Week 11 Honor Killings and Udating Empires

Dicle Kogacioglu talked about honor killings in Turkish society. Honor killings are crimes in which women are murdered by male family members in order to prevent shame or dishonor from coming into their families. Women were murdered for reasons such refusal of a arranged marriages and ethnic switching. In Dicle's case, women were murdered because of their sexual behavior. Dicle disapproves the fact that honor killings are viewed as a "tradition culture" and due to the tradition effect, which is the repeating of honor killings preformed by other families, women were losing their rights. Dicle also disapproves how law institutions reduces sentences for murders compared to regular sentences. It also depends on the crime. For example, Article 51 can reduce prison sentences by two-thirds if the murderer was suffering grief during the crime. Article 462 reduces prison sentences to eight years instead of twenty-four. That means the suspect can leave prison early and kill another woman if she did an "dishonorable" crime.

In Cynthia Enloe's reading, she talked about military abuse and the fact that women were not seen in politics. Women were mostly seen in places such as brothels and factories and  are seen as third world women. It was interesting to know that women wanted their own constitution in order to gain women rights. The first was education; the second was freedom of speech; third was the right to vote; fourth was equal representation; fifth was equal judgements; sixth was equal pay rates; seventh was property rights; eighth was, relating back to Dicle's reading, rights of criminal charges against men for abuse; ninth was selling women; tenth was marriageable age change; eleventh was the right to divorce; and twelfth was the right to remarry.

My questions is relating to the seventh proposal of the constitution, why the law prevents women ownership of land and what kind of effect did they think it would have in institutions eyes? Does law institutions have their own supreme court? 

Week 11: Enloe and Kogacioglu

“The Tradition Effect: Framing Honor Crimes in Turkey” looks at the ways in which institutions such as as Turkish laws, international media and the EU perpetuate the continuing of honor crimes. Kogacioglu challenges the notion that traditions are solely a cultural phenomenon and separate from these institutions. When it comes to Turkey’s admission into the EU, for example, policies about men and women are subject to “gender mainstreaming,” and honor crimes subsequently fall from the forefront of attention, showing how the EU’s complacency in weak policies uphold honor crimes. International media, as well, creates the dichotomies of the Middle East in opposition to Europe, medieval in opposition to modern, the West in opposition to the non-West, etc. By calling honor crimes a tradition and framing them as something susceptible to spreading, the media puts Turkey into the uncivilized category of countries.

“Updating the Gendered Empire: Where Are the Women in Occupied Afghanistan and Iraq?” discusses how the military is another institution that has harmful effects on women. Masculinity is pertinent to nation-building, so we get very masculine notions of what danger and security are. The military is an institution that upholds these gendered notions of the nation but doesn’t make women safe. The U.S., in trying to build an empire, also plays a role in upholding the patriarchal aspects of the military.

My question for this week is: would it be effective to simply inject more women into these institutions so that they have a voice? What exactly should be done to try to undo what these institutions are doing?

Enloe & Kogacioglu readings

In Cynthia Enloe’s piece “Updating Gendered Empire” she discusses the dynamics of an empire and how it is strongly influenced by gender which favors men. She explains the  history of the Iraq invasion in order to put her main points into play. In 2003 the Bush administration invaded Iraq and had a very strong presence. Enloe focuses on subjects like security, danger and combat and invites us to think who gets to define these terms and well as how is masculinity affecting these terms. Throughout the reading it’s made clear that women’s best interest and rights weren’t on the agenda. Although, it’s made to seem the military was there for the freedom of women this dynamic was only to deepen the military regimes sense of masculine control. Enloe explains, “When U.S policy-makers in Washington selected Ismail Khan and his fellow Northern Alliance anti-modernist regional commanders as their most promising allies, they did not employ “the empowerment of Afghan women” a their chief criterion”(282). In the reading women’s lack of liberation was evident as well as the need for male leaders to control every aspects of women’s life in order to feel like they’re sustaining power.

In Dicle Kogacioglu essay “The Tradition Effect: Framing Honor Crimes in Turkey” she discusses how the women are viewed in society, the pressure of honor for these women and how certain institutions view these honor crimes as well as how they handle them. An honor crime is the murder of a woman because she has brought shame onto her family because of sexual actions. Third world feminist believe the main issue is being ignored and instead people are connecting these killings to tradition. These feminist believe power structures and gender inequality are to blame. Another critical aspect is the family rubric and its great importance in Turkey which highlighted throughout the reading. In Kogacioglu’s piece she discusses the way women’s individuality is connected to the family. Reason is the woman is seen as the educator for the family, therefore is the mobilizer for a greater society. This means women lack individuality and instead are connected to the family, their worth is family worth. She also discusses Turkey in regards to to the E.U and how honor crimes are seen. Honor crimes are in the category of mid-range issues. The reading addresses the numerous amounts of committees that work for women’s right in particular honor crimes, but emphasizes the lack of urgent care as explained, “ Yet, to this day, the Parliamentary Commission has not prepared a report or a resolution on honor crimes. Without such a resolution, the issue gets less attention in the European Commission”(135). This shows the awareness of the parliament but also highlights the lack of importance given to these honor crimes and instead pinning this social issue as a Turkish political issue.

