries should consider an alternative.

edited for font size!

The tricky situation is where educated, second generation western women, or even women of western descent, in a country like Australia chose (for logical and sensible reasons) to live as muslim women, so that they dress and act as such women. There are a considerable number of women young and old who do not want to drink alcohol, dress up in a way that makes them attractive to men, or to be the same as men. A lot of them are not even muslim.

My wife has been like this all her life for 70 years. She has never drunk alcohol, sworn, never worn make up or jewellery, and is quite traditional and modest in her dress, appearance and behaviour.

Ii dont have a problem with that in a free society .A woman must be truly free to chose whatever role she wants, not just one the society feels is most appropriate or best for her.

Mother, maddona, or whore; all are allowable, as long as the choice is free and informed. Australia is a multicultural society which, within the limits of the law, actually encourages such cultural diversity.

Edited May 31, 2013 by Mr Walker

[meryt-tetisheri]

The tricky situation is where educated, second generation western women, or even women of western descent, in a country like Australia chose (for logical and sensible reasons) to live as muslim women, so that they dress and act as such women. There are a considerable number of women young and old who do not want to drink alcohol, dress up in a way that makes them attractive to men, or to be the same as men. A lot of them are not even muslim.

My wife has been like this all her life for 70 years. She has never drunk alcohol, sworn, never worn make up or jewellery, and is quite traditional and modest in her dress, appearance and behaviour.

Ii dont have a problem with that in a free society .A woman must be truly free to chose whatever role she wants, not just one the society feels is most appropriate or best for her.

Mother, maddona, or whore; all are allowable, as long as the choice is free and informed. Australia is a multicultural society which, within the limits of the law, actually encourages such cultural diversity.

With regards to women, we both agree on the bolded part; but generally among immigrant communities women are more able to integrate more than men.

Integration does not necessarily mean blind copying of the host culture, or totally abandoning one's cultural heritage. Integration is opting for a compromise between both cultures, accepting to adopt the 'new home land' as a full member of its society, and also accepting that one's children and grandchildren will not live the same culture as their parents. My husband and I raised our children to be proud of the heritage they inherited from both parents, but they are European. Being half Egyptian does not mean that they were expected to live like Egyptians of their age. We maintained some Egyptian traditions at home, but not those that would place them in conflict, whether internal (psychological) or external.

What I was referring to in my previous post was ghettoization, whether physical or cultural; movements like "Sharia for....", the excessive ease with which the accusation of 'racism' is leveled at any one who complains about transgressions or misbehavior of an immigrant. If cultural diversity is to be a success, one side should be tolerant, the other should 'integrate', it's a two-way street. A foreign body, that remains foreign, leads to inflammation and infection!