Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Gods Servant

Wife Beating

Recommended Posts

"Narrated Ikrima: 'Rifaa divorced his wife whereupon Abdur-Rahman married her. Aisha said that the lady came wearing a green veil and complained to her (Aisha) and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's messenger came, Aisha said, "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes! When Abdur-Rahman heard that his wife had gone to the prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him, but he is impotent and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment. Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's messenger! She has told a lie. I am very strong and can satisfy her, but she is disobedient and wants to go back to Rifaa." Allah's messenger said to her, "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifaa unless Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you." The prophet saw two boys with Abdur-Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that Abdur-Rahman said, "Yes." The prophet said, "You claim what you claim (that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow."

 

"and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating." - Huh? I don't get it??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

There are also Muslim husbands who have hospitalized their wives from fracturing their bones, others who killed their wives, even cut them in pieces. What is your point?

 

Did you happen to see a Muslim with wings stemming from his back lately?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You said in the other thread “not to beat their wives in such a way as would leave marks on their body”


 

http://www.gawaher.com/topic/741187-is-wife-beating-allowed-in-Islam/?do=findComment&comment=1277806


 

I showed you a woman was beaten so badly as to have a green spot on her skin which according you is against your prophet’s teachings. Therefore, your prophet had the obligation to step in and rebuke Abdur-Rahman for beating her so badly. Surprising your prophet said nothing. Being silent is morally unacceptable by any prophet’s standard. Either what you said is false or your prophet is a hypocrite. Which is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Just because the hadith does not say that the Prophet reproved the man that does not mean that he didn't. We have already clearly established with evidence that injurious wife beating is forbidden. The point of this hadith was not to emphasize wife beating but the law regarding a woman having to have sex with another man for her to return to the husband she divorced twice from. The narrator felt like that it was the important part to narrate. "

 

http://www.answering-christianity.com/bassam_zawadi/rebuttal_to_response_to_badawi.htm

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For example, look at other hadiths that mention the same story:

 

Narrated Aisha: The wife of Rifa\'a Al-Qurazi came to the Prophet and said, "I was Rifa\'a's wife, but he divorced me and it was a final irrevocable divorce. Then I married AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair but he is impotent." The Prophet asked her 'Do you want to remarry Rifa\'a? You cannot unless you had a complete sexual relation with your present husband." Abu Bakr was sitting with Allah's Apostle and Khalid bin Said bin Al-'As was at the door waiting to be admitted. He said, "O Abu Bakr! Do you hear what this (woman) is revealing frankly before the Prophet ?"  (Book #48, Hadith #807)

 

Narrated 'Aisha: Rifa\'a Al-Qurazi divorced his wife irrevocably (i.e. that divorce was the final). Later on 'Abdur-Rahman bin Az-Zubair married her after him. She came to the Prophet and said, "O Allah's Apostle! I wasRifa\'a's wife and he divorced me thrice, and then I was married to 'Abdur-Rahman bin AzZubair, who, by Allah has nothing with him except something like this fringe, O Allah's Apostle," showing a fringe she had taken from her covering sheet. Abu Bakr was sitting with the Prophet while Khalid Ibn Said bin Al-As was sitting at the gate of the room waiting for admission. Khalid started calling Abu Bakr, "O Abu Bakr! Why don't you reprove this lady from what she is openly saying before Allah's Apostle?" Allah's Apostle did nothing except smiling, and then said (to the lady), "Perhaps you want to go back to Rifa\'a? No, (it is not possible), unless and until you enjoy the sexual relation with him ('Abdur Rahman), and he enjoys the sexual relation with you."  (Book #73, Hadith#107)

 

I think it's quite clear what the emphasis of these different hadiths, which talk about the same story, is. They convey the idea that it is not allowed for a woman to remarry her ex-husband unless she has married another.

 

You have to understand that not all the Hadiths mention every single detail. That's why there are hadiths which explain other hadiths. I think it's quite clear what the message behind these hadiths are. A woman cannot remarry her ex-husband unless she has married someone else.

 

I also think it is quite clear what the message behind these hadiths are:

 

"Do not beat the female servants of Allah"; 

 

Narrated 'Abdullah bin Zam'a: The Prophet forbade laughing at a person who passes wind, and said, "How does anyone of you beat his wife as he beats the stallion camel and then he may embrace (sleep with) her?" And Hisham said, "As he beats his slave"  (Book #73, Hadith #68)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one should ever beat their wife or withhold themselves from her! Good night

 

Yes, she can have that if she wish ...... let tell you how

 

first, You may like to read in some related topics, from Islamic websites, about woman in Islam, family in Islam, mercy in Islam, ……..

 

Here are some hadeeths show a general idea about the Islamic mercy and love in the Muslem house  atmosphere, 

 

"the prophet of Allah never beat a person neither a slave, nor a child, nor a wife"

 

"….many women complained to him about their husbands, he, pbuh, you have to know those are not the best among you"

 

"…don't beat the face and don't say bad words"

 

".. the best among you is the best for his "family/wife" ,…."

 

"…the best Denaar ($) man may spend is the one he spent on his family,…."

 

"….when ever easiness involved in any issue, it just make it better"

 

"Abu Mas`ud Al-Badri (May Allah be pleased with him) said: I was beating my slave with a whip when I heard a voice behind me which said: "Abu Mas`ud! Bear in mind...'' I did not recognize the voice for the intense anger I was in. Abu Mas`ud added: As he came near me, I found that he was the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) who was saying, "Abu Mas`ud! Bear in mind that Allah has more dominance upon you than you have upon your slave.'' Then I said: "I will never beat any slave in future"

 

Generally, mainly, in Islam the wife is the queen of the house and the man is the king, the man is the president and the woman is the vice-president,……the man is the ship leader and the women is the consulter. but there may be some irregular cases (either husband or wife)

 

first, the wife felt that her husband may deal unfair to here:

1- she have the right to ask for a family judjament.........004.035 S: And if you fear a breach between the two, then appoint judge from his people and a judge from her people; if they both desire agreement, Allah will effect harmony between them, surely Allah is Knowing, Aware.

 

2- she can ask divorce through the Judge/court/ruler if she can proof her case.

 

3- she can ask to be divorced by the Judge, khula'a, (if she can't proof here case/ or she is one the wrong side of the case)

 

second: while, on the other hand if the man, who, complained about his wife's behavior, should he neutralize the case, scandle her in front of here family members/society or what, I believe the women are so sensitive to this?!

 

again, The normal case in Moslem family is the love, integrity, mercy feeling among all the family members. While this verse, consider an emergency case when the wife disobey the husband, when the Queen show signs of not guarding the unseen (NOSHOOZ نشوز) what the husband/the king have to do:

 

004.034 S: …… the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.

 

1- admonish, advise, remind with Allah and the main goal of life, the husband/wife may request outside help/fatwa/advice of a sheikh/relative. That may take few days/weeks according the situations

 

2- leave them alone in the sleeping-places, show you are uninterested in here beauty, don't give here the bed right…that may take few days/weeks

 

3- if the situation goes more worse you may beat here, a beat that leave no signs and don't touch the face. [bTW, the Moslem scholars have the right to say with a Miswak or else, 

Islam gave the intellectual/intelligent/scholar/consultation/shoura the right to specify what is left general points in Islam that goes along the general Islamic concepts]

 

By the way the wife have the right to stop all of that, if she felt she is the right in this situation (even before step one), she will request judgment/divorce/khola'a as I mentioned before.

 

Both the wife and husband have to accept the judgment decisions, and re-construct their relations for the sake of Allah, then the family/children and the whole society. If any of them refused the judgment they may go to divorce, while the financial rights of any of them will depend strongly on who is the wrong among them.

