Reforming Islam Under Western Feminist Pressure:
The Collision of Ideals, History, and Practicality
If Western feminism, rooted in the principle of absolute gender equality, were to strongly influence Islamic societies, the resulting demand might be to reform Islam into what is seen from a Western lens as a “gender-equal” faith. At first glance, this seems progressive, promising liberation and equal standing for Muslim women. Yet beneath this idea lie complexities that reveal why some Islamic practices emerged historically — and why “modern misinterpretations” often distort those intentions.
⸻
Original Intention vs. Modern Misinterpretation
Example: Walking ten steps behind
Western observers often interpret the cultural practice where a woman walks ten steps behind her husband as a symbol of female subjugation. But in its original context, it was a practical, even protective measure:
• Historical reality: In dangerous streets or countryside, having the man walk ahead created a visible deterrent to would-be attackers.
• Practical benefit: If an assailant targeted the man, the woman might escape; if they targeted the woman, the man was close enough to intervene.
• Cultural logic: Rather than reducing a woman’s value, it affirmed it by placing the burden of physical risk on the man.
Yet in modern times — especially in safer societies — this practice seems redundant and even oppressive. As violence in public spaces subsided in the West (due to law enforcement, lighting, community structure, and surveillance), the protective aspect was forgotten, leaving only the image of hierarchy.
⸻
Western Feminist Demand for Reform: The Call and Its Tensions
If Western feminism demands that Islam “modernise” to create full symmetry between men and women in all spheres — social, legal, and ritual — several tensions appear:
1. Historical purpose ignored: Many traditional Islamic laws were context-specific, built around the social realities of the time (violence, clan feuds, responsibility for family honour, economic disparities).
2. Loss of protective structures: Eliminating them in the name of equality risks exposing women to dangers that, in some Islamic communities, have never disappeared.
3. Misalignment with lived reality: Western feminism grew in societies where social and technological advances (police presence, street lighting, surveillance, social norms) genuinely reduced danger to women in public. By contrast, some Islamic societies (and even Islamic immigrant communities in Western cities) have not experienced these same changes to the same extent.
⸻
What Happens in Practice?
If Islam were reformed purely under Western feminist ideals, several consequences might emerge:
• Theological Schism: Islam could split into competing branches: a liberal “gender-equal” Islam and a traditionalist Islam that resists reform, seeing it as Western imperialism.
• Cultural Polarisation: Within Muslim communities in the West, younger, urban, Western-educated Muslims might embrace reform, while conservative families reject it, leading to generational and communal conflict.
• Unintended Risks: In high-crime or socially conservative Muslim-majority areas, women following reformed norms (e.g., walking alone, uncovered, or side by side) might be at greater risk of harassment or violence.
• Resistance from within: Many Muslims may see these reforms not as liberation, but as an erasure of cultural identity and a rejection of protective customs rooted in centuries of experience.
⸻
Importing Islamic Culture to the West: The Irony
The historical irony is profound. Western feminists see shariah norms like “the man walking ahead” as oppressive because Western streets became safer over time. But large-scale migration has, in some places, reintroduced street-level misogyny and group harassment (including attacks on unaccompanied women).
In these new realities:
• Shariah’s original intention — to protect women — becomes visible again.
• Westerners face a paradox: To keep women safe, they might need to embrace the very customs they once rejected as sexist.
• Reform collides with reality: The call to abolish “sexist” protective practices could paradoxically harm women, unless the social context (safety, enforcement, cultural norms) also changes.
⸻
Conclusion: Between Reform and Respect
A demand to reform Islam into a “gender-equal” religion risks flattening the rich cultural, historical, and practical reasons why certain customs arose. True progress may lie not in rewriting doctrine to mirror Western ideals, but in understanding why protective norms existed — and adapting them to modern realities without erasing their purpose.
Reform without understanding leads to alienation.
Reform grounded in history and context can create an authentic evolution of Islam, balancing equality with protection — and respecting why these customs ever existed at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment