Introduction
The Fourth World Conference on Women
finally adopted the document, ‘Platform for Action’, on 15th September 1995 in
Beijing, China, after having gone through a series of amendments, additions and
deletions before and during the conference. The goals of the document are –
equality, development and peace. These are undoubtedly the cherished goals of
all the cultures and communities of the world. The realization of these goals is
urgent and imperative as strongly asserted in the document. Development of a
holistic perspective and a comprehensive strategy seems indispensable to achieve
these goals for the varieties of cultures and subcultures across the world.
However, the document has unequivocally challenged that the only appropriate
perspective for all cultures which can ensure the achievement of these goals is
the ‘gender perspective’. The lengthy document of over 200 pages is replete with
few phrases – ‘promotion of gender perspective’, ‘incorporation of gender
perspective’ etc. This article aims at the exploration and critical analysis of
the ‘gender perspective’, as conceived and emphasized in the document. In the
second part, the gender perspective shall be explicated and analyzed, while in
the third part, the Islamic position on the related issues shall be briefly
presented. All this shall be followed by a conclusion.
Gender Perspective in the Platform for Action
A brief survey of the document would
reveal the emphasis on the ‘gender perspective’ in the document. Its first
chapter entitled ‘Mission Statement’ comprises six paragraphs. First few lines
of the ‘Mission Statement’ read as follows:
The Platform For Action is an agenda
for women’s empowerment. It aims at accelerating the implementation of the
Nairobi Forward-Looking Strategies for the Advancement of Women and at removing
all the obstacles to women’s active participation in all spheres of public and
private life through a full and equal share in economic, social, cultural and
political decision-making.
Nairobi Forward Looking Strategies (FLS)
is a reference to the document passed in the Third World Conference on Women,
held in 1985, in Nairobi. The Platform for Action reviews and reaffirms the
objectives of Nairobi Conference for the Advancement of Women to the year 2000.
The FLS provides a ‘framework for action’ at the national, regional and
international levels to promote the three objectives of the United Nations
defence for Women: Equality, Development and Peace. The United Nations Decade
for Women 1975-1985 was declared by the UN General Assembly in the First UN
Conference on Women held in Mexico city in 1975. The Second UN Conference on
Women held in Copenhagen in 1980 for the second half of the Decade for Women,
adopted the Programme of Action. The Platform for Action is developed and built
on the Programme of Action, Forward Looking strategies, Declaration on Violence
against Women adopted by UN in 1993 and various other declarations on Human
Rights etc. One of the main objectives of all the preceding UN conferences on
women had also been the promotion of the shared-power and responsibility between
men and women in the workplace at both the national and the international
levels. The Platform for Action asserts that without full and equal share of
power and responsibility at home and outside work between women and men
sustainable development is impossible, which is obvious from the Mission
Statement, as quoted above. Emphasis on the equal share of power and
responsibility at home and outside work without the consideration of the
biological differences between women and men is an essential principle of the
‘gender perspective.’
Since the UN Decade for Women
(1975-1985), great efforts have been made world-wide to impose the ‘gender
perspective’ through governmental supports. The last lines of paragraph 26 of
Chapter II, entitled ‘Global Framework’, read as follows:
Many Governments have enacted
legislation to promote equality between women and men and have established
national machineries to ensure the mainstreaming of gender perspective in all
spheres of society.
Despite all the government and
non-government efforts for the promotion of the gender perspective, the problems
remain unsolved, the Platform for Action bemoans and bewails at the failure of
the governmental and non-governmental efforts for the same. In its third
chapter, entitled ‘Critical Areas of Concern’, it has identified twelve critical
areas. In every area, it has argued that the problems in the areas have
intensified due to the inadequate planning and actions for the incorporation of
the ‘gender perspective’. Hence, in every area, it has asserted that the
problems can be resolved only through the integration of the ‘gender
perspective’.
On the persistent and increasing burden
of poverty on women, the document comments:
The failure to adequately mainstream
a gender perspective in all economic analysis and planning and to address the
structural causes of poverty is also a contributing factor.