 

BTW

What are the rates of wives' beating/abusing in the west? just to see how successful solution the west provides  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something tells me she gets it whether she wants it or not

even if she wants it, he should not do it

he shouldn't withhold himself from her unless she wants that for a time but he should never beat her ever whether she wants it or not

 

first off, that's mainly a deterring punishment. second it's not in a sever way, it's as light as the Muslem scholars and all Islamic teachings showed .3rd the wife is mistaken and she knows that and keep mistaken and she don't want to neutralize the case (ask for family/judge intervention) what to do?!!. why not, you suggest the 3rd. trial to keep a family exsist before break down!!!

 

what are the solutions you use in the west? what are the results and consequences you gained (real beating cases, divorce)?!!

 

Sometimes punishment is needed,

your own policemen uses, and will continue use, the pepper's fluid and electric chock, only, to let guys (protesters)  get back from the yellow line or the green grace, why do you think?

 

your government will take your money, prevent you from your right to drive your own car, and may jail you if you didn't wear your safety belt!!!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about a deterring punishment for the men? We are not talking about policemen and the law of the land that applies to both woman and men. We are talking marriage friend.

 

What you say makes no sense to me; it seems you are equivocating to justify something that makes no sense whatsoever to an objective point of view. It suggests that woman need a deterring punishment from men, but the men don't need it. So men are better????

 

Why can't the woman punish the men by deferring from the marriage bed? Why is it that the man gets to withhold himself from his wife as if he could outlast the woman. He can only do that if he has more than one wife; otherwise, he'll be punishing himself, lol. Please explain your rationale a different way that makes sense.

 

If in the west we had laws that men could beat their woman, there would be way more cases of it than you hear about now. What about the abuses to Muslim women in the Middle East? In the West woman have recourse (laws) against abusive husbands!

 

you gave

a good example, why then a policeman deters you? why not you deters him, if you see him wrong? I believe you can, through the state/judge, you proof your case and he will be punished. why don't you punish him directly?? because he is well armed he is stronger and not to break down the society order, authorities and responsibilities. the same for woman, she have all the men rights through the society/state/judge. the man will punished, in case of he is wrong, financially and may be physically also.

 

you judge Issues on the concept of "equality" between the two sex, while we see it on the basis of "Justice" which means distributing authorities and responsibilities Justly not equivalently. 

 

you may need to see the marriage structure in Islam, family structure which based on integrity and not competition, the family strength and stability is the main goal and not the individuals which comes in the second place, Authorities and responsibilities, marriage simple legal contract in Islam, the main differences between man and woman (biological, physical, emotional,....)

 

the emotional difference between man and woman that makes, "showing the no care about your wife Feminine is  a harsh punishment to her" yes, I accept, it's a punishment for the man as well but with less effect since he don't have the same woman' sensitivity.

 

since you mentioned the second wife, it's more than rare, it's only and emergency solution for emergency circumstances.in Egypt, I'm 40 years old I never meet such case except once, when the first wife had medical problems to have kids, and she is the one who chose the second wife for her husband.

 

the individual arrogance over the family stability, not only cased a lot of problems to the western family but also the whole society. family non-coherance, wife beating,  lost children, divorce, adultery, fatal diseases (STDs, AIDS, Cansers,...). I believe also you the westerners can't raise up your children on the values you have but the state (which is mostly is atheist) will do that for you...

 

Family is the most Important entity in the society and we should use all the available ways to keep it strong,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now this was a better attempt to make your point, but authority was given by God to serve the weaker not Lord it over them. The same laws apply to the policeman as does for all. When it comes to God's laws He is no respecter of persons also there is not male or female that comes into the issue! If a man steals, he is punished the same as a woman! So your rationale fails still!

 

when the man decides to give authority to a group of people (policemen) to stop/catch/chase/tie down/beat and even kill others including who are more intelligent, productive and benificent  for society than them, then the man is a great legislator!!! while when god do it based on Justice then he is not good??!!

 

BTW, I noticed that you ignore replaying any of my questions, either you have no answers or you don't like to show realities.

 

one more question, what do the bible tells about man and woman, who is the master and the head of the other? is man allowed to beat or even kill his wife? is that the equality/justice you seek for?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have responded to everything you asked and a few things don't make any sense to me so I can't respond to when I don't know what your talking about.

Nevertheless, in response to this post of yours no one gives authority to kill and beat people that are beneficial to society. In fact, they don't have authority to do that to guilty people unless there is no other recourse.

 

All authority comes from God even what the police have, but they too are subject to the laws they enforce.

 

We are to bestow on our wives the love and mercy of God not His justices. I don't want God's justice bestowed on me; do you want it on you? You are digging yourself into a hole friend

 

you didn't gave any statistics that may show up how broke down are your families that led to nonbeliever children and youth which almost will change the whole state into an atheist society, how severe the rates of STDs, AIDS and Cancers, divorce rates, adulterer members before and after marriage..

 

relating policeman authorities, can you explain what was the reasons to set free the policeman who shoot died the 17 years old black youth one year ago, other than your state gave him such authority?? man in his house have just a little authority over the wife non-compared to the case above and it's the last chance to keep a family exists. 

 

our families also on obligatory love (woad ود) and mercy, but also as reasonable creatures we have to put the laws to protect such love and mercy.

 

I like, and I'm asking that all the time, that god to deal with me by his mercy and not justice. while between people, in emergyncy cases only, what if love and mercy didn't work, we should have the law. both love and law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

another hadeeth, shows the of kind of hitting ( ضرب) the mistaken (and keeping instant) wife, I have to remind, first, that have to be after the next conditions:

 

1- admonish, advise, remind with Allah and the main goal of life, the husband/wife may request outside help/fatwa/advice of a sheikh/relative. That may take few days/weeks according the situations

2- the wife accepted and didn't use her right to have external family/state judging

3- leave her alone in the sleeping-places, show you are uninterested in here beauty, don't give here the bed right…that may take few days/weeks

4- the woman accepted the punishment and didn't use her right to have external family/state judging.

5- hitting/grasping that leave no signs, with a Miswak, pencil like stick, no hits to the face and no insulting words

 

the wife can stop all of that, instantaneously, when asking a family intervention or judge/state intervention.

 

in the book of hadeeth "Aladab almufrad" collected by Imam Bukhary, no(184) and others

the wife of the prophet pbuh, Um-Salamah ra narrated, the prophet, pbuh, kept calling a girl without a reply tell he become  so angry. I kept seeking for here when I found her playing. I said " are you playing while the prophet of Allah is so angry of you" the girl said "I didn't hear",  the prophet, pbuh replayed "If I wasn't afraid the god's retribution at the day of Judgement I would hit you with that MISWAk" 

 

that's the way of hitting after exhausting all the emergency proceeduers ........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The arrogance of people especially who come from the US who talk like their country is free of domestic violence! As if this is only a middle east problem. Muslims live in more places than the Middle East too like Indonesia and in Europe but they always associate Arab countries with Islam. 

 

In your country women in some work sectors still get payed less than men! The US is among one of the very few countries which still has not ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. You have high percentage rates of young girls with eating disorders. Many women in the US army have been raped and verbally abused because they are female. Yet the US still claims they have a fair system for women and their women are so liberated that they can join the army even! When I watched a documentary about women who got raped in the US army, their lives have been ruined and they have huge emotional problems that effect their lives everyday. And if you check the statistics on physical, verbal and sexual abuse in the US maybe you will be surprised at how high the rates are. America is not free of abuse of women, nor are many other countries. The Middle East has its problems but many countries there do not implement Islamic law. If Islamic law was implemented then the position of women would be much better. Islam protects women and liberates them. Your country in my opinion does not do that and that is why you have so many social problems and family instability. You have probably never even spent time in a Muslim majority country. I have and I can tell you that women have a lot of say and their voices are not covered up. They are not locked in their kitchen all day. Yes it may surprise you but there are many Muslim men out there who respect their wife and love them. 

