Before God was a Man . . . (pre-Islamic India)
Like all my blogs, “just noticing” here. When one has processed so many years of irrational destruction of life, and waste of time — and reads about this also continuing to happen, while processing the carnage of yet another “Father’s Day” and so forth — well, the human mind needs metaphors and evolving symbols to handle the information.
Unless of course, it ain’t hit YOU yet, and the “if I don’t see it I’m not responsible” or the “what I can’t fix I won’t lose sleep over it” mantra applies, still.
Some things are transformative, one’s gyroscope needs to be re-set. Domestic violence is one of these. Divorce, for the best of us, generally speaking. Family trying to shove skeletons back in the closet to preserve a (facade) of normalcy. By the way, that basically is my take on the family law system, these days. I re-read a kind male friend’s comments on one of my (years ago) court transcripts of a 20-minute hearing in which I had a PTSD “event” requiring water to be brought. The transcript was earmarked with repeated comments (from my male friend) about my PTSD. And precious few comments about what had happened.
Re-reading it (a few years later), I realized that what my mother’s feminine instinct had noticed – AND ADDRESSED ALOUD IN COURT — was the court’s attempt to hide behind its own “rules” in trying to keep the lid on the garbage can (refusing to address any previously very bad decision), while I was myself addressing — though highly distressed — matters of fact and law and violations of law, court order, and rules of court. For me to do this at the time, when ANOTHER woman had within the past month been gunned down (trying to divorce) in the same city, showed significant stamina.
Within about a year, the issues I’d sensed, but didn’t have the documentation on, I later got the documentation on, some of which I hope to illustrate in a 2nd post today, and which this blog talks about — the money trail, and the “paraprofessionals” and the turning of what is supposed to be a LEGAL system into a pop-dispensary of psychobabble (and business source for the peddlars). Among the psychobabble is this word:
I assert that we no longer have (if we ever did) separation of church in state in the United States.
Nomad: From Islam to America, A Personal Journey Through the Clash of Civilizations. By Ayaan Hirsi Ali. 277 pages. Free Press. $27. Women, as the historian Bernard Lewis once told me (probably echoing a desert proverb), “are half the population, and mothers of the other half.” Educated mothers, he said, make a great difference to a society, and the Muslim world’s great drawback is that its women are benighted. Hirsi Ali’s mother was one such woman. Uneducated—and as unenlightened as it was possible to be, on earth, in the 1970s—she hit Hirsi Ali when she first got her period, a sickening blow that was part of an ongoing pattern of violence and misogyny that holds sway not merely in every Somali family, but, in the author’s contention, in almost every Muslim family in the world.
After all, she writes, male domination and female subjugation are Quranically prescribed, and who is Man to challenge the immutable Word of God—especially when God’s arrangements ensure perpetual male domination? This punitive patriarchy is not confined to Muslims in their own lands; it thrives, she points out, in the West, in the lands to which Muslims immigrate, but whose “degenerate” and “sinful” societies they abhor.
In a blistering passage, written with the forthright elegance that characterizes the book, Hirsi Ali asserts that “the subjection of women within Islam is the biggest obstacle to the integration and progress of Muslim communities in the West.
It is a subjection committed by the closest kin in the most intimate place, the home, and it is sanctioned by the greatest figure in the imagination of Muslims: Allah himself.” It is easy to see why Hirsi Ali has bodyguards, and round-the-clock protection. She would be dead if she did not.
Religion, rather than turning the other cheek (as Jesus admonished) instead, slapping the other cheek and backstabbing the critics, as Ayaan Hirsi Ali has experienced. Here’s a comment to the review, below, responding to another comment by “Chittagong.” The speaker is ”
Anyway. Women had high place in Indian society prior to advent of Islam in India. Supreme Godhead is of feminine gender in Hinduism. Many women saints referred to in the high Hindu scripture of the Vedas, Upanishads. Indian women were pushed under Purdah (in most of North India) after advent of Muslim invaders who targetted the women. Sati (burning at husband’s pyre) which was stopped for 1000s of years came back as Juhar as Muslim invaders started targeting Hindu women on Rajasthan. Even a liberal Indian as Tagore accepted that Purdah came to India with Muslims and caused women degradation in the middle ages Even Islamic sources prove situation of women were better in India prior to advent of Islam. Chittagaon should read the commentary of Ibn Battuta , the Moroccan Muslim Traveler who travelled many places including Chittagaon,in Bangladesh now. In 14th century, Ibn Battuta saw Women working with men in eastern India. Many places, he saw women ruling small kingdoms, working as security guards, running business. With growth of Islam in all these areas, women were pushed inside and became object of sexual pleasure.
We can very well say, women’s rights have become inversely proportional to Islamization. Today, you cant find any bangladeshi women (mostly Muslim) working side by side with men folks that was seen even few decades back. Muslim women who used to conduct economic activities are now put inside purdah.
If you look at western india, women of eastern pakistan (mostly Sikh/Hindus) enjoy much greater rights than women in the west Punjab (Pakistan, mostly Muslim). But few centuries back, all of them were Hindus and enjoyed same rights. Richard Eaton analyzed some of these issues well in his book -The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, 1204-1760. We can very well say, womens rights depend also on culture they follow.
What bigger example of Muhamad’s own wife. She was a successful business woman prior to she became Muslim. This shows in pre Islamic Arab societies, women enjoyed some rights. But slowly they lost those after islamization took root.
Western women in Non-Islamic cultures are becoming affected by this, also. Women who got college educations and were somehow (pre-breeding) immune to some of the things that feminism helped us with, have made the mistake of turning to the church for spirituality to add to their educations, failing to realize what was coming forth.
Women whose marriages, though in (or even NOT in) one of these 3 religions, were NOT abusive somehow, lacked the vocabulary to describe the shock, trauma, outrage, fear, and literal danger that the marriages represented. Rather than address the problem (and possibly have to repudiate aspects of their own culture, or take a stand against, perhaps a male spouse), they preserve their own, and let the others be drained away into oblivion.