Overall, in both readings the writer’s explained the masculine agenda as well as how its practiced and it’s effects in society particularly with women. Enloe gives us a look into the politics of the Bush administration and its lack of effort to empower women because of its masculine military regime. She  also, gave us an example of a beauty salon being a place of political forum for these women. The symbolism of the salon is important  because it’s a place where these women can communicate and spread knowledge for empowerment. Kogacioglu piece focuses on Turkey and its honor crimes particularly on the lack of government support on women’s issue. Both readings highlight the lack of importance for women in order to mobilize a power structure of military regime.

Week 11

Dicle Kogacioglu talks about honor crimes and their role in Turkish society. This is when family members of a women kill her because they do not approve of her sexual actions. This is considered to be a "tradition" in turkish culture. Kogacioglu does not agree with this idea, saying that if men were put in the same position then it would not be be justified. The Turkish government should not allow this "tradition" because it is wrong and not a humane or justifiable "tradition". She talks about how mens right take first priority over women, and the government is an abuse of power by letting these killings continue.

Our next reading by Cynthia Enloe talks about how Iraq and Afghanistan the government and how the military abuses its power, she wants to bring our attention to this serious matter. She talks about how women in the United States, are not usually actively seen and are not included in the policies that are carried out. Women are not seen in the US military when dealing with other forces, and that message is put out that they have no interest in giving women and more power.

Both of these articles discuss the unfair treatment of women in their societies and show where they deserve to have equal treatment. Both readings justify this unfair treatment and women deserve and should be able to have a fair say and treatment by their government. My question is, Where can people start in these societies, and have an actual impact so that women can have equal rights?

Week 11 Readings: Kogacioglu & Enloe

Dicle Kogacioglu's piece is about honor crimes and their framing within Turkish society. An honor crime is when a women's family murders her because they do not approve of her sexual behavior. These kinds of crimes have been framed by Western society as a traditional cultural norm but third world feminists point out the disregard of power structures and inequality plagued by this stance (119). There is a value placed on family honor at the expense of the woman by the legal system. "Legally when an adult murders a woman, the penalty is increased if the victim is a minor and a family member. Yet, while these articles and others point to alternative ways that existing laws could be applied, criminal judges and prosecutors almost never take up these alternatives" (123). When interviewing civil court judges, they sympathized with their colleagues in the criminal court as taking an appropriate understanding of social norms into consideration when sentencing, ultimately lowering the punishment of the perpetrators committing honor crimes. Honor crimes are different depending on different institutions and governments. To me, this tradition is egregious, I mean how can people be slaughtered by their own family because of their personal choices? Thinking this, I have to remember that people hold different things as important and in different societies, different things are held to the highest measure, but it's still hard for me to wrap my brain around this.

The second piece by Cynthia Enloe is about the power of the Iraq and Afghanistan military and how that power is held over women creating a power dynamic between men and women in these countries. The military is an institution with immense power and because women are not actively seen by the United States, Enloe says that this causes them to be forgotten in policies that are enacted by foreign agencies. She invites us to examine the notion of women's status within society being directly affected by the military and invites us to examine why women who do participate in the government sector are seen as not important and unpolitical.

Both of these readings invite us to examine the multiple ways that perpetuate women's oppression in that are both sanctioned by institutions. Just like every group of people, women's rights are directly affected by institutions around the world, all human rights are. What is it going to take for these institutions to change the way they view their people? How much can foreign entities intervene when we can't claim oppression because it is subjective? What can be done within these countries and by external agencies to ensure the path to equality is being taken?

Week 11

In Dicle Kogacioglu's "The Tradition Effect - Framing Honor Crimes in Turkey"  she describes honor crimes and how the perceptions of honor killings are primarily based on tradition or culture and are referred to as “ codes of honor.Honor crimes stand at the intersection of multiple political and social dynamics. She argues against this way of thinking and states that once tradition is blamed people feel there is no necessity to inquire into the ways the institution can be implicated in the making of honor killings. She critiques the differences in law for honor killings where women are victim to that of blood feud in which men are victims. Honor crimes are defined as the murder of a woman by members of her family who do not approve of her sexual behavior. Sentences for honor killings could be reduced if the person was feeling “ uncontrollable grief”, if he was provoked, a younger man and for several other reasons all supported  by law. In contrast in blood feuds which occurred between two families and each family kills a male member of the rival family the law increases penalties and deems them as unacceptable behavior. 

In Cynthia Enloe's "Updating the Gendered Empire" she too discusses the effects that military institutions have on Iraq and Afghanistan women. She argues that we need to become curious about the U.S imperial empire, to make sense of and become curious about marriage of factory women, gender dynamics in families, sexual policies the U.S military forces in Afghanistan. Womens roles in an empire are crucial yet over looked as where they are naturally meant to be. Enloe discusses the importance of women’s roles yet men trying to rank and manipulate the varieties of femininity. As seen when the government choses its allies which will more than likely privilege masculinity. 

Both of the articles talk about the power of institutions in the control of women and women’s rights. As well as show the clear separation of women and males rights. For sentences to be  reduced from a 24 to 30 year to only 4 to 8 i think is crazy. Yet when a man is murdered the law increases the penalties in hopes that it will be less likely to occur. 

WEEK 11: "Upholding The Gender Empire" and "The Tradition Effect"

"The Tradition Effect" by Dicle Kogacioglu talks about how honor crime which means the murder of a woman by family members who do not approve of her sexual behavior is considered a "tradition" in Turkey. From 1994-1996, 53 women were victims of honor crime. This type of violence against women is justified by "tradition", in which the author does not agree with. Kogacioglu critiques how men have the protection from the law and if men are victims they are prioritized. As for women, they do not have the same nor are protected like men are. Honor crimes and the traditions they show are different, depending on the political struggles and different institutions; for example the Turkish government. There is a clear differentiation between how men and women and treated. This honor crime should not be allowed, the murder of a women should never be justified as tradition. It is unfair, unhumane and unacceptable it is not a traditional act nor should be tied with tradition.

Cynthia Enloe's article "Upholding the Gender Empire" elaborates on the problems the military has on women in Iraq and Afghanistan. The military as an institution has control, the dominant masculinity takes over and has control over women. Women are affected in the military more than we know, Enloe wants to shine a light on this topic so more people are aware of what goes on in that institution. Women do not have the same rights as men and the issue concerning women get swept under the rug.

Both these readings had interesting views on how institutions treat women, although I personally thought "The Tradition Effect" was a better read. My question would be, when will these institutions treat women equally and protect them as much as they protect men? These institutions try to justify everything they do and never change. It is very disturbing that "honor crime" is allowed and that the government does not do anything to defend women from this horrific act.

Week 11: Cynthia Enloe and Dicle Kogacioglu

Both authors for this week, Cynthia Enloe and Dicle Kogacioglu, discuss the role of institutions in perpetuating gender disparity and oppression in the Middle East- Enloe looks specifically at Afghanistan and Iraq, while Kogacioglu looks at Turkey.

Enloe's article "Upholding the Gender Empire" looks at the harmful effects military institutions have on women in Afghanistan and Iraq. In the United States's mission to develop into an empire, they must develop relationships with local military forces in Afghanistan and Iraq- relationships, Enloe argues, that turn a blind eye to the patriarchal ideologies and abuses the local forces implement, and instead are forged on a connection between men for their participation in the masculinity of combat. This blind eye occurs because for the US, women are not actively seen and therefore are not considered in the policies or actions of allied military forces. Enloe argues that to the contrary, all women are consistently affected and influenced by the actions of military forces- not just women involved in government, but women who participate in domains seen as unpolitical (such as beauty parlors). Enloe discusses how crucial it is to consider as well as question the position of women in a society affected by military. The US fails to do this when it forms alliances with local forces that do not exhibit an interest in empowering women; consequentially, women's rights are not considered pressing issues, and toxic masculinity will only be perpetuated.

Kogacioglu writes "Framing Honor Crimes in Turkey" on the practice of honor killings in Turkey (defined as "the murder of a woman by members of her family who do not approve of her sexual behavior" (Kogacioglu 118)), and the dangerous effects of attributing this practice solely to tradition. While dominant understandings of honor killings are quick to blame them on the prevalence of tradition, Kogacioglu recognizes that honor killings are conducted from a number of factors, particularly, Turkish government institutions that portray themselves as modern and Westernized. Like Enloe, Kogacioglu critiques institutions that allow for a perpetuation of patriarchal power; in this case, institutions like the law allow for loopholes around punishment of honor killings (where victims are women) but crack down on another "tradition-based" crime, blood feuds (where victims are men). Such a double standard on these crimes, which have both been perpetuated through history, demonstrates a prioritization of men's rights above women's rights and a clear instance of patriarchal abuse of power. Honor killings are also de-prioritized when it comes to Turkey's admittance to the EU- an institute which, Kogacioglu argues, is primarily concerned with the economic benefits of admitting a nation and secondarily with the human rights violation of honor killings. The EU is thus another institution that does not demonstrate active concern for women's rights and as a result, is complicit in the perpetuation of honor crimes.

Institutions play a crucial role in the treatment of women in societies all over the world, even when they are passive about women's rights. So when institutions like the military or the law place women's rights underneath other issues (such as regime control or the market), they become complicit in violations of those rights. Based on these readings, it is crucial to ask- what does it take for institutions to shift their focus onto women, and how can this be accomplished in areas where patriarchal interpretations of Islam dominate?