 

Islam shows how valuable a woman is and I am glad I Allah has given me this position in the world: 

 

'Abdullah b. Amr reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The whole world is a provision, and the best benefit of the world is the pious woman.

(Sahih Muslim Book 8 No. 3465)

 

 

Brother Ahmad has explained the ruling well but you fail to see the justice in your Creators law. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ParadiseLost

 

I see it as a great tragedy when restrictions are placed on people which they have not earned.  I’ve met horrible violent women and I’ve met meek and mild men, I’ve met women who can outthink the majority of men and men who would lose a checkers game against a road cone with a wig on.  In my country there is no law which says, you can/can’t do X because you are a man/woman.  Rules are all based on the characteristics a person displays.  Some people are too stupid to fly aeroplanes, some people are too violent to be placed in charge of other people and some people are perfect to stay at home looking after the children and in all cases the sex of the person involved does not determine which role they are better for.  Yes more men are violent towards women but some women are equally violent.  Yes many women make good homemakers and child raisers but I’ve met men who also do this role really well, at least as well as many women.

 

My understanding is that the quran says “if you are a woman you can/can’t do these things”.  It has a different list for the man.  That assumes that men and women are “all” different, that there are no women who would make good tank drivers and no men who would make good house husbands.  From a humanist standpoint that is immoral.  I understand that you believe god said this is how it should be but I don’t accept that.  Can you justify these restrictions on the sexes without god?

 

Yes I agree with you that women are abused both physically and sexually all over the world.  No country, no occupation, no religion is free of it.  Men too suffer from these forms of abuse even at the hands of women yes up to and including rape.  Yes again men are more likely to commit these crimes but women do them too.  There is no characteristic, other than the physical, that you can point to and say “all women” or “all Men” have that so to judge all people by these arbitrary standards seems very counterproductive if you want to have the best of all possible societies.

 

Russell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

allow me to reply to this,

 

Hi ParadiseLost

 

I see it as a great tragedy when restrictions are placed on people which they have not earned.  I’ve met horrible violent women and I’ve met meek and mild men, I’ve met women who can outthink the majority of men and men who would lose a checkers game against a road cone with a wig on.  In my country there is no law which says, you can/can’t do X because you are a man/woman.  Rules are all based on the characteristics a person displays.  Some people are too stupid to fly aeroplanes, some people are too violent to be placed in charge of other people and some people are perfect to stay at home looking after the children and in all cases the sex of the person involved does not determine which role they are better for.  Yes more men are violent towards women but some women are equally violent.  Yes many women make good homemakers and child raisers but I’ve met men who also do this role really well, at least as well as many women.

 

Russell

 

 you ignored percentages, relative advantages, practical obligations and side effects..

 

-  women are more suitable as homemakers based on their natural relative  advantages (patience, caring about details, emotionally sensitive, subjected to have more vacation excuses than men, ..mints, pregnancy, bearing, suckling X 2 years X number of children,....) let's say 90% while men 10%. on the other hand men have an equal advantage in the outdoor work due to their relative advantages (stronger, Durable, less sensitive emotions, ...)

 

- For Example you allowed women to join the Army, but tell me what is the percentage in front lines, tankers' drivers, fighters' pilots....less than 0.1% and mostly for media shows only. the side effects are that scary amount of violence and sexual harassment against them. you pay for that, different and separate barracks, special health care, monitoring, keeping busy of solving harassing problems,  BTW, do you know that the recruit private in the USA army is not allowed to walk alone  all the 4 military preparation period and the other 4 technical preparation period, why do you think?!!! sexual harassment of their seniors!!!!

that's not the end 

 

- practical obligations: if the man is the one responsible about housekeeping while the women in work, what should happen when the woman in pregnancy, bearing, suckling X 2 years X number of children vacation?!!

 

- side effects, just what sister ParadiseLost and you have mentioned, mixing between the two sexes specially in non-public or far away or enclosed areas will cause what we have now and more, by the way we don't count the accepted sex, I mean when the woman (married or not) accepts to have such sex away of marriage wed. I'm not sure if the westerners husbands don't like this or count it as a freedom?!! 

 

- another side effect, when women keeps in contact with many different types/characters/good looking....men, that will force them to compare that with their husbands and if not got too far to fall in love with others at least that will reduce her satisfaction and happiness at home which will affect the whole family.

 

Hi 

 

My understanding is that the quran says “if you are a woman you can/can’t do these things”.  It has a different list for the man.  That assumes that men and women are “all” different, that there are no women who would make good tank drivers and no men who would make good house husbands.  From a humanist standpoint that is immoral.  I understand that you believe god said this is how it should be but I don’t accept that.  Can you justify these restrictions on the sexes without god?

 

But they are already different, you can ask physician, Sychetrists  and socialists. and so it's better for them to integrate for the sake of the family and not compete. specify Responsibilities / Authorities balance based on the missions and the benefit of the family/individual/society priorities.

 

 

Hi 

 

Yes I agree with you that women are abused both physically and sexually all over the world.  No country, no occupation, no religion is free of it.  Men too suffer from these forms of abuse even at the hands of women yes up to and including rape.  Yes again men are more likely to commit these crimes but women do them too.  There is no characteristic, other than the physical, that you can point to and say “all women” or “all Men” have that so to judge all people by these arbitrary standards seems very counterproductive if you want to have the best of all possible societies.

 

Russell

 

again you ignored percentages, here is one, at least it will be a good guide. The USA Jails welcome about 2,500,000 criminals, men occupy 2,400,000 among them while women have only 100,000. the percentage is 24 : 1. that is not win win game, men are more violent and women are the main looser due to violance.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi AHMAD_73

 

No I didn’t ignore percentages, they are in fact one of the crucial points I was trying to make.  Sure 90% of women make better home makers than men but there are a percentage of men who are very good at it but they are prevented from taking up those roles under your system.  You can’t just frame the majority view and say that that will suit everyone because the percentages prove you are wrong.  It’s not true that 100% of women make better home makers than 100% of men.

 

Now there are physical differences between men and women which we get from nature and can do nothing much about.  We can’t decide that men will get pregnant and carry children for example but for all roles which do not require a specific body we should not restrict people.  Some men do make very good home makers and some women are good workers who hate being stuck at home with the kids so why shouldn’t these people be able to swap places if that’s what makes them happy?

 

Breast feeding is best handled by women but many women stop very early and feed their children on formula which a man is perfectly capable of doing just as well.

 

Again men are, on average, better suited to outdoor work but I know quite a few women who also do very well at this sort of work and our mining industry preferentially hires female truck drivers for their 300ton mining trucks because the vehicles last longer, use less fuel and have fewer mechanical problems when driven by women.  There are no hard and fast 100% lines to be drawn here which is my point.

 

Women have only been allowed into the front lines in our military recently so the numbers are very low but they’ve been doing pretty much everything else for years.  They hold positions from cooks to truck drivers and field medics and have done so for a very long time.  Less women want to be in the army, men and women are different as I’ve said, but the number who want to join is not zero.  They basically never appear in the media here so it’s a fallacy to suggest that they are just filling these roles for media purposes.

 

I guess we’ve been doing well though there is certainly some sexual harassment of females in our military.  Those who perpetrate such crimes get thrown out or locked up very quickly but it does go on and it shouldn’t.  Of course the same is true in our everyday society but the numbers are actually very low indeed here.

 

I don’t know how the US army works but I gather they’ve had more trouble than other countries in this.  Does that mean that women should be banned from joining?  We’ve had women in the army here since soon after world war two.  My understanding is that the US has too but, obviously, it’s a system that needs work.

