To think latent Islamaphobia is as prevalent as ever

[Lesschubtolove]

This is based from several posts I’ve now seen in MN, about burquinis, wearing the hijab, in fact anything vaguely Muslim related on MN and in print media as well as the real world.

Most comments from posters on MN are fairly neutral but there are a fair number that then state some pretty (pulls yikes face) comments, especially about women’s clothing or integration. There also seem to be a lot of misconceptions about what Muslims actually believe.

It seems to me as though yes most people won’t come out and say that they dislike Muslims or think they are stupid, backwards, oppressed (insert adjective here) but the disdain comes out in more subtle ways.

im genuinely quite surprised at the misconceptions I read on MN, but I guess they must apply to real life too, but just that people don’t wish to voice them.

ps I am a Muslim myself. I did an ama a while back

Isn't it convenient that everytime an aspect of holy book / religion becomes a little bit too problematic it"s changed to suit the audience of the day's taste?

All these infallible gods sure do change their minds a lot. It's almost as if the religious leaders just make things up as they see fit....👀

That's the theory but I can assure that it is not the practice.

I think Islam does not tolerate criticism. Is it because, as a Muslim, one believes that the Koran - all of it - is the absolute truth? I am prepared to be corrected on this.
As a Christian, we have, since the Reformation, accepted that we can question what's in the Bible (I know there are some strands of Christianity that see the Bible as literally the word of God, but they are marginal). As a Christian, I 'm used to coming into contact with people who think I'm very strange, but that's their right. Why shouldn't people view me and my faith that way?
And, why shouldn't people think of Muslims that way?
And, if you choose, for whatever reason, to wear clothing very different from the norm, why be surprised when people have opinions (sometimes unfavourable) about it?

That’s the whole point, isn’t it, that Christianity (and Judaism, in the more reformed sects) have adapted and changed over time, whereas Islam has not. you say it’s more progressive than the other two, but to me it seems the opposite.

@ExitChasedByAMemory I don't think any woman is free from patriarchal oppression, but I do think symbols of oppression - such as the need for women to cover their bodies to be modest - have a tangible impact. I'm not sure I really think there is such a thing as entirely free will - choices are made in a context, and I don't think most Islamic women would make the same choice if they weren't in a context where that is part of their religion. Most Christian women used to make the choice to cover their hair, and now most don't, because the context in which those choices are made have changed.

By "state sponsored attempts to repress" I was thinking of countries like France, where there have been attempts to ban some kinds of Islamic dress.

It's actually very rare for a man to have more than one wife. I have met a lot of people living in Muslim countries and i'm yet to come across anyone in such an arrangement.

It seems to mainly be the very rich Sheikhs and kings in the Gulf countries who do so.

If someone is not practicing a theory then it might not be the problem with the theory but the person implementing it. In every race, religion and culture, there will be people who do things that are contrary to their creed, but that’s usually more to do with the people than their creed itself. As long as you have free will and mankind has a freedom of choice, there will be good and bad things that happen in society purely because we are free agents welcome to do whatever we want. That’s why we have rules and laws in each country to act as deterrents, it’s the same thing in religions, including Islam.

It's not clear from your post if you actually lived in Islamic countries or know people who lived in them. I lived in a variety of Islamic countries and can tell you that it is quite common.

Or what makes more sense is that women were just chattels and that men wanted to have as many heirs as possible. Women lacked the ability to make the same choices as men because they aren’t equal.

even more abhorrent that he had sex with a child. How do Muslims account for him having sex with a child between the ages of 9-12 (depending on which scholar?

How is Mohammed’s war record reconciled with being a prophet? He was a pretty violent chap?

He’s not the type of leader I would throw my hat in with

I'm not a scholar, so all of this should be taken as my best effort based on my own understanding.

Re: polygamy.

The actual guidance is that men should be faithful to their wives, and there is wider guidance that, unless a society's laws are actively un-Islamic, Muslims should follow the legal system of the country in which they live. So, if someone lives in a country where polygamy isn't acceptable, they shouldn't go looking to have multiple spouses.

A man should only ever be considering having more than one wife if a) he lives in a society in which it is legal and acceptable; b) he can treat his wives equally well. Otherwise, nope, no second wives (or however many) allowed.

There are academic discussions that can be had about polygamy in different cultures and different times, but those probably aren't that relevant here.

Re: The wives of The Prophet, Peace Be Upon Him, having several husbands at the same time, no they didn't, to my knowledge. I don't know if other Prophets or Messengers may have or not, Allah Knows Best. When thinking about that time, it's important to consider that the wider society pre-Islam was pretty misogynistic - some of the teachings and examples from that time, from the early days of Islam, were pretty shocking in terms of promoting and protecting women's rights. Rights to divorce, to inherit, to testify in court...

When we look at aspects of that time from a modern and Western perspective, there are things that we would say "Well, that's not ok in our society today!", but the guidance in Islam wasn't and isn't just for our current society. It's important to consider the underlying principles and themes, the contexts, and the historical purposes of some of the things.

For example, child marriage. Definitely, absolutely not acceptable in our UK society. Historically, it's something that's happened a lot. And even today there are cultures in which it happens, places in which the age of consent for sexual activity is much lower than here. I disagree with those cultures' views. I hope most people posting here also don't agree with child marriage. Historically, it was a common practice and it was common for children to be subjected to horrific abuse as a result. It was a big step for men to be told that, if they were marrying an underage child, they shouldn't consider consummating the marriage until she was 'of age', and they should treat her with love and respect.

'Don't sexually assault children' is an extremely low bar for men, but so many fall short, even today.

Re: Rewards in Heaven, there's no reason to believe that only men get to have a nice time or get companionship or to be with their loved ones. The masculine plurals for people are used, but in Arabic the masculine plurals are used for all-male or mixed-sex groups - only an all-female group would be referred to using the feminine plurals.

"That’s the whole point, isn’t it, that Christianity (and Judaism, in the more reformed sects) have adapted and changed over time, whereas Islam has not. you say it’s more progressive than the other two, but to me it seems the opposite."

I meant most progressive in its original teachings.

The other religions have adapted but that has taken a very long time and a lot of bloodshed along the way. Islam is more than 500 years younger than Christianity.

500 years ago there was chaos all over Europe due to differing views on Christianity.

I agree with this. The point is that because the other religions have adapted more (for most sects, anyway), they are now far more progressive than Islam. Of course horrific things have been done in the name of Christianity over the years (and still is in some cases), but mainstream modern Christianity holds no truck with that and is a very different religion.

My (possibly naïve) understanding of why this might be is because Christians mostly believe that the Bible is the word of God interpreted through man, and hence errors are possible and cultural bias is inevitable, and also the New Testament (definitely problematic in places but overall not that bad) supersedes the Old Testament, so most of the fire and brimstone stuff can be safely ignored. But Muslims, as I understand it, believe that the Quran is the literal word of God dictated to Mohammed by the Angel Gabriel, so doubting or evolving any part of it is problematic.

It's absolutely apalling to think of a child bride these days but it wasn't uncommon in ancient times (obviously that doesn't make it right). Mary was thought to be 13 or 14 when pregnant with Jesus - OK she was supposedly impregnated by God but she was engaged to Joseph (a much older widower) at that tender age. In Massachusets and New Hampshire it is STILL legal to get married at 14! My husband's grandmother (Hindu) was married at 13. Let's not pretend the prophet marrying a child is something peculiar to Islam.

Are you basing that on historical research or your own opinion? Because this academic was doing the former.

this is where societal context is important, in ancient societies (pre Islamic Arabic, Christian, Jewish, pagan etc) someone was of marriage age when they reached puberty. Now of course we know that’s not adulthood, it’s the start of it, but that’s how ancient societies defined it, especially because of the average life expectancy then. It was not just Muhammad (pbuh) who married a girl of a similar age, it was ‘urf or a custom of the people, so by that I mean he was not the exception to the rule rather it was the norm. It wasn’t seized upon by his contemporaries as an awful thing because it was what people did.

re participation in wars, Islam isn’t a pacifist religion, you are allowed to defend yourself if under attack. His participation in wars reflects his social standing as a leader of a rapidly expanding community, he had a different social role than say John the Baptist or Jesus. Islam has very strict rules for conduct in warfare and it must always be a last resort and if the enemy stops, either flees or surrenders you must also stop. There is a strong emphasis on making peace

@Whoarethegrownups That’s interesting. You’re right, in that sense repressing one’s freedom to express their religion in terms of what a person wears or doesn’t wear isn’t right and I believe France doesn’t allow any outer forms of religious clothing like even turbans or crucifixes etc. so it’s not just some forms of Islamic dress but religious attire in general.

I’d be interested to see what your definition of “patriarchal oppression” is because it’s a fascinating concept. However, I’m not sure covering one’s body can be seen as oppression. When we go outside the house, we still have to wear clothes. When it’s hot we might wear looser clothes for comfort and when it’s cold we might wear more layers. So I don’t think of myself oppressed just because I’m wearing clothing.

But if you meant covering one’s body in the Islamic sense, I’ve seen different ranges of covering from just a hijab, to covered head to toe, to no hijab at all depending on their level of belief or how they’ve chosen to interpret scripture. Muslim women just like any other women dress in the way they want. There are many devout Muslims who cover and likewise there are many who don’t.

Some Muslim women interpret things in a certain way and therefore dress in a certain way so even if Islam is scripture-based, there are many differences of opinion. So that’s why I find it saddening how Muslims are painted with the same brush when I believe there are at least 100 different sects in Islam. I’m not sure the exact number but there’s definitely more than 10.

Yes, there are instances where men are forcing women to dress in a certain way similar to how pimps expect the women they are controlling to dress in a specific way, there are men who may force women in their lives to dress in a specific way, but that is contrary to their faith.

What I find disturbing is when someone does something horrific and happens to be Muslim, there seemed to be an expectation for Muslims to denounce it. As though anyone in their right mind would condone it. So yes, I can see the prevalent Islamaphobic portrayals.

Christians don't have to follow Christianity to the book, that's the whole point - the Bible is open to interpretation, in Islam the Qur'an simply is the liberal word of God. So in another 1000 years it won't be any more "modern".

I believe it wasn’t just Islamic culture, the norm of society was that when a girl hits puberty, she would get married. Mary was aged between 12-16 when she gave birth. The average age to get married hundreds and thousands of years ago was a lot different to society’s norms now. I studied the Just War Theory and I believe there is an Islamic equivalent of this as well.

That was my point :)

So the Quran will always be the Quran, you’re right but how we engage with it can change, the meaning we can infer can be interpreted differently.

as a book it’s quite ambiguous in its meaning which is why there is such a reliance on hadith and tafsir and scholarly consensus

"Christians don't have to follow Christianity to the book, that's the whole point - the Bible is open to interpretation, in Islam the Qur'an simply is the liberal word of God. So in another 1000 years it won't be any more "modern"."

A few hundred years ago people WERE expected to follow Christianity to the book, even here in England. If they didn't they would be burned as a heretic.

Anyone caught with a copy of the bible in English was a dead man. If you dared to say the bread and wine did not literally turn into the body and blood of Christ, you were a heretic and would be tortured until you gave up the names of any fellow heretics, before you were burned at the stake.

And that was tame compared to the Spanish Inquisition.

But my boss’s clients say that’s how it does work in Islamic culture.

All of them said that the wife didn’t need to be left a huge share of money or the house etc because her family (eg male relatives etc) would provide for her. She could be left eg possessions, jewellery etc but as she didn’t need money etc because she’d be provided for then this wouldn’t be left to. Her. My boss was quite concerned for the female clients which was why he mentioned it to me (as his PA) and he tried to get them to all change their minds. And was about 5 years ago. These were also clients in a wealthy area of London, Or are you trying to say I’m lying?

What’s your point exactly? What is the relevance of Christianity hundreds of years ago? It has clearly changed a lot since then. Islam has not. What do you have to say about that?

Your boss's clients weren't following Islamic guidance if they were doing that. They were trying to exploit vulnerable women.

Why get so passive aggressive, no one is saying you’re lying. I’m saying they are mistaken

it is quite a complicated ruling but in a nutshell, if a man were to die, he had a wife and 2 children a boy and a girl, and his parents were still alive. As I understand it, his parents would get 1/6th each, 1/8th would be for his wife. All joint assets become hers, Ie a home and any joint bank accounts. His children then would get half which the wife would hold onto until they are ‘of age’. The male child would get double the amount of the female child. And the reason is as your colleague described. The son when he is of age has to take care of his mother and sisters. The parents of the husband should also provide for the widow and her children.

"What’s your point exactly? What is the relevance of Christianity hundreds of years ago? It has clearly changed a lot since then. Islam has not. What do you have to say about that?"

My point is that it took hundreds/thousands of years to change, and Islam is over 500 years younger than Christianity, for example.

My other point is that ugly points in Christianity's teachings and its history since are ignored 'as it was hundreds/ thousands of years ago and a different time', but when it comes to Islam people don't want to see it in the context of its time- they want to relate it to modern standards.