Being a woman in Pakistan

Discussion in 'Social Issues & Current Events' started by DaRk WaVe, Jul 8, 2010.

Share This Page

  1. zagahaga
    Offline

    zagahaga BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,072
    Ratings:
    +0 / 200 / -0
    i mean this whole thread has a indirect way of stateing that beacuse of r****** women dont have rights WRONG it is culture it is simple as that ....... heck if my wife would be going on the wrong path i would have to tell her stop doing what your doing ie. adultary , drinking , immodest cloathing..... but if she would not stop i wouldent BEAT HER UP but maybe enought to tell her STOP DOING WHAT YOUR DOING and if not leave untill she reconizes what is she doing that it .... aint no killing
  2. CAPTAIN AMERICA
    Offline

    CAPTAIN AMERICA BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    848
    Ratings:
    +0 / 129 / -0
    I dont think any culture where Men could have 4 wives and women cant have four hustands would women have equality.
  3. zagahaga
    Offline

    zagahaga BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,072
    Ratings:
    +0 / 200 / -0
    wow you really dont know islam? typical american lloooll. inislam men are allowed to have 4 wives BUT it is not to be excerised this is from God ... why? beacuse you canot blance out between 4 wives who evey dose this has alot of money or is very blanced
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  4. JonAsad
    Offline

    JonAsad ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    11,201
    Ratings:
    +1 / 19,954 / -1
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia
    You are walking on a thin line friend.. you might fall..

    P.S i think you are on the wrong forum to discuss these misconceptions abt Islam...

    Dont make T-Faz more angry :smokin:
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  5. H2O3C4Nitrogen
    Offline

    H2O3C4Nitrogen SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2007
    Messages:
    4,391
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,696 / -0
    you lack intellect to have a discussion over it .. ! Sorry but thats allowed, not necessary , frankly its very scars in Pakistan for guy to have even two wives, but if you go over to Middle East , youl find plenty who have two,three or even four wives..!





    hope this answers ..!
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 5, 2013
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  6. sparklingway
    Offline

    sparklingway PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    3,880
    Ratings:
    +0 / 5,038 / -0
    I don't see any meaningful debate, condemnation of such brutality and debate over socio-cultural factors that have roots in misogyny, patriarchy, machoism and religious dogmas from the people whose argument are always "you are anti-Islam".

    The usual argument is always that "people are not following true Islam" but they never condemn the incidents and label it on illiteracy. These problems are bigger than illiteracy.

    The best example I can bring to your attention is that of the poor girl Saima Sarwar. She had been married for four years and chose to obtain a court divorce from her drug addicted and abusive husband. Her family threatened that she must not do it for the "honour" of the family, even though she had full legal right to do so. Saima Sarwar filed her divorce papers but her mother requested a "meeting" with her daughter in the offices of her lawyer, Hina Jilani. Her mother did not come alone and brought a hitman with her. He eneterd a couple of minutes after her and shot the girl dead inside the office in front of a number of witnesses. Her father was Ghulum Sarwar, then president of the Peshawar Chamber of Commerce and Industry and therefore neither a poor man nor an illiterate man. Her mother was working as a Gynecologist,. She therefore belonged to the elite class and the family was educated, literate and fairly well off. The PCCI organized protests and threatened lawyers who were willing to defend the girl's case earlier.

    An FIR was filed under Section 302(a) and Section 302(b) of the PPC. The man was arrested on the spot and was presented before the Magistrate for judicial remand the very next day. As the Qisas and Diyat Laws had been passed, the girl's parents appeared in the Magistrate's court and announced that they had forgiven the killer "in the name of Allah". As the Diyat laws do not allow for a punishment under Fasad fil Arz liable to Tazir when somebody forgives the murderer in the name of Allah, the assassin walked away less than 24 hours after the murder. A perfect "honour killing".

    If wali has not forgiven "in the name of Allah" but rather chosen compensation (blood money) as badl e sulah, then the judge can sentence upto ten years under Fasad fil Arz liable to Tazir but not award the death punishment.