 

As I said you can feed an infant, after a very short period of time, with artificial formula.  The father is perfectly capable of that if that’s what they choose.  Yes women will have more time off for pregnancy but most women in our society only have two to three children if they choose to have them at all so we aren’t talking about years and years out of work here.  And why ban all women from working for the sake of having children when quite a few decide that they never want to have children but get banned anyway.  Is that reasonable?  I’m not suggesting that we stop the majority of women who want to be stay at home mums only that you leave the door open for the significant minority who don’t want to.

 

I’m not sure what you mean by your comments around women having sex when mixed in with men.  I assume you are talking about married women having sex with other people when the sexes are mixed together in a work setting.  If that’s not what you mean can you try to explain that again?  My wife has travelled overseas on her own for work and has travelled around the state here on her own for work and she’s at home alone now so she has every opportunity to go out and have sex with someone else if she wanted to.  I believe she won’t because we agreed to that when we got married but there’s nothing to stop her.  No I wouldn’t want my wife having sex with someone else though I’ve met couples who find that OK but I’m not at all worried when she travels away from me for her work or just for shopping trips that she’s going to run off and have sex with someone else.  Does that sort of thing really worry you?  Do you trust your women so little?

 

So you are scared of the comparisons between yourself and strangers and wish to prevent such comparisons by stopping your women from meeting strangers?  Sounds kind of insecure to me.  Again I have no problems with my wife meeting other people, men or women, because I trust her and I don’t think I’m such a bad catch.  Does that sound conceited?  It’s pretty normal for men in my society to feel confident in themselves.  That’s not to say that such things don’t happen, they’re not common but they do happen, but if other men out there suit your wife better maybe she married the wrong man in the first place.

 

So the bottom line is that I feel it is wrong to take the majority way of life and say that everyone must live this way when we know that a large minority would be happier living another way.  I don’t believe you should place unearned restrictions on people’s freedom.  No the answer “god said this is how you should do it” doesn’t wash with me I’m afraid.

 

Russell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course I agree with you that some women are also violent to there husbands. Certainly that happens but that wasn't topic. 

 

Yes an essential understanding of Islam is to accept men and women are different. There have been many scientific experiments worldwide which show men are better than some things and women are better than some things. Nobody is saying that men aren't good at raising children. A father is an essential part of the family structure just like the mother. Islam does not deny that. But at the end of the day there is evidence to show that men and women are different. See there are feminist campaigns out there trying to demand everything by comparing their status to a man but in Islam why should we need to do that. We should make our demands based on the fact we are women. We shouldn't have to compare ourselves to men. 

 

It is difficult for you to deny the system you have been told is the right system. I grew up in that system and accepted Islam later in life. I see many women under stress because of this system. When they have a child they have to get back to work very quickly and it is a very emotional time for a woman. There are many other examples this is just one. See you say that the system you have allows a man and a woman do to what they want but that does not mean the system works. 

 

By the way I definitely encourage Muslim women to work if that is their choice but I don't think we should give up our Islamic values and try to copy other systems. There are possibilities for women to work in an Islamic environment. We actually need women in the workplace and not all women want to have children and even those who do find time to work while keeping a balance between family life. But on the other hand there are women who want to stay at home and take care of their children but in some countries there is pressure for them to go out and work or they are looked down upon because they are a housewife. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ParadiseLost

 

I think the fact that some women are violent towards their husbands is the critical point here.  I agree that men and women are different and I don’t think anyone should be looked down on if they choose to stay at home and look after the children what I see as a critical flaw in your system is that you wish to enforce different rules on men and women just because they are men or women.  If allowed the free choice many more women will choose to stay home and look after children than men but there is a percentage who would choose the opposite and they should be free to do so not restricted by rules base not on their merit but on their sex.

 

The system I grew up in has women fitting into certain roles and they are looked down on by a segment of society if they don’t conform to the norms of that society but I disagree with the system I was raised under.  I believe we should all have the same choices.  More men will choose certain options than women and vice verca but we should all have the same freedom of choice so the women who want to be welders or tank drivers have the same chance to do so as the men and the men who want to be house husbands have the freedom to choose that option.

 

None of that is affected by the fact that science shows that on average men and women are different it just leaves the choices open so that those on the end of the bell curve can lead lives that suit them even if those choices go against the norms for their sex.

 

You said that Islam recognizes that fathers are an essential part of the family structure but that is, as I understand it, painted in a very specific role, it does not include the possibility of the man being the house husband and primary carer for the children while the wife goes out and runs a mining company to raise the money to run the family for example.

 

You say you encourage muslim women to work but would you encourage a muslim woman to choose to have no children, even to not get married, and to take up a high powered roll running a big business enterprise or a government?

 

Russell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, Rassell,

 

let me explain that first, because I feel like you misunderstand me, In Islam, women are allowed to work what ever they like by agreement with their husbands and with some conditions relating wearing in modesty, and avoiding private mixing (that should prevent/reduce harassing actions). moreover In some cases it's obligatory/highly recommended for Muslem women to work in specific branch ( every aspect related to women/girls and children, medical , education,....ETC.  )

 

A fact: women are highly more subjected to sexual harassing and violance, the society should protect them

 

A fact: women are more pretty and attractive than men (what ever who is she and who is he)

 

Hi AHMAD_73

 

No I didn’t ignore percentages, they are in fact one of the crucial points I was trying to make.  Sure 90% of women make better home makers than men but there are a percentage of men who are very good at it but they are prevented from taking up those roles under your system.  You can’t just frame the majority view and say that that will suit everyone because the percentages prove you are wrong.  It’s not true that 100% of women make better home makers than 100% of men.

 

In many legislation systems, from mere practical and economic point of views, they should set a threshold value for the minimum number that satisfies the requirements before getting into the issue. for example if # of 2, 3 or 10 women among the 1000 men satisfies the requirements of air academy to be a fighter' pilots, But in case if i accepted them that will cost your country extra $ millions (new separate barracks, new health care areas, physician branch, ...) i'm not mentioning the harassing and troubles due to such mixing ,,,,do you accept that or it's better to dedicate that amount o money to feed the needy and shelter the homeless??

 

 

Hi AHMAD_73

 

Now there are physical differences between men and women which we get from nature and can do nothing much about.  We can’t decide that men will get pregnant and carry children for example but for all roles which do not require a specific body we should not restrict people.  Some men do make very good home makers and some women are good workers who hate being stuck at home with the kids so why shouldn’t these people be able to swap places if that’s what makes them happy?

 

every one can do what ever he likes....

 

while my opinion is if he likes to do that he have alot of time before work, after work,weakends and vacations, we have a tradition about the prophet, pbuh "....he, pbum, was helping his wife in the work she is doing..."

 

Hi AHMAD_73

Breast feeding is best handled by women but many women stop very early and feed their children on formula which a man is perfectly capable of doing just as well.

 

NATURAL feeding and Industrial feeding:

which way do you prefer to your and the others' children?

which way did science  prove the best?

 

Hi AHMAD_73

 

Again men are, on average, better suited to outdoor work but I know quite a few women who also do very well at this sort of work and our mining industry preferentially hires female truck drivers for their 300ton mining trucks because the vehicles last longer, use less fuel and have fewer mechanical problems when driven by women.  There are no hard and fast 100% lines to be drawn here which is my point.

 

Women have only been allowed into the front lines in our military recently so the numbers are very low but they’ve been doing pretty much everything else for years.  They hold positions from cooks to truck drivers and field medics and have done so for a very long time.  Less women want to be in the army, men and women are different as I’ve said, but the number who want to join is not zero.  They basically never appear in the media here so it’s a fallacy to suggest that they are just filling these roles for media purposes.

 

As I said before, threshold values and economic point of view,  side effects, Natural relative advantages, and practical obligations

 

Hi AHMAD_73

 

I don’t know how the US army works but I gather they’ve had more trouble than other countries in this.  Does that mean that women should be banned from joining?  We’ve had women in the army here since soon after world war two.  My understanding is that the US has too but, obviously, it’s a system that needs work.

 

it's a quite good time almost 70 years, the should reveal some results

women are not suitable to work in front lines, while they may work in back/logistic lines where they should present the majority, wear in modisty and no mixing in private places, or I like the american way (move and practice life in twos, body way)

 

 

Hi AHMAD_73

 

I’m not sure what you mean by your comments around women having sex when mixed in with men.  I assume you are talking about married women having sex with other people when the sexes are mixed together in a work setting.  If that’s not what you mean can you try to explain that again?  My wife has travelled overseas on her own for work and has travelled around the state here on her own for work and she’s at home alone now so she has every opportunity to go out and have sex with someone else if she wanted to.  I believe she won’t because we agreed to that when we got married but there’s nothing to stop her.  No I wouldn’t want my wife having sex with someone else though I’ve met couples who find that OK but I’m not at all worried when she travels away from me for her work or just for shopping trips that she’s going to run off and have sex with someone else.  Does that sort of thing really worry you?  Do you trust your women so little?

 

So you are scared of the comparisons between yourself and strangers and wish to prevent such comparisons by stopping your women from meeting strangers?  Sounds kind of insecure to me.  Again I have no problems with my wife meeting other people, men or women, because I trust her and I don’t think I’m such a bad catch.  Does that sound conceited?  It’s pretty normal for men in my society to feel confident in themselves.  That’s not to say that such things don’t happen, they’re not common but they do happen, but if other men out there suit your wife better maybe she married the wrong man in the first place.

 

Russell

 

Yes of course,

uncontrolled  mixing  is a great factor of adultery. which will affect the individuals, families and the whole society

 

although I'm happy that there are good women, and hope Allah will protect you and your family while the issue is not about personal feelings it's about statistics along over the country. for example in the USA, correct me, adultery is between 40:60 % . I have no Idea about Australia while if you have these percentages and you, as I can understand, don't like it, you, Russell should study the case and tell us what are the reasons and how to solve it, along with the associated physical and social Diseases, STDs, AIDS, Cancers, family brake down, divorce, ... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi AHMAD_73

 

No I think I understood where you were coming from but I think you misunderstand me.  My position is that rules should be made for people not for men or women.  All rules must apply equally to all people and should not be preferentially applied to just one sex or the other.  As has been pointed out we are different, men and women, but those differences fall on a bell curve so there are men and women on the extreme that would fit better into what you claim are the roles assigned to the opposite gender.  As I’ve said before I’ve met men who do very very well at being house husbands and women who do equally well as company executives or truck drivers.

 

You stated that women can do whatever work they want “by agreement with their husbands”.  This looks from the outside like a very parent to child relationship rather than the relationship of equals that I believe a marriage should be.  Does the husband have to ask his wife’s permission to take any given job and must he abide by her decision in this or is this rule also only one way and so sexually biased?  Does the casting vote that the husband holds in the marriage mean that in practice the wife can never override the husband while the husband can always get his own way?

 

Please note I’m not suggesting for a moment that the vast majority of muslim men aren’t perfectly fair and reasonable and loving towards their wives but the power assigned by your religion is sexually biased.

 

You are right that women suffer more from sexual harassment than men but your system appears to punish them for that.  Shouldn’t you punish the perpetrators not the victims?  Why limit women when they are the victims shouldn’t you lock up the men who are the cause of this problem?  Make men wear blind folds in public or just lock the lot of them up if they can’t behave themselves and let the people who can apparently behave, the women, get on with their lives unmolested.  Or better yet have a system in which men and women who behave themselves are free to live their lives as they wish but anyone who can’t uphold these simple rules is prosecuted, fined or locked up and so prevented from misbehaving again?

 

In my society private mixing is normal, it happens every day, and the problems that come out of it are small.  My wife has travelled all over the area and even overseas on her own for work and has never had any problems.  You seem to see every man out there as a potential sexual predator but, given the freedom we have in this country, such men are very rare and women can handle themselves.  I don’t think I’d like to try to force my wife to do anything she didn’t want to do, she’d probably hit me and she’s only half an inch shorter than I am and definitely fit and strong.

 

Women find men attractive, men find women attractive; I think it’s pretty equal there at least it is when they have the freedom to express themselves.  Men are more likely to get noisy about it than women but the appreciation goes both ways at least it does for normal people.

 

Let’s take your fighter pilot example, we already have women in the military flying helicopters in support roles and we have women in most other roles around the fighter pilots so the facilities to look after women already exist so that won’t cost one extra cent.  Sexual harassment training and the legal system to back it up already exists for all the other women working in the service so again that won’t cost extra and as women are becoming more and more common the problems are getting less and less as it’s being seen more generally as less acceptable especially as all the earlier perpetrators are being fined, fired and jailed for their actions.  Did you know that an average front line fighter pilot will burn, in a 12 year career, around $4000000 in fuel alone, about three times that in equipment and maintenance costs.  How much extra does building a separate dorm cost do you think?  Especially when all the women can use it so it’ll be spread out over a growing number just as if they hired that many more men?

 

The experience here is that women are doing very well in the front lines, giving the men a run for their money.  The worst of the men are definitely out classed by the average women fighter.  Mixing is the norm for our society so that has caused very few problems that weren’t already dealt with by the extra training and the policing actions and by the normal rules of our society.

 

I’m not talking about the prophet helping his wife in her work, I’m talking about the man becoming the primary care giver and house keeper for the relationship and the woman becoming the bread winner if that is what suits them better.  Of course if the couple decided not to have children at all then they could both work or maybe, as one couple I met from the US did, both worked 6 months per year earning enough to travel for the other six without working.  No kids’ frees up money for those sorts of lifestyles.

 

Breast feeding for the first couple of weeks is best by far though children who don’t get this do almost as well too with modern formulas.  After that the differences are harder to detect though again natural breast feeding is better but the difference is quite small now.

 

LOL “Yes of course” what?  Is that yes to my suggestion that you are insecure and worried that your women will work out you aren’t the best catch if she has the chance to compare you to other men? Or was that to some other part of what I said?

 

I see adultery as a bad thing akin to any form of cheating whereby someone is deceived and thus made unhappy but you seem to see it as some far deeper evil and that is something I’d have to suggest is unwarranted.  Sure adultery can break up families but is keeping people together who are not actually suitable to each other really a good?  Science has proven that children raised by separated parent’s do far better than those raised by parents who are unsuited to each other but stay together for the children.  Divorce is actually a good not a bad as it shows that people have the freedom to admit that they are human and that they make mistakes or simply that humans change over time and not necessarily in the same direction.  Obviously I’d prefer that everyone finds their perfect match the first time every time but, especially when arranged marriages are involved, that’s unlikely to ever happen.  Staying together because you have no choice or because you feel that society will look down on you if you leave is seriously unhealthy mentally so a system which allows divorce is scientifically proven to be a superior system.

 

As for the statistics I have no idea what the Australian figures are though I doubt they are as high as 40% though that depends on your definition.  According to the catholics, for example, there is no such thing as divorce so anyone who gets a legal divorce and remarries is committing adultery in their eyes.

 

You site specific medical problems caused by sex, STDs, AIDS, Cancers but all of these easily enough be prevented if you want to.  Condoms, if everyone used them, would wipe out these diseases and anyone who wishes to avoid these problems has a very high percentage chance of doing so if they just use this one simple precaution.  Cancer can now be virtually wiped out by a simple vaccination.  AIDS is now a manageable chronic condition rather than a death sentence.  I know that condoms aren’t 100% effective but very few people carry these diseases and the infection rate for AIDS in particular is actually very low even if you have unprotected sex with someone who’s infected so the risks aren’t that high to start with and they are dramatically lower if you use condoms.  I’ve lived my entire life, and I’m no spring chicken, in a country which allows unprotected sex with anyone you want whenever you want and I don’t actually know a single individual who has an STD or AIDS or who has ever contracted a cancer due to sex.  I’ve heard of them so I know some people with these problems do exist but the numbers are very low indeed.

