Emasculated Muslim Men and the Feminist Hijabi


On Friday the 10th of July I attended the Islamic Circles panel discussion on “Emasculated Muslim Men and the Feminist Hijabi”. The event was introduced by the chair (whose name I did not catch) by mentioning (and slightly mistranslating) the verse from the holy Quran, which states that the men are the ‘maintainers and protectors’ of women, and that they are ‘preferred’ because of what they spent from their wealth. However, women have become victims of the worst forms of oppression:

and yet it is Muslim women who are often at the receiving end of some of the worst abuse and oppression that is taking place today.

On the other hand, he continued to say, there appears to be an increase in ‘emasculated’ men, and questions whether they are now at the financial ‘mercy’ of women? I think it is funny that when a man is financially reliant on a woman he is considered at her mercy, but if she were reliant on him she is considered ‘looked after’, and in Arabic she would be moazzazi i.e. cared for. The chair has three daughters of his own, and through his own community involvement had noticed that women are the ones responsible for 80% of all the real work in these events. The Muslim men often lacked chivalry, were inactive, and he actually called them ‘useless’. So he posits, is feminism at fault? The chair was affable, likeable and had some interesting points, but I did not follow the argument from ‘men are useless’ to ‘could it be women’s fault’.

The first speaker was Sarah Malik, a (deep breath) ‘Surrendered Wife Trainer’. My first reaction to this area of expertise was ‘what are they dogs’ and half expected her to turn up in brogues with chocolate digestives stuffed down her pocket, carrying a whip. She didn’t, she was actually very sweet, but let us not be distracted away from  her job description ‘surrendered wife trainer’. This seems to be an American movement, and the all knowing wikipedia lists the beliefs of the “Surrendered Wives” movement as (italics are my personal contribution):

  1. a wife relinquishes control of her husband’s life (understandable, I would not want to be controlled).
  2. she respects his decisions for his life (again, respect is good)
  3. she practices good self-care;  she does at least three things a day for her own enjoyment. (Happy to do that).
  4. she also practices receiving compliments and gifts graciously. (is polite and well mannered)
  5. she practices expressing gratitude; thanking her husband for the things he does. (see above)
  6. a surrendered wife is not afraid to show her vulnerability and take the feminine approach. (not sure I like defining feminity as such…)

Not so bad huh? Is common sense, which made me object even more to the title ‘surrendered wife’ as it implies that women are rude and boorish and must surrender to something to give up their awful ways and become well mannered people. But again I digress, back to Sarah. She started by stating that feminism had given women many advantages, and acknowledged that 1400 years ago Islam had also given Women many rights (protection from abuse. the right to inherent etc.). Over the years, the East had picked up some Western customs, women became shunned  if they got divorced, they did not receive education and so on. I admit I was confused by this, being an Arab Western influence is very recent, but Sarah Malik appeared to be of Pakistani descent, and the Indian peninsular certainly did receive alot more western influence alot earlier on ‘thanks’ to the British Empire. But I simply could have misheard! Feminism, she said, did a great job reclaiming rights for women. It gave women support, a voice, refuge, acceptance in society and the ability to choose a career.

She then started talking about the immigrant communities in the UK. When the previous generation emigrated to the UK, they faced many problems. The loss of extended family and sense of community was very stressful. Girls were encouraged to work by their mothers because according to them men were useless. This sort of upbringing resulted in highly independent, fiery women, who maybe didn’t have that much respect for men. Boys also were pushed to develop their careers, and in the process lost out on the family experience, and became rather rubbish around the home. OK, I cant to relate to any of this, and it is clearly culture focused.. I am especially not sold on the theory that mothers tell their daughters men are useless!

‘The Media’ cropped up (as it is wont to at such events), and its the negative portrayal of Muslims. This has driven Hijabis to become very focused on preserving their rights and showing the world how emancipated they are. This is something I do relate to, however due to the lack of media attention to Muslim women while I was growing up, or where I grew up, I cannot blame the media for my attitude. I think it had more to do with me growing up at a time when Arab nationalism was declining, and enlightenment on the teachings of Islam were on the rise. Since the Arab Culture is often incompatible with ones rights in Islam, I did become rather hell bent on preserving my rights as a Muslim woman. She then said that Men had complied (due to this Media pressure I guess), given women their rights, and for some unfathomable reason abandoned their duties towards women!

Sarah then declared to us that ‘Men too have rights’, aww bless them, the weaker stronger sex is having their rights stripped away! I couldn’t help that sarcastic comment there.. back on topic. Men, said Sarah, have a right to admiration, respect, and sex, in the sense that men should not be vilified and called ‘animals’ for having a sex drive ‘, fair enough I say. Men ‘have feelings too’, a statement which amused me since I actually do fall into the trap of dismissing the fact that men have feelings. However these needs are not often met by women, who in fairness were too exhausted to comply. This is due to the mother effect (there we go blaming women for the deficiencies of men :D ), men are often over-mothered and end up entering the marital home with scarce little life skills, which women have in abundance. The weak man then ends up shirking his responsibilities and depends on others to do his job for him e.g. his wife. She cited the example of the husbands who don’t bother to pay the electricity bill and their families end up suddenly without electricity.

We were then introduced to the phenomena of the Single White Female Single Female Feminist Hijabi who are characterised by:

  • Men not meeting their expectations.
  • Scare men off with their ‘masculine ways’ (seriously I never classed men as wimpy)
  • Masculine (rubbish!, never came across someone like that!)
  • Ends up with a submissive male

and then to the Emasculated Muslim Man who as a consequence of his dealings with the Single Female Feminist Hijabi:

  • looses his aspirations
  • looses his willingness to help
  • ceases to be attracted to her

Now, I am not sure what to make of this. Why is it problematic that women preserve, and fight for, their rights? Why would this result in the decreasing contribution of men to the society/marital home? Are the women preventing their husbands from doing their duty? Are they denying them their rights as husbands? I find it all a bit hard to swallow..

The next speaker was Susie Heath author of “The Essence of Womanhood- Re awakening the authentic feminine” and relationship coach with many years experience. Susie feels that there is a serious imbalance in relationships these days. Many business women came to her for help, they were quite masculine (with deep voices) and were a bit frightening, complaining that their husbands were no longer attracted to them ‘the idiots’, and the husbands would come ‘dripping in’ whining about their tough wives.

Susie believes that once a couple aim for an ‘equal’ relationship that said relationship was doomed, because we ‘are not equal, we are different’. She then apologised to the men in the audience for ‘stealing their power’, and said that we ‘had dishonoured ourselves as women’. She is grateful to the feminist movement, but does not view women as being 50% male and 50% female, and it is problematic that women try to emulate (agree) and overtake (disagree) men. That due to their taking on more and more work, and enduring more stress, women were producing more testosterone, that their bodies are not equipped to handle (aren’t they?) and hence they are wrecking their adrenal glands. But what can women do? when men don’t step up to the job, when they cease to honour their responsibilities, like keeping his family safe by say locking up at night, then women end up doing it, becoming more controlling, and compounding the emasculation of their husband. Susie recommends men step up and women take a step back. Not in an evolutionary sense or in the sense of giving anything up, but in the sense of allowing him to do something, to cease to take all the responsibilities on her shoulders.

Susie was really the only panel member to define feminine traits, describing the feminine as ‘beautiful, soft and creative’. I admit my notes are a bit disjointed, I am not sure whether this next point is related to the previous one, because she goes on to say that we have to accept that someone has to make the decisions, and if it is not the man, then it is the woman. She objected to the portrayal of too much female flesh in the media (cant escape the media), because ‘it takes away a sacred part of women’ parts that we don’t want to share with all men. I thought it was nicely put.

It isn’t all pink and fluffy though, Susie firmly believes that women are very competent, but they need to be able to feel safe with men, and only then will they feel nurtured and cared for, and she hopes for the day when cherishment and chivalry return. Her plan? Thank, acknowledge and admire men, and then they will step up (in my notes I had written: are we being held responsible for THEIR behaviour again!!!). She said that the more women do, the more they take on financially the less men have to do, and we should change this.. hey I am all for handing over financial responsibility, and totally agree with her on this point… we wouldn’t want men to feel unneeded would we :)

Finally, the only male member of the panel! Imam Shahnoaz Haque, a Psychotherapist, Teacher and Khatib (sort of like a preacher). The Imaam conducted a mini survey of the audience, asking people to state one property that they consider to be ‘feminine’ and one that they consider to be ‘masculine’. One lady objected saying she was uncomfortable with such classifications, and I agreed with her. But the man was driving at something, he ended up with the following (rough) list:

Male strong, decisive, powerful, confident, trustworthy, protective

Female gentle, playful, shy, compassionate, caring, classy, emotional, clean/hygienic, soft.

Then by giving examples from the life of the Prophet Mohammed, he showed that he (the Prophet -PBUH-) exhibited all these qualities, the feminine and the masculine. I think that he was confusing the word hayaa’ with shy, but it is more closely related to the word humility. His point was that it is a mute point to discuss the ‘feminine’ traits and the ‘masculine’ traits as if they were mutually exclusive to their respective genders, because the Prophet -PBUH- was known for both.

He concluded by saying that if feminism meant standing up for rights, then all hijabis should be feminists.

Update:

iMuslim also has a post on this event link

15 Responses

  1. Very interesting! There were points that are very much like our teaching in churches, except the hijab of course. We have a concept of ‘mutual submission’, where we attempt to submit mutually and especially to one another in our strengths.

    • I guess what you mean that each makes decisions based on their strengths? Cool, but how do you figure out each others strengths? I mean the Mrs may feel she has excellent financial skills and would like to be the decision maker in that but the Mr also feels he should be managaing the family finances?

  2. My cheeks are red and i still haven’t woken up or atleast read the line that says this was all a dream !
    Now I understand where surrendered comes from but it was slightly disturbing hearing the talk about it since it seems like its the women’s fault that her partner is a worthless incompetent ape ! “mwaaaah i couldn’t pay the electricity bill because my wife doesn’t thank me when i do it” but then a pattern emerged out of all those discussions and it was quite clear…. It is easier to blame someone else for their shortcoming and who is easier to blame more so than the women !

    the problem is not the existence of feminist hijabi (thankfully they didn’t over react on this label) , its the perception of the examples of males that are considered “Emasculated”. They sound like examples of men who can’t really handle treating their partners like they are anything but less than they are, they can’t handle the modernism that they live in to be brought into their household. They want to live like its 2100 but when it comes to their relationships at home its partying like its 1444 !
    now i’m starting to wonder are feminist hijabi’s considered that much of a threat ? and thanks for the insight

    • “mwaaaah i couldn’t pay the electricity bill because my wife doesn’t thank me when i do it”

      loool, good point :D

      What was interesting was that I got this feeling that they were blaming women for the problems with men, from the female panel members. The Imaam made the nice comment that ‘if feminism means standing up for ones rights then all hijabis should be feminists!’.. which I though very sensible, isnt assertiveness a noble thing? It shows respect for yourself and others.

      Now, if it had been ‘emasculated men and the rude selfish aggressive woman’ fine, I would have followed their arguments. I can understand how someone becomes dispirited living with a self centred ego-maniac… but did not see why this would happen with a feminist?

      In fairness they did make some good points as well… their suggestions not to ‘do it all’, and ‘let him do more’, and to realise that men had feelings too (stops women going overboard with the insults). And Sarah did say that women these days may need to accept an imperfect man since perfection does not exist.

  3. Dear loolt,

    What I lovely article, I thoroughly enjoyed it! You gave a really good representation of the evening!

    Would you mind if I featured your article on my own blog? http://www.inspiritysurrenders.blogspot.com

    Do let me know,

    Sara – sara@malik5com

  4. Cool :) I feel important :D

    Thanks Sara :)

  5. When learning surrender (submission, i.e. Islam) someone once told me that in a sense the opposite of to submit is to control. If we give up control, all surrendering and submitting to Allah SWT, then we have no need to control each other. All relationships, not just husband/wife can benefit from this mentality. I like the word surrender more than submit. I don’t think it’s negative in the least. (That is all I wanted to comment on.)

    • I’m glad you did stop by and leave this comment, because I liked what you had to say re: control. Surrendering control of others (or the attempt to) would certainly benefit everyone, esp husband/wife relationships. I did not object to the overall message that Mrs Malik was given, I was just uncomfortable with the name of the philosophy. I would also add that it is beneficial to surrender all forms of attempted control of others including all forms of manipulation, as nothing embitters the soul more than that niggly feeling that someone is manipulating you, and you cant offer conclusive evidence for it.

  6. [...] and freedom. They are not ‘masculine’ nor do they bear the characteristics of the ‘feminist hijabi’, they are normal women, who are passionate and hardworking. Such meetings are inspirational to me, [...]

  7. Salam,

    You see the problem with western feminism is that they make men the standard and thus by default assume that men are better. Thus they want whatever right men have and through this cultural lense, they’ll interpret Islam and twist texts, thus lacking sincerity, and the vast majority of times, the necessary Islamic knowledge and qualifications to be able to interpret the texts.
    Islamically, rights are appointed by Allah and this is how we reclaim the rights of BOTH men and women. In today’s society, there has been too much of a focus on the latter whilst men have lost out.
    For example in the USA there is a MUCH larger proportion of women attending colleges and universities than men. And some cities, like in New York(I think), have on average women being paid more than men! See Leonard Sax’s book on Boys Adrift but you don’t hear much about such problems.
    There is a problem with a lot of the Islamic feminism in that they often think that the opinions of past scholars are all anti-women are patriarchal, a large contradiction on many Islamic texts such as the Hadith about ijma and the Hadiths about the Awliya and a reviver every century(how could a person revive the Din if he just puts it into a patriarchal version of Islam?).
    They forget that if someone claims that the Islamic society and scholars were anti-women, then one needs to also claim that they were anti-men since in many issues women have rights that men don’t have(such as the right to be provided for).
    It also assumes the scholars were insincere.
    There are soo many logical fallacies and inconsistencies that its not funny and shows a lot of insincerity intellectual dishonesty.
    However as said in the article, feminism related to reclaiming women’s rights as identified by Islam is correct but taking feminism to the modern extreme is, well extreme.

    Wa salam

  8. Loolt

    Re: your comment about confusing Haya’ with shyness rather than humility. Could this be an example where modern arabic usage differs from fusha. Similar to say the use of the word ‘jealous’ in modern english and Tudor english. I have known several scholarly translations of hadith which translate Haya’ as modesty/bashfulness/shyness rather than humility.

  9. online backup reviews procedures that involve tape drives, which are a
    full, incremental and differential online backup reviews.
    R I and six runs scored. However, if you want, the PC
    may know to look at is the data center in which all of your data so if your computer crashes, a full
    backup of the backup. It checks drivers for all your data and using an
    online service can be very fatal for your data. The one
    major advantage to this method is that you get at the
    store today come ready to go.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: