Professor: Muslim men can't control themselves, women must adapt

Then post them here.

 

KevinB, nice of you to ignore the articles I provided that provided you with exactly the passages you asked for.

More articles on the treatment of women in Islam. These again quote passages of the Quran

http://www.submission.org/women/care.html
http://www.submission.org/women/faq8.html

In this case the Quran is painstakingly careful to explicitly mention men and women equally (unlike the Bible that uses the more ambiguous "men" which could mean mankind as in all humans or just the mail sex).

The requirement to remain chase and to not commit adultery by necessity prohibits rape. In Islam a man can not even have consensual sex out side of marriage let alone force a woman to have sex with him. Mohammad was very clear about this and all the various passages quoted in the various articles I link to very clearly show this. In Islam ANY form of sex outside of lawful marriage is prohibited, thus rape is prohibited.

 

From a previously linked article

 

That's neat. Now why then in Islamic run countries are the rape victims punished?

And why are Muslim clerics openly blaming women?

And why is it so hard to quote the entire verse?

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3396597.stm

http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2004/11/wife_beating_an.php

 

I would like to point out that how Ricky Ricardo treated Lucy on "I Love Lucy" would likely currently be treated as criminal wife abuse. And how long ago did that show air, showing cultural norms in the US and Latin America?

 

Note: I am NOT saying that beating, a wife or a child is in any means right, good, or permissible. I am saying that IF we are, in some respects, less than 100 years ahead of a society that used to be even further behind, we shouldn't criticize that society for not catching up -faster-.

 

We're not criticizing the society for not catching up faster. We're trying to find out if the Koran expects any better. Plenty of muslim scholars and countries ruled by Islam don't think so.

If the Koran doesn't expect any better then we have no expectation that those societies will ever improve until they stop basing their society on the Koran.

Long short, we're trying to figure out where these problems stem from.

 

Which episode do you assert that Ricky beat his wife on a television show? Which episode did Ricky instruct people on how to beat their wife without leaving incriminating marks?

This is a very poor example of moral equivalence. By reaching for moral equivalence as a shield, one admits the original problem in the first place by default.

 

Alright. Well it seems that the verses quoted by KLB state that the Quran does expect better of it's people than -rape- (not sure about any of the other documents), but that somehow the societies have yet to... accept this.

As for wife/child beating, I'd like to point out a Bible verse that has long been mis-construed to say that beating your child with a stick is a good thing, and was used by people to justify their violent (and anti-Christian) behavior.

"Spare the Rod, and spoil the child". The rod, as a shepherd's tool is actually a tool used to guide and protect. Remember the crook shepherds are pictured with, used by Shepherds to haul their sheep back before they accidentally fell into a river or off a cliff? The rod was used in conjunction with the staff for more gentle guidance. You don't always need to haul your kid back, so much as you should be constantly nudging them in the right direction.

What about the psalm that states "Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me"? The rod is not an implement to beat your child, but to guide and protect them.

The only time said 'rod' should be used to beat is when the good Shepard puts himself between a lion (or other preditor) and his charge, and users the rod to beat it away, and defend himself and his lamb/sheep.

So I have no problem believing that religious leaders may have -mistakenly- interpreted passages of the Quran to say that beating your wife is an okay/good thing.

On the other hand, I'd have to study the Quran myself to know if this is the case, or if it really does advocate wife-beating.

 

I don't remember the name, or number of the episode, but it was an episode where Lucy and Ricky had a bet. Lucy had to go without buying a new hat, and Ricky had to go without loosing his temper. The one to fail in that task first lost. Lucy lost the bet in the morning she went to return a hat, and actually bought a hat. But she had it delivered, and schemed to have Ricky loose his temper before then, trying to make him mad EVERY which way she could. At the end of the episode, Ricky found out about this scheme, when a hat was delivered while Lucy was 'ordering' it on the phone. The episode closed with the 'heart on velvit' scene doing a close in on Ricky vigorously smacking his wife's behind repeatedly, while she cried out in pain.

As Lucy would not deign to allow others to see her derier (sp?), her dresses obviously covered up the marks.

 

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/004.qmt.html

 

ROFLMAO! That's one of the funniest things you've posted yet! Moral equivalence from a TV show.

 

Okay. Well, now I very much doubt that this particular verse has been mis-construed.

 

Hey, if a guy can get away with beating his wife on a comedy, I very much doubt that the American public would have seen it as being that much out of the ordinary.

I'm not saying ricky said "ho home and beat your wives if they ever disobey you" this is an example of a guy with a temper problem giving into it... ... yet it was on a humorous mainstream American TV show.