 

So point by point.

 

Adultery, you paint this as some form of absolute evil while I see it as a human betrayal but no more than any number of other betrayals people indulge in.  It’s certainly not something that we need legal sanctions for.  It would be best for society if this only ever happened with the consent of all those involved.  I’ve explained before that I have met a couple who’s rule was that they could have sex outside the marriage with certain rules and this system worked for them, they were a happy couple who are still raising their children in a loving home.  That’s a strange idea to both of us but it works for them.

 

Divorce, again you paint this as some form of ultimate evil but I see it as a sign that this society works.  It shows that people are allowed to be people and to admit that they made a mistake.  The science is clear, children raised by divorced parents are far healthier mentally thanthose raised by parent’s who should have divorced but stayed together regardless.

 

STDs, AIDS and cancer; yes these are bad things that can occur if you have unprotected sex with someone who carries these diseases.  All of them can be simply prevented by using a condom when you have sex.  AIDS can now be dealt with with drugs, STD’s can also be dealth with with drugs and cancer can be wiped out with a vaccination so while these things are tragic they are very rare and they can all be dealt with with modern medicine.

 

Sexual harassment:- you raise this as a reason to restrict women to ‘protect them’.  I see it very differently.  Women rarely indulge in sexual harassment while men do it quite a lot.  Most men won’t do it but there is a percentage who will.  Shouldn’t we focus on punishing the perpetrators here rather than punishing the victims?  Yes restricting women is a form of punishment.  Most men and virtually all women don’t have this problem but a small subset of men do, they are the criminals here not the women, they are the ones who should be sanctioned by society.  Why do these men get a free pass to be horrible, immoral humans?

 

Yes I understand that many women in your society like wearing the burka and I have no problems with that apart from the obvious security concerns around banks, airports etc. I assume that they’d feel much the same as I would if I was forced by a society to walk around with no pants on so if it makes them feel comfortable to dress that way then that’s fine but what about those women who don’t want to be restricted this way?  Why should they be forced to follow your rules?

 

Russell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi AHMAD_73

 

No I think I understood where you were coming from but I think you misunderstand me. My position is that rules should be made for people not for men or women. All rules must apply equally to all people and should not be preferentially applied to just one sex or the other. As has been pointed out we are different, men and women, but those differences fall on a bell curve so there are men and women on the extreme that would fit better into what you claim are the roles assigned to the opposite gender. As I’ve said before I’ve met men who do very very well at being house husbands and women who do equally well as company executives or truck drivers.

But you already separate and distinguish between people based on sex, do you have a mixed football (american/soccer, boxing, karateah, bascketball, ...............etc.) team or mixed competitions between men teams and women teams. the answer is: NO, isn't that unfair and discriminating?!!

 

I accept the NATURAL DISTRIBUTION DIAGRAMS will show an area of intersection, but that can be neglected duo to:

1 - it's small intersection area since for example the woman bone denisty/strength is between 70:80% of men

2- in practical life, and generally, man chooses among the 90% of women who are relatively weaker than him not the 10% who are stronger, and so we can say practically, every man is stronger than his wife.

3- there is another factor which have no relation to strength, but the sex, which is the natural attraction between the two sexs.

 

So in dealing with the man/women aspects we should apply the justice rule besides and before the equality, and sure the final output of any legeslation will be the family and society happiness and stability.

 

 

Hi AHMAD_73

 

You stated that women can do whatever work they want “by agreement with their husbands”. This looks from the outside like a very parent to child relationship rather than the relationship of equals that I believe a marriage should be. Does the husband have to ask his wife’s permission to take any given job and must he abide by her decision in this or is this rule also only one way and so sexually biased? Does the casting vote that the husband holds in the marriage mean that in practice the wife can never override the husband while the husband can always get his own way?

 

Please note I’m not suggesting for a moment that the vast majority of muslim men aren’t perfectly fair and reasonable and loving towards their wives but the power assigned by your religion is sexually biased.

yes, that's what the woman knew about and accepted by signing the simple marriage contract BUT:

- if she was working a specific kind of work before marriage and the husband accepted, mostly he don't have the right to stop here later.

- if she added a special condition in the marriage contract relating her future work.

 

meanwhile in the Islamic marriage model, women aren't required to provide any kind of finantial support to the house, it's the man mission to provide every member in the family with his needs.

 

Normally in a society model where most of the outdoors workers are men there a very small chance for a man to be with woman in a private place while that probability will be very high in the opposite case. the women can ask the man from where did you got the many and urge him to find the legal and halal ways to do so.

 

 

 

Hi AHMAD_73

 

You are right that women suffer more from sexual harassment than men but your system appears to punish them for that. Shouldn’t you punish the perpetrators not the victims?

you are right, as a primarily step, BUT if that didn't work and it didn't referring to the statistics why not try another step (which is not very unfair but more like integrative )

 

Hi AHMAD_73

 

In my society private mixing is normal, it happens every day, and the problems that come out of it are small. My wife has travelled all over the area and even overseas on her own for work and has never had any problems. You seem to see every man out there as a potential sexual predator but, given the freedom we have in this country, such men are very rare and women can handle themselves. I don’t think I’d like to try to force my wife to do anything she didn’t want to do, she’d probably hit me and she’s only half an inch shorter than I am and definitely fit and strong.

can you depend on some practical statistics?!! like the folloing

Statistics about Sexual Assault and College Campuses

The following statistics were compiled by the New York State Coalition Against Sexual Assault

  • At least 1 in 4 college women will be the victim of a sexual assault during her academic career. Hirsch, Kathleen (1990)”Fraternities of Fear: Gang Rape, Male Bonding, and the Silencing of Women.” Ms., 1(2) 52-56.
  • At least 80% of all sexual assaults are committed by an acquaintance of the victim. Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2001.

Hi AHMAD_73

 

Women find men attractive, men find women attractive; I think it’s pretty equal there at least it is when they have the freedom to express themselves. Men are more likely to get noisy about it than women but the appreciation goes both ways at least it does for normal people.

you are absolutely right, and so to solve such problem we have to reduce the contact/friction between them, let one of them generally for out door works and the other for the indoor . which is for their good luck, the women, whom have more attractive structure and also wear in modesty.

 

every one's problem is solved now, the women will be sure that their men will nor run across more attractive/badly wear women and will get hom with the same love and satisfaction to their wives they got out with.

 

Hi AHMAD_73

 

Let’s take your fighter pilot example, we already have women in the military flying helicopters in support roles and we have women in most other roles around the fighter pilots so the facilities to look after women already exist so that won’t cost one extra cent.

helicopters don't require and special health features. I was talking about the fighters' pilots, do you mean the fighter pilots recruit women (which will be ofecers and dealt with like that) will sleep in the same barracks with unlisted mechanics even if they are women, I doubt so .....,

 

 

Hi AHMAD_73

 

You site specific medical problems caused by sex, STDs, AIDS, Cancers but all of these easily enough be prevented if you want to.

Russell

I like again to return to the Statistics and the practical situation, not only theoretical solutions. for example you tells AIDS problem can be solved easy like this, by this or that. yet the practical statistics falsificates your suggestions (USA have 1,500,000 AIDS proved cases + unknown non-proved cases almost the same + and that's the most important 150,000 annual increase) can you explain that. and before advising those who don't practice adultry to do it in safe way you should find out why those who already practicing it why the have such scary rates of AIDS and STDs

allow me for now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ParadiseLost

 

I think the fact that some women are violent towards their husbands is the critical point here.  I agree that men and women are different and I don’t think anyone should be looked down on if they choose to stay at home and look after the children what I see as a critical flaw in your system is that you wish to enforce different rules on men and women just because they are men or women.  If allowed the free choice many more women will choose to stay home and look after children than men but there is a percentage who would choose the opposite and they should be free to do so not restricted by rules base not on their merit but on their sex.