    Such events cast a doubt on the usual "illiteracy" argument. My views on religious dogmas aside, religion has been and continues to be used as a victimization tool. Their intentions might be barbaric, inhumane and irrational but they choose to defend them in the name of religion and even discussing that event brings out a whole crowd of "you are anti-Islam" protesters.

    When Iqbal Haider brought the matter in the Senate, the only three people who chose to side with him were Aitzaz Ahsan, Jamiluddin Aali, Hussain Shah Rashidi. Ajmal Khattak and numerous other NWFP senators even tried to manhandle Iqbal Haider and defended that Ghulam Sarwar and family had acted in "Pakhtoon tradition".

    Hamza Alavi once wrote that the women in rural areas had far greater freedom before the green revolution. As productivity was low, the entire family used to work in the fields (much like medieval Europe) and the women although forced to work hard at least enjoyed freedom and were not "domesticated" so to say (although an inhuman word). Since the green revolution increased productivity manifold, women were no longer required to be working in the fields beyond sometimes bringing food and helping out in the fields during the harvest. They were "domesticated" and restricted to their houses and forced to do household chores and ginning work, etc. much like as it happened to women in Europe after the Industrial Revolution. In his survey in rural Punjab, nearly 3/4 of the women (who were old by then) responded that they loved whatever "freedom" they had back then. More than 1/2 said that they did not have to wear any head covering since working in the fields was difficult in the summer and the work hardly allowed to constantly adjust the head coverings. Although they said that they were doing it by choice now, they responded that the males chose to justify their restricted freedom and increased dress codes under religious terms. Hence, even though the result was not due to any religious reasons but males chose to cover it and justify it somehow in religious terms even though they had no intention to apply religious rules to reach this end.

    Moreover, the increasing religiosity of society is visible and the most conservative class is the urban middle class as has been revealed by most surveys over the years. While the rurals might be equally, if not more, misogynistic, they are on a general level less religious than their urban middle class counterparts. Niaz sb says so, and all history books say so that our society had never been overly religious and the role of religion in society was far less before Independence. Any post-Zia kid taught with the ideology of petro-dollar Wahabism of course cannot imagine how could this be possible and has never been able to respond to the series of question I have posed to them time and again.

    While they choose to rant about other people's ideological inclinations and opinion, they never condemn such incidents, nor seek to debate over the reasons and use the "they don't know about Islam" argument. Extremely liberal arguments over the Hijab are as condemnable as any Wahabist argument necessitating it and making it compulsory. However, I find it inherently abhorable that some people choose to fir their opinion as bullets in this regard and will label you as a non-beleiver, western apologist and what not if you consider women's role in society and their dress codes to be dictated by themselves rather than by men.

    Every MCP is bound to believe that a woman's "sanctity" is important but he cannot and will not blame male chauvinism and patriarchy for many social evils.

    A women was brutally raped by a bunch of monstrous psychopaths - this means she must have been wrongly dressed. There's no problem with the guys, they weren't monsters, they were just led astray by the supposed lack of clothes.

    A women wants to marry according to her choice. How dare she? Kill her, it's a matter of honour (No mention of Khadijah bint Khuwaylid proposing to marry the Prophet herself).

    A female got harassed in the market. Why was she in the market? She must have been "demanding" it. Lock the women and allow the men to do as they wish.

    A guy took liberty of a female's naivety and indulged in premarital interaction (avoiding words that make people "uncomfortable"). This is the guy's "achievement" and a source of pride for him, while this is supposed to be the woman's walk of shame.

    While many such things apply across national and social boundaries owing to female subjugation over thousands of years, such hate towards females is more prominent in our society and has not been dealt with accordingly.

    To most men in Pakistan, women are like mere objects and their own property. Even on PDF you can see replies along the lines of "will you let your sister/daughter do this". This is the misogynistic and dictatorial rule that males have justified for themselves. Females are their possession and dependent on them for even moral guidance. A women is always a mother, daughter, sister or a wife. She has no independent identity of her own and a single female does not exist in the mindset of most people. Somehow a mother's respect has remained in our society even with this level of misogyny. Women are like real estate to you bunch. The property of a Male Chauvinist Pig. Had it been upto you people, you would have them locked and chained.
    • Thanks Thanks x 8
  7. H2O3C4Nitrogen
    Offline

    H2O3C4Nitrogen SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2007
    Messages:
    4,391
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,696 / -0


    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 5, 2013
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  8. Desert Fox
    Online

    Desert Fox SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2010
    Messages:
    6,625
    Ratings:
    +2 / 8,047 / -7
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    if a man marries 4 fives then he has to take care of them and take the responsibility! BTW, this is more common in Arab countries, not in Pakistan, so far i haven't come across a single Pakistani with 4 wives!