Week 10: Motherhood, Marriage and Divorce in Islam

In the first chapter of Kecia Ali’s book Sexual Ethics and Islam, “Marriage, Money, and Sex”, she discusses how Muslim men and women engage in these topics, and “the gap between expressed doctrine and practice” in the US specifically. She goes into detail on the development of the dower and how it was not an Islam innovation, but an adoption from 17th century Arabic practices. Then, the dower was paid to the wife as a guarantee that her offspring would belong to the husband’s tribe rather than the relatives of the woman. Because of this perception of the dower as economic security for the wife, this notion has been used as “proof of Islam’s liberatory stance towards women.” The dower being looked at in this way, as the husband paying for his control over the relationship, leads to the explanation for divorce laws. The husband has more say over divorcing his wife than vice versa due to the power role given to the male. In the jurists logic, because of the monetary compensation supposedly given to the wife upon divorce, the power to choose divorce lies in the hands of the husband. This is due to the wife’s potential ability to allow the marriage to be consummated and then divorce solely for financial reasons. “Any attempt to modify the rules surrounding divorce but not these governing dower, as some advocates for women’s rights have proposed, would alter the marital dynamic significantly.” She also discusses sex and the lack of taboo it holds in the religion. She compares it to the contrasting approach in Christianity on sex and the way in which the religion highlights purity, versus the acknowledgement of sex as “a natural and desirable part of life” in Islam. She talks about the husband’s duty to fulfill his wife’s sexual desires but also acknowledges by quoting Al-Ghazali that this is moreso a matter of being the husband’s duty rather than the wife’s right, because the right of sex belongs to the man not the women. Although he may be responsible for her pleasure, the decisions surrounding sex are decided by the husband. She ends on a positive note that although there are challenges that arise with applying Islam to more contemporary views, there has been many

In the chapter “Crafting an Educated Housewife in Iran” of Remaking Women by Afsaneh Najmabadi, she talks about the shift of the viewpoint of women from “house” to “manager of the house.” Whereas traditionally women did not have much to do in terms of educating or the caretaking of their children, and the men were the educators, there was a shift onto women playing important educational roles. Tusi wrote in the 13th century that he “considered his ideal reader to be not a Muslim man in search of this-worldly and other-worldly perfection, but an Iranian man concerned with the fate of Iran. The perfect man had changed from a Muslim believer to an Iranian citizen.” In this approach, the woman became a necessary piece in the progress of Iran. Women’s need to become more educated developed as a response to realization of the role women played in children’s life. It was realized that the education of children would benefit the nation as a whole, and therefore the mothers would need to start this chain of events. She talks about one of the first writings that spread awareness of women’s education, a piece entitled the “Liberation of Women”, that was translated into Persian by Yusuf Ashtianti. He published the piece under a different name “Education of Women”, and changed a paragraph regarding the veil, but even with the changes, this was the first time full attention had been placed on the necessity of women’s education. This notion that the “progress of the nation was dependent on the education of women” changed the way in which mother’s and women’s roles were depicted in society.

In reading these chapters, it stood out to me that although the western perspective of some Muslim practices is negative, in what ways do our practices run parallel? In terms of money, sex, divorce, and women’s education, we may not agree with the way the matters are conducted, but what western version of the same thing are we condoning? In some of these topics, is one really any better than the other? Or are they undoubtedly accepted because they are rooted in our historical and political association?

Week 10

In Afsaneh Najbadi "Crafting an Educated Housewife in Iran", she discusses the Persian books of ethics. In the book, it says what roles a Muslim man and woman should have. A man was in charge of the household and took care of the financial needs of the house. A woman was to take care of the house and that the only purpose is to property and to have kids. It was believed that the women could teach her kids while in the womb, but the need for educated women grew. The role of a Muslim changed from a housewife to manager of the household. She could teach her children growing up that would guarantee the prosper of the country.

In "Marriage, Money, and Sex" and "Lesser Evils: Divorce in Islamic Ethics", Kecia Ali discusses the position of women regarding the subject of marriage, money, and sex. A marriage obligates the man to pay a dowry to the brides family in exchange for considering her future children as a part of the family. Because of the dowry, it is believed that the man has the power over the woman and her reproductive ability. It is also said that Muslim women has their own sexual rights which are overpowered by the need to keep their husbands pleased.

Both readings had interesting views of a woman's role in societies. I found the concept of dowry interesting because it is a lot different that the Indian perception of dowry. The man would pay the brides family in order for her cute offspring to be a part of the family. Whereas in Indian culture, dowry is give to the mans family to marry a woman and take her off her families hands.

Remaking Women & Sexual Ethics and Islam

In the text Remaking Women, Afsaneh Najmabadi touches base on the notion that newly veiled women of the Middle East are equal products of the modernity as upper and middle class women who unveiled themselves in the turn of the 20^th century. Specifically, in the chapter “Crafting an Educated Housewife in Iran” Najmabadi focuses on shifts of the meaning of “mother” and “wife” for women as well as the roles men were supposed to play in marriage. A postmodern normative concept was that “the father, not his wife, was the manager of the household and in charge of the discipline and education of the children…”(92). The women were not expected, sometimes not even wanted, to be the caretaker or educator of the child. Women were seen most useful for the ability to carry a child in their womb. Often times that alone was their only job, as it was believed the child would gain its ethics and character traits from the mother while in her womb. In the first years of the 21^st century, Iranian reformers began to argue that “reform regarding women’s status was women’s education” (101). A new way of thinking began to arise and it was believed that women’s education needed to improve for the sake of a prosperous civilization. Mother’s eventually gained more respect and they began to take charge of girls’ education by encouraging and creating the means to organize fund-raising events and prove free schooling in their homes for those who could not afford to receive an education.