 

The system I grew up in has women fitting into certain roles and they are looked down on by a segment of society if they don’t conform to the norms of that society but I disagree with the system I was raised under.  I believe we should all have the same choices.  More men will choose certain options than women and vice verca but we should all have the same freedom of choice so the women who want to be welders or tank drivers have the same chance to do so as the men and the men who want to be house husbands have the freedom to choose that option.

 

None of that is affected by the fact that science shows that on average men and women are different it just leaves the choices open so that those on the end of the bell curve can lead lives that suit them even if those choices go against the norms for their sex.

 

You said that Islam recognizes that fathers are an essential part of the family structure but that is, as I understand it, painted in a very specific role, it does not include the possibility of the man being the house husband and primary carer for the children while the wife goes out and runs a mining company to raise the money to run the family for example.

 

You say you encourage muslim women to work but would you encourage a muslim woman to choose to have no children, even to not get married, and to take up a high powered roll running a big business enterprise or a government?

 

Russell

Why is it the critical point? Do you think Islam is unable to deal with that issue?

 

Well the jobs you mentioned are traditionally viewed as male jobs in your society but there is nothing in Islam that says women can't be truck drivers etc. No matter what job a woman does it should be according to Islamic values. 

 

I wouldn't encourage women to not have children but I would definitely support their choice if they did not want to choose that path in life or if they did not want to get married. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi AHMAD_73

 

You’re right that women don’t play ‘A league’ football but the critical point is that there’s no rule that says they can’t.  Football is a merit based profession and that rules out many men including me and it rules out, as far as I know, all women.  In the lower leagues women do play but not at the top because the male bell curve is just a little further to the right than the female one.  Is it unfair to the wimpy guy’s to rule them out of ‘A league’ football just because they will get beaten every time by bigger, stronger guys?

 

We do have mixed tennis matches here, that’s actually quite common though again we don’t have male vs. female matches at the top level because, again, men are stronger than women so the women can’t compete.  At lower levels however male vs. female tennis is quite common.

 

Of course in the realms where those bell curves are aligned, motor sport for instance, women do compete on equal footing with the men.  Less women are interested in motor sport so less compete but quite a few women are involved, very successfully, even at the elite level.

 

There are many bell curves which describe human beings and many of those curves are virtually identical between males and females.  Bone strength may not be one of them though I’m not sure that would be true unless you are merely pointing out that men are, on average, bigger than women so have bigger bones.  I’m sure that is true.

 

You’re wrong to state that all men are stronger than their wives though this is usually true.  I know of a number of examples in which this is not the case, I lived next to one such couple for quite a few years.  Maybe that is true in your society however but it’s not true generally though it is more common than the alternative.

 

I agree that for the majority of people sexual attraction leads them to people of the opposite sex though that is not true for some 5%-10% of the population if they are free to express their true feelings.  The figures for people who will admit this are quite a bit lower due to the persecution they are faced with even in the west which is more accepting of this.

 

I disagree that we must apply any rule other than equality when we formulate our moral code or our legal system.  To make a truly happy society people must be free to make choices regardless of their sex and as an example it has been scientifically shown that lesbian couples are more successful at raising children than heterosexual couples so the science speaks against your formulation anyway.

 

Does a society need to be stable to be happy, no I don’t believe that it does, at least not as rigidly stable as you seem to desire.  Handled properly flux gives variation and that’s exciting and fun.

 

Does a society need to be formulated around the creation of families to be the best of all possible societies; again I’d have to suggest that it does not.  Many people choose to be part of families but other groupings work for some people and let them build happy lives while yet other people choose to remain single all their lives and again these people can be very happy living this way and why not if that’s how they want to live.  I know people who live very happily in all of these groupings.

 

Ok so there’s an out clause if the woman was already working in a given job before marriage but you still paint a biased arrangement once she gets married.  Why can’t a woman choose a job that will make her happy regardless of what her husband may want?  Why is it only the woman who has to bow down to her partner’s wishes and why not the man also?  Having to specifically add clauses to the marriage contract to protect her from a condition that does not bind her husband in the first place is sexist.  You paint the relationship between men and women as very constrained and very much the relationship of adult to child.  The woman needs her husband’s permission just as a child needs its parent’s but the husband does not need his wife’s permission. Do you see the imbalance here?

 

I like the model where the man works and the woman looks after the house, that’s the household I live in at the moment though my wife does work at times and in her last job she made more money than I do but we have the freedom to choose whatever arrangement works for us rather than this formulaic approach which tries to push everyone into a mold of the average as if we were all the same.

 

Yes I understand that you have a phobia against being alone with a woman other than your family, or of allowing your wife to be alone with another man, but in my society that’s a daily occurrence and it causes few problems and why should it, we are all human beings and we all have a moral sense which controls our actions.  Sure some people will not behave appropriately but we have a moral code to deal with that.  Did you know that women have interesting ideas, ideas worth finding out about, not just the few women you will be related to but women in general?  Talking to them is fun and interesting.  All people have stories worth hearing.

 

I don’t understand what you mean when you say “the women can ask the man from where did you got the many and urge him to find the legal and halal ways to do so.”  If she can only urge him while he can tell her again you are showing a sexual bias here.  Why do you think that women’s brains are inferior to mans and so must be overridden by a man’s view?

 

On Sexual harassment I understand where you are coming from but I can’t say that the down side of restricting women could possibly be justified by the few problems not doing so causes.  Again I know of but don’t actually know any women who have been seriously harassed and all of the women I know seem to deal well with the minor issues they have had with little difficulty.  Sure they shouldn’t have to but they are human, they can stand up for themselves and having to do so is hardly a serious issue to them.  Maybe the women you know are more the shrinking violet types who can’t stand up and say what they think but the women I know have no problems doing so.  Of course if they have a problem with meeting men in public no one will make them so they have the choice to hide away if that’s what they want.

 

You’ll have to show me some really serious statistics to justify restricting women rather than policing the problem, the men involved.  I disagree that restricting women can be considered in any way integrative.  I’d have to suggest that my society is the integrative one.  In my society women can choose to be the stay at home mum or to go out and work, they can choose to have children or not, they can choose to marry and who to marry and they can go out on equal footing in public and meet people if they want to without having to feel inferior to anyone.

 

I agree that one in four is a terrible indictment on the men involved and on the system which allows that to happen but, given that that may well be just one incident per woman in her lifetime can that possibly justify a lifetime of being forced to live hidden away?  Also I’m not sure that your rules would fix the problem anyway, don’t you think it would be better to attack the source of the problem, men.  If men are the issue why penalize the woman, why not lock up all men till they can learn to behave themselves for example or, better yet, target the perpetrators directly?

 

In my society private mixing is normal, it happens every day, and the problems that come out of it are small. My wife has travelled all over the area and even overseas on her own for work and has never had any problems. You seem to see every man out there as a potential sexual predator but, given the freedom we have in this country, such men are rare and women can handle themselves. I don’t think I’d like to try to force my wife to do anything she didn’t want to do, she’d probably hit me and she’s only half an inch shorter than I am and definitely fit and strong.

