3 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Nozzi: On the irrelevant stuff you post and what Islam has done to women.

Reader comment on item: A Saudi Prince's Threat to the Obama Administration
in response to reader comment: MUSLIMS ARE PURE ON THE SIGHT OF ALLHA DUE TO OUR BELIEVES IN ALLAH & THE LAST DAY

Submitted by Plato (India), Jun 2, 2009 at 11:05

Nozzi, you write,

>>Sahih Bukhari, Book5, Hadith 281, "Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet came across me in one of the streets of Medina and at that time I was Junub. So I slipped away from him and went to take a bath. On my return the Prophet said, "O Abu Huraira! Where have you been?" I replied, "I was Junub, so I disliked to sit in your company." The Prophet said, "Subhan Allah! A believer never becomes impure." As the phrase, A believer, is mentioned in Bukhari, Book 5, Hadith 281 with the phrase, never becomes impure, it implies that all muslims are pure on the sight of Allah even muslim slaves.<<

Why do you post irrelevant stuff, Nozzi? This was my reply to one of your posts: "The Muslim slaves would be the non-believing slaves who converted as there would have been no Muslims elsewhere at this early stage of Islam. The incident I quoted about Ali raping a captive girl would certainly be a case of violating a non-Muslim girl. However, would raping a helpless Muslim girl make the incident any less horrible because the slave happened to be "clean" and "halal"?"

What has your reply got to do with my query? You are only obsessed with the pure nature of Musligims. But you fail to see what a horribly impure thing (rape) Ali, one of your rightly guided caliphs did with a poor captivegirl.

>>When we read the history of Bukhari, we have to know the women's status at the time of history when Muhammad was there. Women at that time have no authority over men during that time and these caused them to have disadvantage over men since many women might have been beaten by men for their wrong act. During that period, men usually were playing significant role in the family since they were those that support the whole families.<<

Nozzi, you have been fed some fantasy stuff about women's status of pre-Islamic times. It was Islam which came and destroyed the rights women enjoyed. Consider the that the prophet's first wife was an independent woman doing international business and Muhammad was an employee of hers. Khadija had authority over Muhammad. Many tribes of the jahiliya period were matriarchal and there were many powerful queens among them. Islam came and spoiled all that by making them a degree lower than men and confining them to the home.

>> Men could have many wives but not for women.<<

Muslim men can have many wives even in this modern age. Islam has left Muslim women in the seventh century.

>> However, women could voice out in regard to their unhappiness.<<

Islam prevents women from giving voice to their unhappiness. They can be thrashed if the husband even suspects she will be disobedient : 004.034 YUSUFALI: Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).

The verse says if you even FEAR disloyalty you can thrash them. If a woman voices unhappiness at a man's conduct it would be seen by him as disloyalty and she could end being soundly beaten (as usually happens in many Muslim homes: Fariyal F. Fikree, Junaid A. Razzak and Jill Durocher

Abstract

Aim: To explore men's attitudes on wife abuse and examine predictors for the risk of physical abuse in acohort of Pakistani men.

Methods: Men were identified based on convenience sampling from three socioeconomic venues. A total of 176 men (_18 years) who were married for at least 1 year and lived with their wives during the

preceding year were interviewed. Information on demographics, behaviours, and attitudes to wife abuse (verbal and physical) were elicited.

Results: The lifetime prevalence of marital physical abuse was 49.4%; slapping, hitting or punching was most often reported (47.7%). Of the men 55% were themselves victims of physical violence during childhood and 65% had, as children, observed their mother being beaten. Almost half of the subjects

thought that husbands have a right to hit their wives (46.0%). Significant predictors in the logistic regression analysis included low socioeconomic status (OR 2.6; 95% CI 1.1, 6.1), marriage duration of _5 years (OR 3.0; 95% CI 1.3,6.9), beaten as a child (OR 4.5; 95% CI 2.1,9.6) and witnessed mother beaten as a child (OR 2.7; 95% CI 1.2,6.0).

Study limitations, convenience sampling and small sample size, should be viewed in the context of the rarity of South Asian wife abuse studies.

Conclusions: The burden of wife abuse in Pakistani society, the inter-generational cycle of violence perpetuation, men's right to physically abuse their wives, in concert with their felt need of some type of help suggest that interventions should consider preventing child abuse in addition to adopting strategies to prevent spousal abuse.

http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Attitudes_of_Pakistani_Men_to_Domestic_Violence__A_Study_from_Karachi,_Pakistan.pdf

This study is in a country which prides itself on its Islamic heritage. What has Islam done to the women in Pakistan?

Regards

Plato

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Nozzi: On the irrelevant stuff you post and what Islam has done to women. by Plato

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List
eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)