Quran and women

[paarsurrey]

For my kids, not so much #3...definitely the first two though. Same with seeing them as a helper rather than a partner.

You are a nice person and you have a good insight in these matters.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

I would probably go as far to say that almost every nation, religion, culture, ect.. Has at some point treated women with inferiority. I know there are exceptions. I believe the ancient Spartans may have been an exception. I think they had a very high regard for women because they gave birth to men. I am not sure but even women in ancient Sparta could hold political office. Or at least have a strong influence to politics.

Thanks for you input in the thread.
How would you reflect on post #120?
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

I agree that most people desire equal treatment with women. But someone's religious views do not necessarily have any reflection of their views on women's rights and status. All atheist are different some respect women and some don't. The only thing they have in common is their lack of belief on a god or God's.

The Atheists have no norms on any issue, in fact they deny not only religion but even having knowledge of science is not required of an Atheist. It is a negative ideology.
Regards

 

[delizzle]

I believe that perhaps the reason why women are typically viewed as a weaker or inferior could come from the old hunter/gatherer periods where women did rely heavily on a man's strength for survival. Men typically did the hunting of large animals to provide. Men were the ones who typically protected the family from threats such as wild animals and people who tried to take their supplies. None of these reasons have anything to do with religion. I believe that as mankind began to become more civilized it was difficult for some reason to move away from that mindset. Even in more recent times, let's say a two hundred years ago. Women depended on men to do much of the more physically demanding work such as building their homes and farming. I think it is not until within the last 100 years or so that with the advancements in technology and industry we see superior strength is not necessary for survival. A 100lb woman can be a single mother and still provide for her family even with the lack of a man in her life. She probably could not have done that in earlier periods. Now I know there are those exceptions and I don't want to come across as over generalization. But I think it makes sense.

I am not sure if this is what you were asking but I hope it helps.

 

[delizzle]

The Atheists have no norms on any issue, in fact they deny not only religion but even having knowledge of science is not required of an Atheist. It is a negative ideology.
Regards

What do you mean by "negative ideology"? Just because someone is an atheist does not mean he is a scientist. Nor does he need to have a scientific view. All atheism is is just a lack of belief in a god or gods. It has nothing to do with science.

 

[delizzle]

If women are nothing but time and money and money is the root of all evil then women are nothing but time and the root of evil. However, since time is money, then women are nothing but the root of evil times the root of evil making women the root of evil squared. So if the square cancels the root, does that mean women are nothing but evil?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I would probably go as far to say that almost every nation, religion, culture, ect.. Has at some point treated women with inferiority.

I think that's true, but it doesn't make it right.

 

[Sees]

OK for the third, nevertheless it is there as you have mentioned it.
The situation would be different if one lives in a different land. There are tribal societies, societies ruled by a monarchy, societies ruled by a dictatorship, societies ruled by democracies etc mixed blend of some sort of the above.
If you don't mind; will you state which type of society you live in? Time, place and occasion are important dimensions on a issue, one cannot ignore it.
Regards

You are a nice person and you have a good insight in these matters.
Regards

Thanks. I live in Ohio in the US and have been around quite a few places. I agree time and place influence the way we view these things and it is reflected very well in many writings.

 

[paarsurrey]

You mean you do that to your dependent family members.

1. Advise and instruct them first.
2. Send them to their bed second
   
3. Hit/spank them third .

Further to my post #114 our friend sees has added following comments:

Post #89 I'm going to give my wife a lecture and light spanking just to make sure. Better safe than sorry.
Post #93 Because I pay the bills and therefore I'm the boss and responsible formy women. Amiright?
Post #95 Heck no, I claimed her fair and square and brought her back home.

Do these points related to point # 3 of my above post? Please
Regards

 

[Sees]

Further to my post #114 our friend sees has added following comments:

Post #89 I'm going to give my wife a lecture and light spanking just to make sure. Better safe than sorry.
Post #93 Because I pay the bills and therefore I'm the boss and responsible formy women. Amiright?
Post #95 Heck no, I claimed her fair and square and brought her back home.

Do these points related to point # 3 of my above post? Please
Regards

Sarcasm to show how crude/silly it sounds.