    Americans also practice Polygamy but in a different way and i'm sure you wouldn't want mt emphasizing on that issue!
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  9. CAPTAIN AMERICA
    Offline

    CAPTAIN AMERICA BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    848
    Ratings:
    +0 / 129 / -0
    In the USA its rare and illegal.
  10. Peregrine
    Offline

    Peregrine SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    Messages:
    3,694
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,100 / -0
    Completely Irrelevant. Okay, so her Parents are responsible for her murder & just because they say that they forgive the killer in the name of Allah, it doesn't mean that the murder is justifiable, similarly if some murderer justifies his killing in the name of Allah doesn't provide a vindication to target the religion. Like i said earlier it's the people themselves who bend & twist rules to accommodate their wishes, it has nothing to do with Islam.
    The act of pardoning doesn't only thrive in Islamic law.
    On August 11, 1999, Clinton commuted the sentences of 16 members of FALN, a violent Puerto Rican terrorist group that set off 120 bombs in the United States, mostly in New York City and Chicago.the FALN is responsible for "6 deaths and the permanent maiming of dozens of others, including law enforcement officials." Clinton offered clemency, on condition that the prisoners renounce violence seeing as none of the 16 had been convicted of harming anyone and they had already served 19 years in prison. This action was lobbied by ten Nobel Laureates, the Archbishop of Puerto Rico and the Cardinal of New York. so an archbishop & a cardinal is involved but we shouldn't say that such practices exist in Christianity as the order of the day is to confront Islam & not other religions. P.S i know you will see my post as religious victimization as i highlighted the flaws of those who are lets just say not Muslims, If only we had better arbitrators to resolve such cases world would be a better place to live in.
  11. gambit
    Offline

    gambit PROFESSIONAL

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2009
    Messages:
    16,677
    Ratings:
    +34 / 12,100 / -3
    Country:
    United States
    Location:
    United States
    We do? News to me. Please do not bring up a certain prominent Christian sect.
  12. JonAsad
    Offline

    JonAsad ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    11,201
    Ratings:
    +1 / 19,954 / -1
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia
    So its rare and illegal.. thats it
    Now we are supposed to believe you ehh?

    But when we say that in Islam women have equal rights..
    then what?
  13. gambit
    Offline

    gambit PROFESSIONAL

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2009
    Messages:
    16,677
    Ratings:
    +34 / 12,100 / -3
    Country:
    United States
    Location:
    United States
    Yes, it is illegal. When it does occur in a certain religious sect, the subsequent marriages in a polygynous marriage are always presented as 'spiritual' ones to evade legal punishments. That mean Americans do not believe in polygynous or polyandrous marriages.

    Polygyny = wives
    Polyandry = husbands

    Plural.

    Yes.

    Fine...But we are talking about practice, not merely in theory.
  14. sparklingway
    Offline

    sparklingway PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    3,880
    Ratings:
    +0 / 5,038 / -0
    I did not state that it was somehow justifiable, I just said that the orthodox interpretation of Diyat allows the wali to forgive in the name of Allah without facing any punishment, even the Fasad fil Arz punishment. The orthodox interpretation also has resulted in such a freed person not even being labeled "convict" legally. Legal conviction means becoming ineligible for many things including government service. Hence a person walks away without any social stigma associated as well.

    You have clearly never read Islamic Jurisprudence in this regard and therefore misunderstood my remarks. As you have clearly a lax understanding of the law and utilizing the "I believe it and therefore it must be perfectly right" kind of argument, I'll avoid commenting any further.