Hence, it has presented few strategic
actions to be taken by the governments to eradicate poverty. One of the
important actions proposed by the document is an analysis of all economic
policies and programmes from the ‘gender perspective’. It states:
Analyze, from a gender perspective,
policies and programmes – including those related to macro-economic stability,
structural adjustment…
Later, it proposed the following
important actions to be taken by intergovernmental organisations, the research
institutions and the international statistical organisations respectively:
Develop conceptual and practical
methodologies for incorporating gender perspective into all aspects of economic
policy-making, including aspects of economic policy-making, including structural
adjustment planning and programmes,
collect gender and age-disaggregated data on poverty and facilitate the
assessment of economic performance from a gender perspective.
On the problems of inequalities in
access to health and related services, the document asserts that women should
enjoy the right of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental
health. It points out that women have unequal access to and use of basic health
resources like prevention and treatment of childhood diseases, malnutrition,
anaemia etc. It also states that due to the inappropriate medical services to
women and also the gender-bias in the health system, women health is badly
effected. However, the solution pointed out in the document for all these and
several other problems of ill health of women is again the promotion of the
‘gender perspective’. It states:
… for the advancement of women as well as technical and
financial assistance to incorporate a gender perspective in developmental
efforts, the resources provided by the international community need to be
sufficient and should be maintained at an adequate level.
The Draft Beijing Declaration has unequivocally declared
that governments are convinced and determined to promote the ‘gender
perspective’. It says:
We hereby adopt and commit ourselves as government to
implement the following Platform For Action, ensuring a gender perspective is
reflected in all our policies and programmes…
For this, the Commission on the Status of Women, as a
functional Commission assisting the Economic and Social Council of UN is
expected to play a dynamic role. The Commission would draw work-programmes for
the period 1992-2000, and would review the critical areas of concern. It has
proposed that the Commission should have sufficient human and financial
resources to monitor within the UN system the implementation of the Platform For
Action. The document also states categorically that the Commission would play a
decisive role in the promotion of ‘gender perspective’. It says:
In the context, the Commission on the Status of Women
should consider how it could further develop its catalytic role in mainstreaming
a gender perspective in UN activities.
Along with the Commission, it is also proposed that a
high-level post in the office of the Secretary General should be established to
act as the Secretary General’s adviser on gender issues to help ensure
system-wide ‘gender perspective’ in all activities. Besides this, the Division
for the Advancement of Women, the office of the Human Resources Management, the
Department of Public Information, the Statistical Division of the Department for
Economic and Social Information and Policy Analysis, UN Development Fund for
Women would also co-ordinate with each other for the promotion of the ‘gender
perspective’.
Analysis of the Gender Perspective
Although the ‘gender perspective’ is so highly focused all
through the document as discussed above, it is neither defined nor elaborated in
the document. However, during several Preparatory Committee Meetings of UN for
the Beijing Conference, and the non-governmental organizations, the ‘gender
perspective’ was revealed quite obviously. Furthermore, the ‘gender perspective’
is also attributed to the Gender Feminism, which is also called Neo-Marxist
Feminism. Hence, an analysis of the ‘gender perspective’ in the document demands
a two-fold study: (1) an exploration into the debate over ‘gender’ and gender
perspective’ which took place during the Preparatory Committee Meeting of the
draft, Platform for Action; (2) an analysis into the philosophy of Gender
Feminism.
On March 15, 1995 the Preparatory Committee for the Fourth
World Conference on women was held in New York. According to a newsletter, Earth
Negotiations Bulletin, the Preparatory Committee was highly confrontational over
the term ‘gender’ in the draft. It observes:
Several countries expressed discomfort with the term
‘gender’ and asked to bracket the word throughout the text… Those who wanted to
bracket the term suspected that there was a hidden/unacceptable agenda behind
its use, for example, toleration of non-heterosexual identities and
orientations.
Thus, the term ‘gender’ is not used in place of ‘sex’ but
with a different meaning altogether – acceptance of all forms of sexuality. This
can be further clarified through the following quote appearing in an NGO report
of a meeting in Mardelplate, Argentina:
Knowing the variety of ways gender is symbolized,
interpreted, and organized leads to a position ‘anti-essential’ – that is that
there exists no natural men or natural women, that there is no conjunction of
characteristics or conduct exclusive to one sex even in the psychic life.
It clearly reveals that gender is not referred as ‘male’
and ‘female’. There is rather a non-existence of a feminine or masculine. Terms
like ‘male’ and ‘female’ and their biological differences are ‘socially
constructed’.
A careful reading of the document also reaffirms that
those who drafted the document also conceived ‘gender’ in the same way. It
states:
In many countries, the differences between women’s and
men’s achievements and activities are still not recognised as the consequences
of socially constructed gender roles.
Biological differences between male and female are not
appreciated in the document. During the preparations of the draft itself, such a
concept of ‘gender’ and ‘gender perspective’ has been already integrated into
the programmes of the UN system. Bella Abzung, a former US Congress woman,
addressing the delegates in one of the Preparatory Committee Meetings said:
We will not be forced back into the ‘biology is destiny’
concept that seeks to define, confine and reduce women to their physical sexual
characteristics…
This is the reason that the institutions of wifehood and
motherhood are referred to as ‘stereotypes’ in the document, since they are
based on the reality of the female biological and natural characteristics.
Instead of these highly important and basic institutions of a society, the
document emphasizes the promotion of non-stereotype images of women, all through
the document. It states:
Elaborate recommendations and develop curricula, text
books and teaching aids free of gender-based stereotype for all levels of
education.
At some other places, it is said:
Raise awareness of the responsibility of the media in
promoting non-stereotyped images of women and men…
Design and provide educational programmes through
innovative media campaigns and schools and community education programmes to
raise awareness on gender equality and non-stereotyped gender roles of women and
men…
Through producing such literature in Women Studies Centers
and also through various means of communication, the document asserts that the
non-stereotyped roles should be promoted. Education and mass communication
should be free from gender-based stereotypes – wifehood and motherhood.
Shulamith Firestone in her book, ‘The Dialect of Sex’, observers:
The heart of women’s oppression is her childbearing and
childrearing roles.
Ellen-Herman explains the attitude of the Gender Feminists
toward family in these words:
In the late 60’s, the radical young women who reclaimed
the derisive term ‘feminist’ and made it central to their own developing
political identities pinpointed the family – especially, the western
patriarchal, bourgeois, child-centered, nuclear family – as the most important
source of women’s oppression.
Thus, like the Gender Feminists, the document has attached
no great importance and significance to the institution of family based on the
matrimonial relationship between male and female and their procreation of
children. In fact, the document mentioned about the existence of different types
of families in different cultures. It demands equal respect for such families.
It states:
In different cultural, political and social systems,
various forms of the family exist. The rights, capabilities and responsibilities
of the family members must be respected.
In other words, different forms of families based on
different types of sexuality should be accepted. Freedom should be given to
women and men to design their families in their own life styles. As what Allen
Herman explains that the Radical Feminists demand freedom to love men or women,
to have sex with one or several persons and to live with or without children.
They look at proper familial relationships as enslavement which blocks progress
and development. Perhaps it is one of the reasons that the document instead of
proposing measures and strategic actions to keep the mother and the father in
the family together, shows greater concern for the female-headed families at
several places. It states:
Formulate and implement, when necessary, specific
economic, social, agricultural and related policies in support of female-headed
families.
The biological, natural and other factors which signify
the differences of roles of husband and wife are greatly devalued in the
document while the necessity for equal sharing of family and outside work is
highly emphasized. Single parent headed families are, therefore, accepted and
protected. One of the main causes of the confrontation between spouses – wife
and husband on equal sharing inside and outside house is made compulsory for
women’s achievement. The document has accepted the statistical fact that while
women have entered the work force outside, men have not shared with women in the
house chores. This is not looked as the result of biological and natural
differences between men and women, rather as the outcome of the socially-created
roles in some societies. It observes:
However, changes in women’s roles have been greater and
much more rapid than changes in men’s roles. In many countries, the differences
between women’s and men’s achievements and activities are still not recognized
as the consequences of socially constructed gender roles.
The fact is that equal sharing of power and responsibility
of the house work and outside work between men and women is conceived as a
prerequisite for equality, development and peace. It is generally appreciated
that women are sharing with men the outside work even in non-standard work,
sometimes as temporary, casual and multiple part-time employment despite facing
sexual harassment in the work-place and child-care problem in the house. The
problems of sexual harassment and the child-care are often treated in the
document as obstacles in the way of women’s potential achievement and their
advancement. The document states:
Many women face additional barriers to the enjoyment of
their human rights because of such factors as their race, language, ethnicity,
culture, religion, [sexual orientation]….
So, sexual orientation is recognized in the document as a
human right which should be duly respected. What is sexual orientation? It
implies the acceptability of homosexuality and lesbianism as human rights, which
is obvious from one of the fliers distributed during one of the Preparatory
Committee Meetings. The flier states:
We, the undersigned, call upon the member states to
recognize the right to determine one’s sexual identity, the right to control
one’s own body, particularly in establishing intimate relationships; and the
right to choose, if, when, and with whom to bear or raise children as
fundamental components of all human rights of all women regardless of sexual
orientation.
It should be noted here that the flier was distributed by
the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission [IGLGRC].
In other words, an unrestricted freedom should be given to
women and men to determine their sexual behaviour and life styles. It also
implies that a family based on matrimonial relationship which obliges mother and
father to take care of each other and their children is not necessarily
important. Men and women can live separately based on sexual orientation.
However, in any way, if they happen to produce children and children are staying
with women, the document asserts that men should be encouraged to share with
women financial and other responsibilities, no matter whether men stay with
women or not. The documents states:
Encourage men to share equally in child care and household
work and to provide their share of financial support for their families, even if
they do not live with them.
It signifies the persistent demand in the document for the
economic independence of women and equal economic empowerment of women with men
so that both may live independently enjoying economic empowerment. What about
children? Children would live at the mercy of equal or unequal share and care of
such independent parents or maybe at the mercy of UN Children Emergency Fund!
Perhaps, this is one of the reasons that many children have started publicly
complaining and divorcing their parents who have partially or completely
divorced themselves!
The same philosophy lies behind the emphasis on political
empowerment of women. It is argued that patriarchal culture-male-domination over
women is prevailing in all institutions and spheres of life from family to
international level. Hence to break such a dominant culture, women’s
socio-economic and political empowerment is essential.
Men and women are conceived as two classes, standing
against each other for empowerment. Men’s empowerment all through the ages has
only entailed women’s suppression and oppression. The whole discussion reminds
one of Marx and Engels and their dialectical materialism. Like two economic
classes – bourgeois and proletariat, men and women are camped into two classes
in conflict with each other for empowerment. As the classless society is the
goal of Marxist Communists, the goal of Gender Feminists seems to be a
sex-classless society.
The demand of
the Gender Feminists of 50/50 male/female for all elected offices reveals the
whole philosophy behind the equal partnership in political and economic
structures as emphasized in the document. Mim Kelber’s edited book entitled
‘Women and Government: New Ways to Political Power’ can be cited as an important
example. It is argued that equal participation of women in the country’s
political decisions at all levels is a necessary condition for democracy.
The necessity of 50/50 male/female quotas for all elected
offices from local, national to international level is emphasized by the Beijing
Preparatory Committee Meetings. The Council of Europe Meeting for Beijing
Preparation has played an active role in this connection. One of the reports of
the Meetings States:
… and additional protocol to the convention should be
adopted. This protocol should clearly and formally include the basic principle
of equality between women and men as a source of positive law. Parity democracy
is a means of re-thinking democracy…
So equal representation, 50/50, of men and women in all
decision-making is a sine qua non of democracy for Gender Feminists. The same
conception is reflected in the document on the issue of women’s political
participation. The following statement of the document can be cited here in this
connection.
… monitor progress towards achieving the Secretary
General’s target of having women hold 50 percent of managerial and
decision-making positions by the year 2000.
Integration of women in all economic and political
structures and decision-making equally with men, is in fact a strategic solution
pointed out by the modern and post-modern feminists of all political schools –
Liberal, Socialist, Radical Marxist and Neo-Marxist. They look at family,
society and all its institutions as patriarchal-male domination over women.
Hence they argue that women’s equal participation in all institutions is
essential to fight against patriarchy. Betty Friedan, who is reckoned as the
mother of American Feminist movement, in her book ‘The Second Stage’, suggested
a balance of women’s assimilation into the workplace with a counter assimilation
of men into the family to overcome this problem.