 

I disagree that you must restrict women to certain sorts of work so that they won’t mix with the men.  Yes we are all attracted to each other but that doesn’t have to be a problem so long as we all learn how to behave.  It certainly works in my society.  Sure there are issues as you have pointed out in your attached statistics but that’s not a reason to prevent all women who want to work out doors from doing so.  I know of many women who would hate to have to work indoors all their lives, they love outdoor work so why shouldn’t they be able to.  Personally I like working indoors so why should I be forced to change?  If women choose to face the challenges and risks why shouldn’t they be allowed to make that choice? Why do you have to protect them like children, why not treat them as adults with brains who can make up their own minds.  They are free to work indoors and to work away from men if that’s what they want but what if they don’t want that?  I don’t actually know any women who would choose that but then I’ve always lived among women who are empowered to make their own choices as equals so I guess the women I know are very different to yours.

 

Yes again I guess I understand this paranoia you seem to have about your wife/husband running away with someone else if they ever get the chance to meet other people but welcome to my world.  I’ve lived all my life in a society which allows men and women to dress as they wish and to mix as they wish and I really can’t see why you are so scared of it.  I’ve never suffered from any of the issues you complain about and I don’t know anyone who has though I know that it happens.  Would you prefer to live with an ignorant woman who simply doesn’t know if you are any good as a man or not or would you prefer to be chosen by a woman who is free to make any choice she wants but chooses you because you are the right one for her?  I love that feeling I have to tell you.  I know that my wife could be with other men, she could have chosen someone else other than me or she could decide that I’m not good enough for her and leave at any time but she stays with me of her own free will in the full knowledge of the options she has.  I have to tell you that’s an amazing feeling.

 

I’m not sure what ‘special health features’ you are talking about that differ between helicopters and fighters.  G suits work perfectly well for women or men, Urine collection systems exist for both women and men, what else, women are slightly shorter and weaker physically on average than men but all fighters are fly by wire today so the strength needed is simply programmed by computer so can easily be changed to suite.  They already do this to suit the individual requirements of the pilots anyway.

 

Offices don’t sleep in dormitories but in individual motel styled units so this is not an issue.  Lower enlisted personnel do indeed sleep in dormitories at times or in multi person units, usually four people each, but assigning one complete unit to a given sex is not a significant drain and the other facilities needed already exist as there are already plenty of women in the forces.  In short I don’t see the problem here.  The larger dormitories present the biggest issue but we’ve been dealing successfully with that one for many years now.

 

Sure I can explain the US AIDS statistics, the increase you quoted and the existing infected population, are both due to people not following those simple rules. They should know how to avoid AIDS today at least, it’s not exactly rocket science, but they fail to do so.  What more do you need to know?

 

Lets boil this down, for every 200 people who have a dramatically better quality of life without all these religious restrictions, one will contract AIDS because they fail to follow a few simple rules and to avoid that one foolish persons plight you wish to restrict the lives of the remaining 199 people?  Is that really your position on this?

 

Can you show any statistics which show a relationship between adultery and AIDS?  Who are the main demographics with AIDS in the US?  I doubt it will have much to do with adultery any more than other sexual contact or historically other infection paths such as blood transfusions.

 

Russell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russell, pardon me I can't reply all of what you mentioned right now, ......... 

 

Hi AHMAD_73

 

You’re right that women don’t play ‘A league’ football but the critical point is that there’s no rule that says they can’t.  Football is a merit based profession and that rules out many men including me and it rules out, as far as I know, all women.  In the lower leagues women do play but not at the top because the male bell curve is just a little further to the right than the female one.  Is it unfair to the wimpy guy’s to rule them out of ‘A league’ football just because they will get beaten every time by bigger, stronger guys?

 

NO country in the world allows mixed teams in many sports, or allow the women to compete with men in such sport. why not the women activists try to get their rights, delete all of these discrimination.

and what, men will beat women!!, where are the Judges, legislators, and the whole society?! allow me to borrow yours wards as a solution in sexual harassing " it's not fair to punish the victim (women), they should harshly punish the guilty (men).

then society can't protect women in open areas, vastly watched and monitored matches, and you believe they can protect them in private, far away and isolated areas,,,,,NO WAY and return to Statistics

 

 

Sure I can explain the US AIDS statistics, the increase you quoted and the existing infected population, are both due to people not following those simple rules. They should know how to avoid AIDS today at least, it’s not exactly rocket science, but they fail to do so.  What more do you need to know?

 

 

it didn't work, it don't work,  your solution is not working, although you believe it's good, but the reality shows that it's insufficient.

in fact, you really ignore the reality, that you, I mean the USA only, loses 150,000 of their young men and ladies because of this AIDS, to fulfill a stupid 5 minutes of lust, ......... , let them die, let them spread the AIDS to the others let their families, neighbors and friends die every day of sadness for their kids!!!!

you, the westerners have no other solution, you liked the live with these diseases.......

 

NO OTHER SOLUTIONS?!!!

 

in fact if that adulterous societies, if those people have this " public urinals sex culture" just 50 years ago, many among you would not have the chance to exist. if these rates of STDs/AIDS rates were there 50 years ago, they eventually, I mean the adulterous society would die since medical care at that time wouldn't be capable of help. shouldn't we thank religion for that, shouldn't we thank our chaste grandmothers and grandfathers for that.

 

what will be the dilema if you returned back to the chasty, no adultery, no fornication, no diseases, happy life

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ParadiseLost

 

It’s a critical point because it shows the flaw in your system.  Sure more men than women are violent, I think we are both agreed on that, but your response is to treat everyone as if men are the issue in this case and to create rules to control that whereas the actual problem is violent people, men and women.  Your rules target the wrong group.  That is the problem time and again with your system.  Sure the majority of women don’t want to be truck drivers or fighter pilots etc but like all human activities there is a percentage who do but your system treats them as if all women are the same and all men are the same.  Men want to be the breadwinners and truck drivers and women want to hide behind the scenes and not be seen by men or talk to men or do dirty outdoor jobs. Women are too silly to make up their own minds about what they do for work or if they can work and need their husbands to control their lives.  Not all people fit that mold.  Not all men want to be the big macho dominant male leader of their households and not all women want to sit behind the scenes and live under the rule of their husbands.  That doesn’t mean that they don’t want to get married and raise families just that they want to do it in a different way to the rules you have set out.

 

It’s been said here that women can have a clause written into their marriage contract which would allow them to do some particular sort of work but that again is treating them like unchanging children rather than changeable adult human beings.  Why can’t they change their minds even if their husbands don’t like their decisions?  Why are they treated as below the men?

 

You said in a previous email that men were outside workers while women were inside workers so that they wouldn’t meet but being a truck driver is going to put you in a position in which you have to directly interact with men, often on a one to one basis and alone so your claim that women can be truck drivers doesn’t seem to make rational sense.  Are you going to setup an entire, female only, trucking and transport system so that women can work alongside only women to avoid such problems?  If you don’t then to be a truck driver will mean to interact one on one and even alone with men.

 

Yes being a truck driver is seen as a male occupation in my country though that has changed a lot lately.  A number of trucking companies preferentially hire female drivers when they are available because of the same factors that lead the mining companies to hire females.  Their trucks last longer, have fewer mechanical problems and use less fuel when driven by women.  On average they are actually better at this occupation even though it is a general perception that it is a male job.  The numbers of women who want to be truck drivers is quite low so there will always be a place for men in the industry but experience has shown that the limited number of women who do want to get into this profession are the best of the best as drivers.

 

More lives are ruined by driving cars than by sexual predators by the way but I don’t see anyone suggesting we should stop driving.

 

You say you would not encourage a woman to not have children, let’s consider that statement for a moment.  We live on an overpopulated planet.  Scientific studies have shown that, without fossil fuel inputs this planet can’t support our current population so what’s wrong with creating fewer children?  If you are married it should be a mutual decision if you have children or not with either partner being able to say no but as an overall idea reproduction without limits is the policy of a cancer cell not of an intelligent race who can see their resources are limited.

 

Russell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×