    I was not concerned with pardoning here rather showing you how a family got their daughter murdered and got away with it using Islamic law. Most jurists today call for overhauling Qisas and Diyat in line with modern demands since the introduction of Diyat had much to do with alleviating Arab hatreds and the modern day application of 8th century interpretations leads to acquittals and deprives the society of providing any the three necessities of justice i.e. retribution, rehabilitation and deterrence. In those times, exile was a severe punishment and today it is infeasible and a useless punishment. Just like that, Diyat laws need to be interpreted my Islamic jurists and many have come to the conclusion that the complexities of today demand that crime is twofold i.e. crime towards person and crimes towards society. A murder like that of Saima Sarwar should fall into the category of crime against society for which there should be no pardon as there is no deterrence if the murderer is forgiven and he simply walks away with the crime. I can search through documents, but I'm pretty sure there was a hitman either in Lahore or Kasur who was "forgiven" in more than 6 cases involving nearly a dozen murderers. Hired by relatives who would end up as walis, he could be forgiven in the name of Allah and hired to kill someone else, they walis could be forced to forgive in the name of Allah. The Judge in one case had written such a scathing judgment that one could literally read his rage.

    The introduction of Qisas and Diyat Laws have destroyed the criminal justice system, after the Hudood Laws started its destruction.

    83% of murder trials have resulted in "Razinamas". This means that 83% of real killers roam the streets without any social stigma attached to them and because the orthodox interpretation of Islam does not label the person who goes free under diyat as a "convict", he roams free in every possible way. Society has changed from the small communities of Arabia but our peanut brains are yet to accept this fact.

    Since the advent of Qisas and Diyat laws in 1990, conviction rate at trial stage has dropped from 29% to 12%. Conviction in SC at appeal level has dropped from 79% to 35%. Self cancellation of cases has increased from 4% to 11%. Homicide rate has gone up from 5 per 100,000 to 9 per 100,000. 7% of cases withdrawn after "razinamas" involved trading girls as compensation. No single case since the introduction of the laws has been convicted under Qatl-i-amd liable to Hadd.

    Razinamas are controlled demolitions of the system of criminal justice.

    However, since their introduction, conviction rates have decreased immensely. Most apologists here would argue with their usual illiteracy that the "true law is not being applied. Their are loopholes and gaps, while true law has none and therefore will magically result in a 100% conviction rate and free and perfect justice".

    The criminal justice system has been destroyed precisely by the introduction of these laws which were supposed to help the society. Even then the jurists had pointed out that these orthodox interpretations had absolutely no grounds for application in a modern society and its challenges. Diyat would have been an acceptable solution in tribal Arabia as it sought elimination of long standing enmities. Today, Diyat means a system of justice that is biased and is clearly elitist is nature. A justice system biased towards the elite cannot work. Diyat also allows criminals to roam free without stigma. Societies aren't small anymore where everybody knows you. You can migrate between cities. In 8th century Arabia, everybody knew you and migrating out of the clan was not an option.

    Anybody willing to study the effects of Qisas and Diyat Laws should read the book " The Application of Islamic Criminal Law in Pakistan : Sharia in Practice". It has been written by somebody who is sympathetic to the system of Islamic Justice and extensively covers its historical grounds, both in Arabia and this region and basis his opinion on contemporary opinions of Islamic jurists.

    His conclusions are clear, the system of Qisas and Diyat needs a revolutionary change to be applicable in a modern society and it has failed to cover any one of the three aspects of criminal justice, namely, rehabilitation, deterrence and retribution. The principles of Islamic jurisprudence demand not just following the letter of law handed by 8th century interpretations, but following the principles. The principles deem murder and rape as crimes liable to a death punishment. These were being followed before the introduction of the Hudood and Qisas and Diyat Laws.

    I don't see it as a cross religious comparison. But the second statement is just what I said, the usual "not true Islamic law", "intentions are not right" argument which comes from most people who are illiterate about a subject. If you have belief that your believes are based on a system of perfect justice that can magically do no wrong, then I'm happy for you but don't use this pathetic, frequently used and hollow argument. It is not a convincing argument in any scenario.
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  15. H2O3C4Nitrogen
    Offline

    H2O3C4Nitrogen SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2007
    Messages:
    4,391
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,696 / -0
    But sparklingway i dont think majority women are being digraced that much in our society or is it the majority of women bent down to the will of there masters..??