 

This runs counter to what is written in the Quran. I quoted a couple of things earlier but I will repeat them here (I'll use indent instead of quote to reduce confusion between your comments and comments I quote):

When dealing with the Islamic perspective of any topic, there should be a clear distinction between the normative teachings of Islam and the diverse cultural practices among Muslims, which may or may not be consistent with them. The focus of this paper is the normative teachings of Islam as the criteria to judge Muslim practices and evaluate their compliance with Islam. In identifying what is "Islamic" it is necessary to make a distinction between the primary sources of Islam (the Qur'an and the Sunnah) and legal opinions of scholars on specific issues, which may vary and be influenced by their times, circumstances, and cultures. Such opinions and verdicts do not enjoy the infallibility accorded to the primary and revelatory sources. Furthermore, interpretation of the primary sources should consider, among other things:

(a) The context of any text in the Qur'an and the Sunnah. This includes the general context of Islam, its teachings, its world view, and the context of the surah and section thereof.

(b) The occasion of the revelation, which may shed light on its meanings.

(c) The role of the Sunnah in explaining and defining the meaning of the Qur'anic text.​

And from http://www.submission.org/women/care.html:

One of the most abused expression in the Quran is the statement about "Ma Malakat Aymanukum", which translates word for word as "What your right hand possess". Many traditional Muslims have abused this statement. They have followed corrupted scholars who have innovated and fabricated laws that have no basis in the true Islam (Submission) and contradict the laws of God in the Quran.

When we study the verses that talk about "Ma Malakat Aymanukum", or (MMA) for short, in the Quran, we will understand this sensitive issue. ​

The article is quite long and scholarly, but it is also insightful.

Here is one comment from http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_351_400/rape_against_muslim_women.htm on the punishment of the rape victim that is relevant:

Moreover, Ibn `Abdul-Barr (may Allah bless his soul) said

The scholars are unanimously agreed that the rapist is to be subjected to the hadd punishment if there is clear evidence against him that he deserves the hadd punishment, or if he admits to that. Otherwise, he is to be punished (that is, if there is no proof that the hadd punishment for zina may be carried out against him because he does not confess and there are not four witnesses, then the judge may punish him and stipulate a punishment that will deter him and others like him). There is no punishment for the woman if it is true that he forced her and overpowered her. (Al-Istidhkaar, 7/146). ​

I saw another passage that quoted the exact scripture from the Quran, but I've read so many writings in the past number of days that I forgot where I read it. As soon as I have retraced my steps and tracked down the exact scripture I'll post it.

For the same reason that Western society including many Christian religions leaders did the exact same thing for so long and some still do. In male dominated societies men like to place the blame on women. "What did she do to entice this good Christan man?" "She was asking for it."

This isn't unique to one specific religion or culture. This attitude is pervasive throughout different religions. I've honestly heard fundamentalist Christians also blame the woman for being raped. How many times have we heard some fallen evangelical paster crying on the pulpit blame their transgressions on being bewitched?

How many American women have hidden the fact that they were raped or sexually assaulted to avoid the astigmatism associated to it especially when the perpetrator was in a position of power (e.g. priest, preacher, teacher, boss, etc.). In many former Soviet Bloc countries that are predominantly Christian it is all but impossible for a woman to find justice for sexual assault.

For some reason it is natural for people to ask what the victim could have done differently to have avoided being raped.

This is a failing on all sides. In part I blame it on a failure of people to fully understand how important it is to not just cite a chapter and verse, but to fully quote the passage.

Proper citation and references are critically important but generally lacking in most writings. While this is a problem throughout writings it seems to be especially pronounced in religious discussions of any nature. I have rejected several articles have read over the course of the past several days and not mentioned them because they did not at least cite chapter and verse and I was not convinced about who wrote said articles.

Given the flow of these discussions and how much reading I'm having to do, I will be providing more articles that provide longer passages from the Quran as I find them. Since I do not own a Quran myself I can't look up the citations and transcribe the entire verse as I find references to them (like I can the Bible).

 

Just a little humor, Josh. Never in my wildest dreams would I have guessed one of the great comedy shows of all time, "I Love Lucy" would be subjected to moral equivalence with wife-beating in islam.

Today, I can say "I've seen it all!"

 

Wife beating is wife beating. The only difference I can see is in how much damage the woman suffers before she gets away.

 

Further information on wife beating in islam:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/wife-beating.htm

The amount of material is overwhelming. Even for islamic apologists and revisionists. It includes not only quran, but hadith and sira references.

In addition, it contains references to numerous books and scholars who have addressed the subject as well.

One must go to great lengths to sweep such overwhelming evidence under the carpet of "political correctness."

 

Interesting bit at the end.

Where in the Koran are men commanded to love their wives?