In the chapters “Marriage, Money, and Sex” and “Lesser Evils”, Kecia Ali starts by discussing the sexual subordination required by Muslim women in both Muslim cultures and Islamic belief. She argues against several Muslim authors, one being Abdul Doe, with his conception that men always willingly fulfill their expected duties as a Muslim man. Ali argues that Islam is “men’s Islam” because the interpretation and regulation is done by men and male scholars. Ultimately, she pushes for advocacy to reconsider dower, spousal support, and intermarriage to form a new structure of egalitarian marriage. The concept of a dower in marriage is most problematic. The common idea of including a dower in marriage is to ensure the husbands words to provide for his wife and family and create an economic safety net. Jurist’s, however, shine light on it to be a form of control and dominance for the husbands to have over their wives and children. Ali brings up sexuality as another problematic marriage topic. “Significant texts in the Qur’an and hadith allude to the importance of female gratification and satisfaction in the sexual act” (7). In marriage, women have sexual rights and Ali highlights the dissociation of sex from reproduction. However, even though it categorized as a woman’s “right” to such pleasure, the concept of women being obligated to keep their husbands sexual pleased often overrides that right.

Though Muslim women have made great efforts in gaining some respect and rights, there is still a lot of equality to fight for. In terms of marriage, what should/should not be expected of both the husband and wife to create a more egalitarian relationship?

Week 10: Motherhood, Marriage and Divorce in Islam

Divorce trial in Indonesia. Photo: www.jawapos.com

Islam and modernity has always been an interesting topic in the Muslim world, especially among Muslim feminists. With the social and economic changes, Muslim feminists face challenges regarding several issues such as motherhood, marriage and divorce. In the chapters “Marriage, Money and Sex” and “Lesser Evils: Divorce in Islamic Ethics” in Kecia Ali’s book Sexual Ethics and Islam, the position of women in Islam regarding marriage, money, sex and divorce is unpacked through the feminist lens by reflecting on the Qur’an, Hadith and jurisprudence. The most interesting part of this piece lies in the second chapter. I found it very appealing as Ali attempted to constantly present the challenges occur in the modern world. She did this for instance by describing the clashes that might happen with the civil system regarding divorce especially for Muslim people living in Western country such as the United States. At the end of the chapter, she expressed her optimism toward a better position of women in divorce by giving examples of the reforms to divorce laws that have been happening in the contemporary Muslim world while still admitting that in Islamic law divorce is a prerogative right entitled to men. She also invited us to rethink about divorce in Islam by positing questions such as “but are the verses on divorce meant to apply in every possible situation, or are they specific in some way to seventh-century Arabia? If they can be modified, on what basis should one do so, and how far can one go in altering specific rules?” (38). The piece shows how Islam is a multi interpretative religion and how it can try to adapt in modern time such as today.

            Meanwhile, the role of Muslim women as housewife and motherhood in the Iranian context is described in the piece “Crafting an Educated Housewife in Iran” by Afsaneh Najmabadi. The chapter showed how “the modern educational regimes, deeply gendered from the start, were central to the production of the woman of modernity through particular regulatory and emancipatory impulses” (91). In the article, the education rights for women are slowly gained by the changing role of housewife to the manager of household affairs and educator of the children. Therefore, the (male) children need to be raised by educated housewife to guarantee the progress of the nation. The notions of disciplinary and regulatory brought the “acceptable social space for freedom for modern woman” (113). This article displayed how Islam met some challenges in modern time and once again trying to compromise in finding its place in the contemporary world.

            As the world progresses so fast, Islam is often faced by several modernity challenges. What stood out for me the most in these two pieces and the documentary Divorce Iranian Style is how Islam as a religion that is often assumed as backward and rigid, can be so flexible in finding its way in modern world. I think these pieces did a good job in putting Islam in a different light other than as this backward and rigid religion that might not be suitable with modernity. I wonder what other things can be done outside the scholarship to enforce this. What can Muslim feminists in particular and feminists in general do in order to make people seeing Islam in a different light as an attempt to cope with Islamophobia? I also wonder if Muslim feminists may have a totally different approach in gaining their own definition of equality. The pieces also make me think about the Muslim marriage and divorce back in Indonesia. Since it is not a Islamic Republic, the Muslim marriage and divorce also shaped itself between Islamic law and the legal system inherited by the Dutch colonizer. 

Week 10: Motherhood, Marriage and Divorce in Islam

Divorce trial in Indonesia. Photo: www.jawapos.com

Islam and modernity has always been an interesting topic in the Muslim world, especially among Muslim feminists. With the social and economic changes, Muslim feminists face challenges regarding several issues such as motherhood, marriage and divorce. In the chapters “Marriage, Money and Sex” and “Lesser Evils: Divorce in Islamic Ethics” in Kecia Ali’s book Sexual Ethics and Islam, the position of women in Islam regarding marriage, money, sex and divorce is unpacked through the feminist lens by reflecting on the Qur’an, Hadith and jurisprudence. The most interesting part of this piece lies in the second chapter. I found it very appealing as Ali attempted to constantly present the challenges occur in the modern world. She did this for instance by describing the clashes that might happen with the civil system regarding divorce especially for Muslim people living in Western country such as the United States. At the end of the chapter, she expressed her optimism toward a better position of women in divorce by giving examples of the reforms to divorce laws that have been happening in the contemporary Muslim world while still admitting that in Islamic law divorce is a prerogative right entitled to men. She also invited us to rethink about divorce in Islam by positing questions such as “but are the verses on divorce meant to apply in every possible situation, or are they specific in some way to seventh-century Arabia? If they can be modified, on what basis should one do so, and how far can one go in altering specific rules?” (38). The piece shows how Islam is a multi interpretative religion and how it can try to adapt in modern time such as today.

            Meanwhile, the role of Muslim women as housewife and motherhood in the Iranian context is described in the piece “Crafting an Educated Housewife in Iran” by Afsaneh Najmabadi. The chapter showed how “the modern educational regimes, deeply gendered from the start, were central to the production of the woman of modernity through particular regulatory and emancipatory impulses” (91). In the article, the education rights for women are slowly gained by the changing role of housewife to the manager of household affairs and educator of the children. Therefore, the (male) children need to be raised by educated housewife to guarantee the progress of the nation. The notions of disciplinary and regulatory brought the “acceptable social space for freedom for modern woman” (113). This article displayed how Islam met some challenges in modern time and once again trying to compromise in finding its place in the contemporary world.

            As the world progress so fast, Islam is often faced by several modernity challenges. What stood out for me the most in these two pieces and the documentary Divorce Iranian Style is how Islam as a religion that is often assumed as backward and rigid, can be so flexible in finding its way in modern world. I think these pieces did a good job in putting Islam in a different light other than as this backward and rigid religion that might not be suitable with modernity. I wonder what other things can be done outside the scholarship to enforce this. What can Muslim feminists in particular and feminists in general do in order to make people seeing Islam in a different light as an attempt to cope with Islamophobia? I also wonder if Muslim feminists may have a totally different approach in gaining their own definition of equality. The pieces also make me think about the Muslim marriage and divorce back in Indonesia. Since it is not a Islamic Republic, the Muslim marriage and divorce also shaped itself between Islamic law and the legal system inherited by the Dutch colonizer. 

Muslim Women's Roles

Kecia Ali in our reading talks about the importance of marriage, money, and sex and the importance of its roles in Muslim America and how muslim american women have a different set of rules then those who do not live in america. First she talks about marriage and the little agreement that they have over dowry. The rules of dowry do not  apply in the same way in the US due to our laws of marriage, yet they can have the same benefits such as property transfer, for legal not religious reasons. She also talks about sex and how the Qur’an talks about the importance of sexually satisfying the female. Dower has a more symbolic meaning in american muslims she explains.In Muslim america there is a shift in the duty of the women and she is not there to run the house, but she can support the household and not follow all traditional aspects of the muslim religion. 

Afsaneh Najbadi in her text talks about ethics and how man and women are supposed to act and what roles they are supposed to play. She says how the man is supposed to be the bread winner and be the one who takes care of the the women financial needs, while the women is supposed to take care of the house and that the only purpose is property and to have kids. Later she talks about how women’s education should start to become a priority and not just something for men to have. 

Both of the readings bring up interesting views of muslim women and their role in society. The man has a lot of control over his wife and what I think is being said is that women need to start to have more freedoms. She is not just property and something that is to be used for just sex. 

A question to think about: What should muslim women roles be in society be, and how fast will it get there?

Week 10

In Kecia Ali’s “Marriage, Money and Sex” she explores the ideology behind the governing of spousal sex and dower.  Marriage obligates the husband to pay a dower to his wife and his commitment to provide for his wife and the household. She talks about a dower being paid either to the family of the bride in exchange for considering her offspring part of the husband’s family rather than her father or brothers and dower being praised for giving the woman economic security  and as an example of the husbands willingness to provide. Jurist however understood dower as compensation for the husbands domination over the wife’s sexual and reproductive ability. The husband is believed to be paying for control over the woman. With the power being bought by the dower, it ‘made sense’ that only the man could liberate the wife through divorce. However the belief of homemaker and provider was not the case for most muslim families instead the husband maintains the wife in exchange for her sexual availability. In the Qu’ran and hadith it describes the importance of sexually satisfying the female and mens responsibilities for their wives to achieve this satisfaction. Husband’s duty rather than wife’s right (6).However when it comes to reproduction it was believed that the right for sexual pleasure was independent form ones choice to bear children. The women could not demand intercourse but the husband could prevent the women from reaching her sexual pleasure by stopping intercourse entirely, therefore not violating her right to pleasure. 

While in Afsaneh Najmabadi’s article “ Crafting an Educated housewife in Iran” she reviews educational regimes that were central in women’s modernity. She begins by talking about Persian books of ethics that were used to create the perfect Muslim man. In these books the man was to be in charge of the household and the children and the only purpose for taking a wife was for preservation of property and to provide her womb for conception and prebirth nurture. A woman would only be considered to teach the child while in the womb for it was believed that emotions would affect and alter the babies appearance, attitudes and whether they are of good nature. She talks about how within the first decade of the 21st century constitutionalist argued that women had the right to be educated for they would be the educators of children and the companions of men while in premodern texts knowledge only pertained to a man’s perception of god and his rules(97). Books were even used to teach favorable behavior in both boys and girls. Boys were to be kind, generous, and not get angry, while girls were shown as well mannered, never hiding anything from their parents, and helping with housework. However in  Kirmani and Ashtiani’s books their central conviction was that progress of the nation was seen as dependent on the progress of women again at the first years of the 21st century several arguments rose that women education should be a priority since from these women a educated nation would rise. The perceptions of women were beginning to change ignorant women were no longer seen as suitable mothers. “ A man who finds his wife in this ignorant condition, he quickly despises her(103).”

Kecia Ali’s article i thought was very interesting because it talked a lot about women having rights such as to sexual pleasure but men’s rights still being able to over power them, he could impede his wife conceiving. Men paid a dower and were in charge of their wives sexual activity. Forced intercourse was not seen as rape but rather as what the wife owed to her husband, rape did not exist in these marriages. Women had rights but were at the same time powerless. While Najmabadi’s articles also mentioned viewpoints on women as what seemed to be just another part of man’s property( just needed for a womb and companionship) but then evolving into women education being a priority for the children would learn from the mother and result in an educated nation. 

Agreeing to Differ

The year 1979 was a challenging year for Iran, more specifically Muslim women in Iran. After the monarchy was replaced by an Islamic Republic, drastic things began to take place. Though religion was not forced upon any of the people, the shari’a law was declared the law of the land. The large group of women who supported the revolution unexpectedly found themselves as outcasts of the new government that began to restructure Iran, proceeding the feminist movement to emerge through the 1980’s and 1990’s.

Ziba Mir-Hosseini’s book gives a personal glimpse into the perspectives on women in Islam through the conversations she shared with Iranian religious thinkers from Qom as well as writings she read in journals, popular press, and other forms of media. One emphasis she makes is the differentiating laws for men and women regarding the same issues. The Hejab, blood money, and guidelines concerning marriage and divorce was often brought up. Mir-Hosseini strongly believes “the law should protect the weak; and social conditions mean that woman is the party in the marriage who needs more legal protection”. The day they are born, women are expected to marry and care for a man the rest of his life. Catering to his desires and demands, without defiance or questioning. Like many men in Qom, Mortazavi found Mir-Hosseini’s arguments redundant and struggled to find any urgent problems in her points. “If everyone had a perfect religious conscience, then our society would be paradise; but it doesn’t work like this…”, seemed to be his bland explanation as to why Iran was conducted the way it was and why such problems could not be solved.

Throughout the conversation, Mir-Hosseini finds herself speaking without any of her words being accounted for. As she consistently displays examples of the inequality and injustice between Islamic men and women, Mortazavi seemed reluctant and complacent to see her point of view. “He was recycling an old argument, which I had heard so many times I knew each line by heart”, Mir-Hosseini reflected. The old argument was that men are by nature polygamous and Islamic law is in coherent with nature, as a result men’s right to polygamy “maintains order in society and protects women”. Mortazavi’s inability to fully grasp the importance of equality for women is in part due to his gender. Growing up, it is likely he never experienced the oppression and unfair treatment women often go through on a daily basis. Mir-Hosseini proceeds to tell him, “Your perspective on the issue…is that of a man. Mine is that of woman and I make no apologies for it”.

Mir-Hosseini’s conversation with Mortazavi is a discourse many women in the U.S. can relate to in some way. Though the feminist movement and fight for equal rights has gained face in the past few years, women’s voices are still not being heard and their arguments are still not being taken seriously. Women around the world have gained opportunities and rights, at one point in time Mir-Hosseini never would have been able to even have the conversation she did with Mortazavi, but there is still a long way to go on the road to complete justice.

Agreeing to Differ, Final Meeting

In Ziba Mir-Hosseini’s “ Agreeing to differ-Final Meeting with Payam-e Zan” she documents her final meeting/interview with Payam-e Zan. She interviews men of the islamic clergy and discusses the inequalities in the Feqh such as the view that women are deffective, unable to lead or be part of Tehad ,and the differences in blood money. When Mir-Hosseini goes on to question why women are made out to be defective, the clerics respond with “you’ve taken it as a definite, a priori that feqh perceives women as defective, inferior. dependent on and secondary to men and that is why it defines women duties differently from mens (174).” As the interview continues many of her questions seem to be unanswered, avoided or taken as an attack on the feqh and its practitioners. Who go on to say they have that they cannot think of a single principle that implies women are defective but rather need protection and support. However in the Sunni Feqh there is a principle that states blood money for women is half of mans because women are defective as well as can not assume a position of judge because of their emotionality and lower capacity for reasoning (175) . Mir-Hosseini questions womens economic value in comparison to men in which they respond to the issue of blood money and women receiving half of that of man and justifies it by saying that it is not based on the value of your own person but based on that duties that will be unfulfilled in your absence, and there are more duties assigned to men than to woman( 180) . She feels a bit frustrated because they could not see that this was an example of gender roles. 

The article was very interesting to read and to see how Mir-Hosseini posed her questions and how she defends what she stands for . As well as the perspectives of the men whom she interview which were at times frustrating.The justifications these men gave for the some of the questions Mir-Hosseini answered were direct examples of the very inequalities she was referring to which could have been frustrating but nevertheless she maintained her composure and i applaud her for that. 

"Agreeing to Differ, Final Meeting"

In "Agreeing to Differ Final Meeting With Payam-e Zan" , Ziba Mir-Hosseini is having her third and last meeting with Payam-e Zan. She is documenting her encounter with him as well as the other men whom she spoke too. Ziba Mir-Hosseini's main question to him is "to explain the inequality between men and women's legal rights". These men have a hard time answering her questions and often avoid answering them. She finds herself having to elaborate her questions more and more because they do not grasp them. It was frustrating for her and difficult because these men were not being completely honest.
They assume that she is trying to find a fault with the past of feqh, and that she does not understand it. One of the men does not consider "differences" as discrimination, although women have different rights compared to men; he does not see it as a bad thing. He tries to switch up Ziba Mir-Hosseini's question and assumes that she is saying "women are defective". This is his way of avoiding answering the question, he laches on to that and goes on about how women are not "defective" and how that was never written anywhere. The value of men and women are different and there are all these "reasons" to justify why women are treated different. Nothing really changes, these men have there opinions set in stone and do not think they are wrong.
Reading this article was at times a little frustrating because of the things these men said. We all know that Muslim women have different rights compared to men, they deserve equality. This equality is hard to achieve because of the set mind people have. I really enjoyed reading everything Ziba Mir-Hosseini had to say and what she stands for.

Agreeing to Differ: Final Meeting with Payame Zan

Reading Ziba Mir-Hosseini's article about gender and Islam, left me reflecting on how I view feminism and thinking of the article, "Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses." I connected these two articles because they maintained through out the session that feqh does not promote and endorse these beliefs, that it's not within the basic principle to view women as inferior or defective. Yet if this is not true why is it interpreted this way on such a large scale? At one point through out the conversation, he says marriage and submission of women is due to the roles in the marriage, not the notion that men's lives are valued more than women's. I connected this to the other article because I thought about how we view oppression of women through Western eyes but secular personalities in Islamic countries also view this as oppression. So that left me thinking that it wasn't necessarily that we declare them oppressed and we put them into that realm but it must be something within the religion that makes people interpret it these ways? One of them mentioned that women place men into the role of the provider and they come to expect this and in return they are submissive. This comes from how feqh portrays the gender dynamics within marriage. These are the limits they are given and expected to uphold. I respect her for staying so composed through out such a provoking conversation. I have extremely strong feelings about gender equality and this provoked a lot of feelings for me but I was conscious about that and kept "putting myself in check." Trying to be objective and understanding is important to me because being open minded of where people are coming from and what intersecting identities have created these beliefs is imperative for change. If we can be understanding of where people are coming from it makes coming to a compromise on both sides more feasible. To me it is impossible to accept such notions and justifications due to my beliefs but my beliefs are not the consensus.

Blog Post #3 Ziba Mir-Hosseini

In "Agreeing to Differ: Final Meeting With Payam-e Zan", Ziba Mir-Hosseini documents her last meeting at the Payam-e Zan clerics who publish articles in a women's magazine in the Middle East. She interviews men of the Islamic clergy in order to discuss "assumptions on which feqh Rulings on marriage and divorce are constructed" (171). However, as the interviews occur the author finds their content to be very different than she anticipated. While she does facilitate discussion over the inequality of the rights of women under feqh, those she interviews continuously avoid her questions or somewhat answer them. Mir-Hosseini touches upon a plethora of inequalities stemming from women being viewed as not equal to men under feqh, such as the tradition of women being forced to give up blood money, not being able to lead or be a part of Tehad, not having societal support in providing for their households, and views around men's right to polygamy. This discussion brings to light that although women are not defined as defective under the feqh, there are still many restrictions placed upon their identities due to their gender (174). Furthermore, the piece goes on to discuss whether a woman's lower value in society stems from her gender or if it stems from another part of society. When Mir-Hosseini questions whether the law stipulates "woman's economic value and contribution to the society is half man's", Mortazavi answers by saying that men have more roles and duties assigned to them in society, thus justifying the gender inequality laws with regard to blood money (180). After this discussion ends, there isn't much change in views by anyone as all parties have already somewhat made up their minds.

I enjoyed this article as I learned a lot about feqh and how women's roles in society as somewhat dictated in Iran. I admire Mir-Hosseini's courage in discussing these matters with these clerics as she is attempting to bring to light many issues women in Iran face today. I think that people need to question how social hierarchies work and not just stay within the roles they have been placed in. I found the discussion around polygamy particularly interesting, especially when the second person being interviewed Sa'idi stepping in to clarify what Mir-Hosseini meant by saying that her perspective as a woman differed from Mortazavi's due to him being a man, in that it had nothing to do with feqh, but rather their personal feelings on the matter. I was surprised by the complexity of Sa'idi's answer to her question as I can somewhat understand his perspective on the matter with regard to polygamy. However, I still disagree with polygamy being legal for men only. Under Sa'idi's answer, women should also be allowed to have multiple wives as they also may have a change of heart or desire.