Juliet Mitchell’s work ‘The Longest Revolution’,
is recognized as the first written text of the British women’s liberation
movement. She looked at patriarchy as the ideological from of women’s
oppression, represented in each person’s unconscious by the Oedipus Complex.
Kate Millet, in her ‘Sexual Politics’
argued that sex is primarily political and women’s liberation depends on the
overthrow of patriarchy.
The document has echoed the same views and opinions
throughout its pages. It has pointed out that ‘only 10 percent of the members of
legislative bodies and a lower percentage of ministerial positions are now held
by women’. One of the primary reasons identified in the document for such a
condition is the following:
The unequal division of labour and responsibilities within
household based on unequal power relations also limits women’s potential to find
the time and develop the skills required for participation in decision-making in
wider public forums.
No doubt there is no proper and adequate representation of
women in the decision-making forums and this problem needs to be addressed from
a holistic perspective. There is also a need of sharing of responsibilities of
men and women in the house-chores which has its implications in the outside
work. However, sharing should not mean ‘tearing’!
Sharing the work inside and outside the house with mutual
understanding and confidence through proper and adequate arrangements is
advisable and should be encouraged. But participation of men and women in all
works from family to social, national and international institutions based on
50/50 quotas is not ‘sharing’ but ‘tearing’ the peace and stability of all.
Statistical equality between women and men in all types of works without
consideration of biological differences is not possible; it would ‘tear’ all
institutions into pieces. The supporters of ‘gender’ perspective’ demand equal
share between women and men in all works without consideration of the biological
differences. This can be further elucidated through a T.V. interview of Bella
Abzug by a reporter John Stossel:
John Stossel: The men in the fire department say that
women are not strong enough
Bella Abzug: That’s true.
John Stossel: They have had to change the test.
Bella Abzug: Well, that’s all right. Institutions have to
adjust. If there are still physical problems which prevent certain activities,
these activities should be assisted, so that it – in a way, with technology, so
that it is possible.
John Stossel: They should give them an electric axe?
Bella Abzug: Whatever is required.
One of the great obstacles towards equal socio-economic
and political empowerment of women is their reproductive role. Hence the
document has ensured reproductive rights and reproductive health for women.
Behind the emphasis of the reproductive rights and reproductive health, again
lies a hidden agenda to ensure freedom to men and women to follow their own
choice of reproduction. The document while describing reproductive health and
reproductive role at several places has not referred to the system of marriage
which ensures acceptable mode of reproduction. It discusses the safe-sex life
and methods regulating fertility. It states:
Reproductive health, therefore, implies that people are
able to have a satisfying and safe sex life and that they have the capability to
produce and the freedom to decide if, when and how often to do so.
Thus, reproductive health and role are defined in an
ambiguous way which has only aroused confusion. Later in the next paragraph,
reproductive health includes the right to make decisions concerning reproduction
free of discrimination, coercion and violence, as expressed in human rights
documents. It is also mentioned that women should decide their own
responsibility towards sexuality. Equal relationship between women and men on
sexual relations and reproduction seems essential.
This also reveals the emphasis on the ‘gender perspective’
in the document even on reproduction rights of women. To clarify the point,
Heidi Hartman’s argument on reproduction can be represented here:
How people propagate the species is socially determined.
If biologically people are sexually polymorphous, and society were organized in
such a way that all forms of sexual expression were equally permissible,
reproduction would result only from some sexual encounters, the heterosexual
one… In more imaginative societies, biological reproduction might be ensured by
other techniques.
The fact is, sex life based on ones own style of sexuality
implies the acceptance of homosexuality, lesbianism, transexuality and all other
deviant forms of sexuality in the same way as heterosexuality. In other words,
all the other types of sexual relationships and the forms of reproduction, using
advanced technologies should be accepted. A careful reading of the document also
suggests the same:
Equal relationship between women and men in matters of
sexual relations and reproduction, including full respect for the integrity of
the person, require mutual respect, consent and shared responsibility for sexual
behaviour and its consequences.
Again, it is obvious from the above lines that the
institution of marriage is not mentioned which regulates sexual relationship
between males and females and also directs the proper procreation of children.
Instead, the document ensures the freedom to women and men for their sexual
behaviour and also their consequences. It implies the devaluation of the
institution of marriage and the recognition of all forms of sexuality, sexual
relationships and modes of reproduction.
The fact is, for the gender feminists, the relationship
between men and women in marriage is merely a sexual division of labour for
economic reasons alone. Hence, they argue that heterosexuality and the dominant
mode of reproduction are socially constructed. Heidi Hartman argues:
The strict division of labour by sex, a social invention
common to all known societies, creates two very separate genders and a need for
men and women to get together for economic reasons. It thus helps to direct
their sexual needs towards heterosexual fulfillment and helps to ensure
biological reproduction.
This is the reason that all kinds of rights for individual
women and men for their decision on sexual behaviour and their consequences have
remained the central focus of attention in the document. For the same reason,
the rights of abortion are also greatly emphasized several times in the
document. At one place, it states:
Since unsafe abortion is a major threat to the health and
life of women, research to understand and better address the determinants and
consequences of induced abortion, including its effects on subsequent fertility,
reproductive mental health and contraceptive practice should be promoted, as
well as research on treatment of complications of abortions and post-abortion
care.
Thus, instead of promoting research to find out the
reasons and causes for an increased number of abortion cases which become
complex and cause deaths, emphasis is laid more on the techniques and research
for safe abortions. In the same way, great concern is shown in the document on
the greater number of women suffering from AIDS/HIV and other sexually
transmitted diseases. Here again, instead of looking into the problems of the
unrestricted freedom and liberty enjoyed by men and women on sexuality and
sexual relations, emphasis has been made on the incorporation of the ‘gender
perspective’ to study the problems. It states:
The consequences of AIDS/HIV reach beyond women’s health
to their role as mothers and care givers and their contribution to the economic
support of their families. The social development and health consequences of
AIDS/HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases need to be seen from a gender
perspective.
Quite surprisingly, the document seems reversing the
problems and issues of women and turning them upside down! Therefore, many
critical questions rise up while studying the document especially the strategic
objectives and strategic solutions suggested in the document for various
critical areas of concern: Will these strategic actions resolve the problems of
women or aggravate them? Is the document addressing the problems of women and
womanhood to let women enjoy their rights of being women or liberating them from
being women?
It was found out that such questions also emerged even
during the Preparatory Committee Meetings among some of the delegates who were
surprised to see that the meetings did not focus on the problems of women,
rather on the ‘gender perspective’. Dale O’eary observes.
The majority of delegates were looking for practical ways
to help women and had not come to New York to debate ‘feminist epistemology’
[feminist’s philosophical theories of how we know things] ... As the debate
progressed, it became obvious that the supporters of the ‘gender perspective’
believed that their understanding of the meaning of ‘gender’ as referring to
‘socially constructed roles’ was understood and accepted.
The Gender Feminists who have influenced the conference
and the document seemed not much concerned about the problems of women. Their
interest was to promote the horror amongst women over male-domination over
females and to mobilize them for statistical equality with men in all areas to
overcome their domination. Heidi Hartman observes:
The women question has never been ‘the feminist question’.
The feminist question is directed at the causes of sexual inequality between
women and men, of male domination over women.
That is why for the Gender Feminists, specific male and
female roles based on natural and biological differences are ‘socially
constructed roles’ of the dominant patriarchal culture. Although the Beijing
Conference was named as the Fourth World Conference on Women, the Gender
Feminists looked at the Conference through a ‘gender perspective’ which is quite
different from all other perspective on women. In one of the Preparatory
Committee Meetings, Valarie Raymond, a delegate from Canada categorically stated
that Beijing should be approached ‘not as a women’s conference’ rather it should
be approached through a ‘gender lens’. Raymond says:
Through this gender lens, our challenge is to recognize
and value the diversity of women [including] … sexual orientation.
Islamic Position on Some of the Gender Issues
Islam means ‘peace’ and one of the basic conditions of
peace is the prevalence of justice, and justice cannot be achieved without a
comprehensive sustainable development of family, society and human civilization
as a whole. Thus peace, justice and comprehensive and sustainable development
cannot be perused in Islam without considering moral and spiritual dimensions
and without focussing on a healthy and peaceful relationship between men, women,
and children. It is for this reason that the Islamic approach to the problems of
women’s advancement and development is, therefore, not fragmented and one-sided,
rather holistic and multi-dimensional. Islam’s mechanism, strategic objective
and plans for the enhancement of women cannot be isolated from the over-all
mechanism and strategy for the development of civilization. So the goals of the
document, Platform for Action – equality, peace and development are intrinsic to
the whole comprehensive plan of civilization development in Islam, not outside
it. Therefore, fatherhood and family as a whole are basic and fundamental to the
overall development scheme of Islamic civilization. Below we would elaborate
briefly the philosophy behind it, while specifically dealing with some of the
institutions and related issues.
Marriage
The only intimate relationship which is approved in Islam
is the relationship between adult male and female through the process of
marriage which develops the institution of family. The institution of family is
therefore considered as the basic institution for the development of
civilization. It is regarded as one of the signs of Allah since it establishes a
firm bond of love and compassion between a man and a woman who receive an
honourable position of husband and wife in the society.
The spouses dwell in tranquillity with each other and keep trust in each other
enjoying love and dignity. Marriage unites them for peace, prosperity and a
comprehensive development of their personalities so that they may live and work
as co-partners throughout their life, complementing each other. Marriages does
not divide them into two opposing camps of male and female fighting for
empowerment against each other. Marriage also does not enslave any of them, male
or female to struggle in an environment of either domination or oppression. In
fact marriage in Islam is recognized as a basic step towards peace, progress and
development. It enables husband and wife to carry the responsibilities of
familial, social, economic, political and civilizational development. Marriage
is not an obstacle for development rather an essential union of man and women
for a comprehensive and balanced development of the members of the family. No
proper and appropriate family is conceived without marriage between male and
female and no peaceful and stable civilization is possible without peaceful and
stable families.
The stable and healthy relationship between male and
female in the family is a training process for the maintenance of better
relationship with men, women and children in the society. If this aim is not
achieved, marriage and family are not abolished rather other strategies are
adopted such as proper education and training.
Family
The family is a divinely ordained institution in Islam
which comes into being after marriage between a man and a woman based on their
consent.
It regulates relationship between a husband and a wife and between parents and
children. Wife and children are the comforters of eyes for man in the same way
as husband and children are the comforters for women.
Children are enjoined to be benevolent and obedient to parents. However, ‘mother
enjoys more benevolence than father since mother passes through a number of
travails in bearing, rearing and nourishing children more than a father.
Motherhood is thus greatly acknowledged and respected in
Islam. It is neither conceived as an act of oppression for women nor as a
political institution. It is a symbol of selfless love, devotion and compassion
and an embodiment of peace and serenity. Since the very time a mother conceives
a child, the child becomes an essential part of the mother’s life and her
existence. Although she suffers pains and troubles of various kinds all along
this period, she is blessed with such a special love and care for children that
she bears all the problems with happiness and content. Motherhood is, therefore,
not a curse nor a nightmare, rather a Divine blessing and a sweet care.
Technology cannot replace motherhood, albeit it can help
motherhood. All the positive help from the reproductive technology can be taken
to lessen the strains of bearing and reproducing child, but reproductive
technology cannot perform the responsibility of a mother. Procreation of
children cannot be left to the machines and technical culture of no values and
no norms.
Reproduction is one of the unique signs of Allah that
ensures procreation of children through proper and appropriate relationship
between the husband and the wife. Reproduction is not a matter of a mere
physical union of husband and wife just as marriage is not a mere physical union
of a man and woman endorsed in a covenant. Marriage and reproduction are
physical and spiritual unions of husband and wife which ensure procreation with
better physical and spiritual health. In the same way, family is not a mere
physical relationship between husband and wife and between parents and children
but a spiritual relationship between them. It is for this reason that family in
Islam is considered as a cradle of civilization in which all the fundamental
rights and duties towards each other and moral obligations towards society and
humanity are taught. It serves as a foundation of education and spiritual
training for children to be the better future scholars and leaders of human
civilization. So the development of motherhood and fatherhood and family is
considered a prerequisite in the whole developmental process.