 

[paarsurrey]

Thanks. I live in Ohio in the US and have been around quite a few places. I agree time and place influence the way we view these things and it is reflected very well in many writings.

Thanks for your good reply.
Living in a great country like US I think one cannot exactly imagine life in the third world and fate of delicate and weak (lacking the power to perform physically demanding tasks; lacking physical strength and energy) female humans in tribal societies.
Hence Quran did not want to leave women at the mercy of such societies and set some rules for the societies to regularise the privileges of women in whatever societies the women are.
Regards

 

[FearGod]

Sarcasm to show how crude/silly it sounds.

OMG, we thought you were serious.

 

[Sees]

Thanks for your good reply.
Living in a great country like US I think one cannot exactly imagine life in the third world and fate of delicate and weak (lacking the power to perform physically demanding tasks; lacking physical strength and energy) female humans in tribal societies.
Hence Quran did not want to leave women at the mercy of such societies and set some rules for the societies to regularise the privileges of women in whatever societies the women are.
Regards

For me the main issue is - it is enshrined. And what we (most modern folk) may see as worse case scenario can be pointed to as prime example instead. I've seen many say they believe Islam tends to lock people into the past and that can definitely be brought up regards to treatment/view of women.

The best arguments for it are much like the arguments for not outright abolishing slavery. It was for a patriarchal society of the distant past, with fewer resources compared to modern times, etc. That does make it slightly less offensive, oppressive, and so on when viewed as a historical thing - but does nothing as far as addressing it being The Truth, last and best guide for mankind, in the mind of millions today.

If the prime example of a man to be followed also preaches or recites that women are deficient in regards to intelligence, trustworthiness, piety, etc. compared to men - we have psychological conditioning of misogyny, to go along with laws not suited to all later societies.

 

[paarsurrey]

Sarcasm to show how crude/silly it sounds.

OK.
Now tell us if the three points mention in my post #114 taken from your post #65 were also sarcastic?
Regards

 

[Sees]

OK.
Now tell us if the three points mention in my post #114 taken from your post #65 were also sarcastic?
Regards

Referencing the Qur'an wasn't sarcasm. The role-reversal of how I view/treat women later on was with sarcasm.

My worldview/beliefs/lifestyle is very much in opposition regarding the view/treatment representative of Islamic sources.

 

[paarsurrey]

Referencing the Qur'an wasn't sarcasm. The role-reversal of how I view/treat women later on was with sarcasm.
My worldview/beliefs/lifestyle is very much in opposition regarding the view/treatment representative of Islamic sources.

OK.
So only the reference on Quranic verse was real and the rest was sarcasm in this thread. I don't mind any sarcasm (or ridicule or derision by my friends).
Now on, if one resorts to it, please, mention it clearly in the brackets like (sarcasm).
Now please paraphrase your argument after reading my posts #1 and #2 on the topic without sarcasm. Right?
Please don't mind it, it is just a friendly discussion.
Regards

 

[Sees]

OK.
So only the reference on Quranic verse was real and the rest was sarcasm in this thread. I don't mind any sarcasm (or ridicule or derision by my friends).
Now on, if one resorts to it, please, mention it clearly in the brackets like (sarcasm).
Now please paraphrase your argument after reading my posts #1 and #2 on the topic without sarcasm. Right?
Please don't mind it, it is just a friendly discussion.
Regards

Sure, all of these

Even the idea it is the right of men that their women "...do not make friends with any one whom you do not approve" doesn't sit well with many people.

All of the ideas about women in Islam reflect much closer to how we view/treat children. Think about it in light of 4:34 - saying men are in charge because they spend their wealth on women...an argument parents often use on their kids. When they are being bad you are to advise/instruct them first, send them to their bed second, and third hit/spank. Pretty much the same way people often discipline children, is the same way instructed to discipline a wife.

Treating women closer to the level of children rather than the same/equal level as adults - just won't ever sound right outside of the cultures where Islamic ideologies condition it.

What does prostitution or STDs have to do with this?

Why would I know better as far as who to befriend or not to befriend than my wife does?

My wife doesn't need my permission to go visit anybody or go anywhere. She usually thinks for herself and makes those choices for herself. She doesn't need me to advise or restrain her from hanging out with prostitutes.

I respect her as a free, intelligent adult. That's all there is to it really.

The mindset is completely different. Our worldview and laws aren't based on wives being teenage women needing male induced and enforced restraint and obedience.

Does it make sense?

For me the main issue is - it is enshrined. And what we (most modern folk) may see as worse case scenario can be pointed to as prime example instead. I've seen many say they believe Islam tends to lock people into the past and that can definitely be brought up regards to treatment/view of women.

The best arguments for it are much like the arguments for not outright abolishing slavery. It was for a patriarchal society of the distant past, with fewer resources compared to modern times, etc. That does make it slightly less offensive, oppressive, and so on when viewed as a historical thing - but does nothing as far as addressing it being The Truth, last and best guide for mankind, in the mind of millions today.

If the prime example of a man to be followed also preaches or recites that women are deficient in regards to intelligence, trustworthiness, piety, etc. compared to men - we have psychological conditioning of misogyny, to go along with laws not suited to all later societies.

As well as seeing women as a partner and not just a helper, which is more how we see children. The entire thing is based on that.

No doubt in my mind it is rooted in the fact that the early ummah had young and not necessarily very willing girls taken as wives. It's biased towards location, culture, and surrounding events...as would be expected.

 

[paarsurrey]

Please base you criticism/comments on the verse and the verses in the context from the clues/words/hints given in the text as given in my post #2 in this thread, for a meaningful discussion.
Regards

 

[Deathbydefault]

I agree that most people desire equal treatment with women. But someone's religious views do not necessarily have any reflection of their views on women's rights and status. All atheist are different some respect women and some don't. The only thing they have in common is their lack of belief on a god or God's.

Sorry to generalize atheists, but I didn't intend to be careful about that.
The main force of atheists seem to appeal to logic and reasoning.
It is both logical and reasonable for men and women to be equal to one another, as far as I can tell.
So, I stole away on that and produced my argument.

Also, I am well aware that religious views do not always constitute subjugation of the opposite sex.
However, in concern to the big three (Christianity, Islam, Judaism), there are specific texts for degrading women.
They are up for interpretation, as is said enormous amounts of times when such subjects come up, but they are specific.
My parents are fundamentalist Christians, the bible is literally true to them, no interpretation required.
My mother has been hit more than a few times for "speaking out of turn", as have I and my sisters.

They are controlled by their religious texts and I'm disgusted by people like that.
So I was making sure that my buddy, @paarsurrey, could make the connection that men and women were equal without the Quran.
I would like to know if all religious people on this forum could make such a connection without the use of books.
Sadly, some probably can't.

 

[FearGod]

Sorry to generalize atheists, but I didn't intend to be careful about that.
The main force of atheists seem to appeal to logic and reasoning.
It is both logical and reasonable for men and women to be equal to one another, as far as I can tell.
So, I stole away on that and produced my argument.

Also, I am well aware that religious views do not always constitute subjugation of the opposite sex.
However, in concern to the big three (Christianity, Islam, Judaism), there are specific texts for degrading women.
They are up for interpretation, as is said enormous amounts of times when such subjects come up, but they are specific.
My parents are fundamentalist Christians, the bible is literally true to them, no interpretation required.
My mother has been hit more than a few times for "speaking out of turn", as have I and my sisters.

They are controlled by their religious texts and I'm disgusted by people like that.
So I was making sure that my buddy, @paarsurrey, could make the connection that men and women were equal without the Quran.
I would like to know if all religious people on this forum could make such a connection without the use of books.
Sadly, some probably can't.

Our souls are gender-less, we're only males and females on earth, there's a whole chapter in
the quran named "the women" and the first verse says that we're all the same.

O mankind! Be wary of your Lord who created you from a single soul, and created its mate from it, and from the two of them, scattered numerous men and women. Be wary of Allah, in whose Name you adjure one another, and the wombs.
Indeed Allah is watchful over you.(4:1)

As you see the origin is a single soul (not male, not female), from this same single soul God created us as males and females.