Sexuality
Islam is highly sensitive regarding chastity and purity of
men and women. It not only forbids the acts of adultery but also prohibits men
and women to go near it. It looks upon adultery as an evil that opens the venue
for all kinds of injustices in the society.
Islam completely forbids all forms of sexual relationships outside marriage. It
totally rejects all deviant sexual relationships and sexual orientation –
homosexual, lesbian, transsexual etc. All kinds of deviant behaviours are
considered as the attitudes of injustice and ignorance. Sex only through
marriage is acceptable in Islam. It is against total abstinence and also
unceasing promiscuity.
Sex is not a mere physical satisfaction. Sex is also not
something political that entails male domination. It is one of the natural
instincts of men and women which is regulated and disciplined in the institution
of marriage which entails moral and spiritual sublimation and elevation of both,
not domination and subjugation of one over the other. If sex is not disciplined
through the system of marriage and men and women are given all kinds of sexual
freedom and liberty, the institution of family will be completely demolished.
The demolition of family entails the prevalence of anarchy and bestiality in the
human society. Such anarchic conditions in society will lead not only women but
all human beings towards total destruction.
Equality Versus Identity
Equality of man and woman constitutes one of the important
principles of Islam. Its philosophy of equality lies in the very creation of man
and woman from a single soul.
It does not subscribe to the myth of the creation of a woman from man’s rib
which relegates her to a secondary position. It also rejects the attribution of
temptation of eating the forbidden fruit and its consequences of fall of man to
Eve alone which assigns women a less spiritual position than men.
Women and men are also assigned equal position of
vicegerency of Allah. Not only this, the acquisition of knowledge is made
obligatory for both man and woman so that they may efficiently perform the
responsibility of the vicegerency.
However, there is no confusion of ‘equality’ and
‘identity’ in Islam. Woman and men are equal but not identical. Biological and
natural differences are respected, not suspected and eliminated.
Differences in biology, colour complexion, language, ethnicity, nationality and
others are all considered as the signs of Allah. Neither the exaggeration of any
of these differences to the disapproval and disrespect of the other is accepted
nor the elimination of any of these differences is approved.
Men and women are partners in family, society and
civilization as a whole. Being partners does not mean that they are similar. Men
and women are not similar in their biology. For instance, men are expected to
perform the responsibilities of husbands and fathers and similarly women are
expected to perform the functions of wives and mothers. The roles of wife and
mother are not inferior to the roles of husband and father. Differences of roles
does not mean differences in positions and honour.
Furthermore, being a wife or a mother does not mean that
all the opportunities for women to work for the development of civilization are
closed for them. Islam does not forbid women to play a dynamic and constructive
role in the society provided she is also doing justice to her basic
responsibilities as a wife and as a mother. Similarly, being a husband or a
father does not mean that he should not share with her wife the work inside the
house.
So Islam infuses a sense of sharing in the members of family for the sake of
co-operation with each other not for competition against each other, suspecting
and disrespecting the differences between each other. Confrontation between
husband and wife for statistical equality is not a sharing rather a tearing of
spirit.
Concluding Remarks
The objectives
of the Platform for Action are acceptable to all cultures and communities across
the world, including the Muslim community. However, the ‘gender perspective’
that is emphasized in the document is highly objectionable. Gender perspective
is not implied as women’s perspective which is obvious from the discussion made
earlier. Such a perspective envisions a different model of progress, peace and
development which does not coincide with other models of development based on
other perspectives of human family. One model of development based on one
perspective cannot be forced upon all the cultures and communities of the world.
Contemporary developmentalists have rejected the hegemony of one model over
other communities. They argue for different models of development and progress
based on indigenous cultures. The following observation of Huntington
illustrates the point:
Maybe the time has come to stop trying to change these
societies and to change the model, to develop models of a modern Islamic,
Confucian, or Hindu society that would be more relevant to countries where those
cultures prevail.
A revision of
the Platform for Action seems, therefore, logical and necessary to incorporate
other perspectives and let other communities follow their own models of
development based on their own worldview.
(The author is Assistant Professor, KIRK & HS, IIU,
Malaysia)
Courtesy: The Hamdard Islamicus, April-June 2000
|