Connect with us

New Social Compact

The Scourge of Islamic Slavery

Published

on

Slavery is not an Islamic invention. Slave trade was an accepted way of life, fully established in all societies. Most of these slaves were white people, the word ‘slave,’ comes probably from the people of Eastern Europe, the Slavs. Without exception, the ancient world accepted slavery as normal and desirable.

The great civilizations of Babylon, Egypt, Greece, Rome, were built upon slave labor. The Greeks, from whom we derive so many humanistic ideas, were dependent on slavery. Three quarters of the population of Athens were slaves. Even Plato’s Republic was based on slave labor. This was also the case of Rome. Under the Roman law, when a slave owner was found murdered, all his slaves were to be executed. In fact, half of the population of the Roman Empire were slaves.

However, Islam is unique concerning slavery, as it is legally and religiously permitted and endorsed. Slavery persisted in the Arab-Muslim world for centuries, from its beginning. Islam itself means “submission,” as in being a slave to Allah’s will. Slavery has been justified by Mohammed’s example, as laid out in the Hadith.

The main occupation of Arab tribes before Islam was raids on others (Ghazawat) in order to take booty (Ghan’im). They were not farmers nor traders, nor scientists or intellectuals. They were raiders. For the Arabs, warfare was an economic benefit to achieving human spoils of war: captives. Becoming Muslims has brought only a marginal change: instead of raiding on one another as a social-economic way of life, now came the religious order to raid on the infidels’ territories and the prize was to take much more valuable booty: fertile lands, rich property and huge amount of captives.

Muslims conquered, invaded, controlled countries and took spoils and prisoners as slaves. Islam allows Muslims to make slaves out of anyone who is captured among the infidels. Islam allows for the children of slaves to be raised as slaves. Islam allows for Christians and Jews to be made into slaves if they are captured in war. Muhammad and many of his companions bought, sold, freed and captured slaves. So it stands to reason that the Qur’an, the Hadith, and classical Islamic law have a notorious doctrine and practice of slavery. Islam perpetuated the institution.

While on a military campaign, Muslim soldiers had sex with their female captives, even though the women were married to polytheists. It is also permitted to have sex with prepubescent slave-girls. This is the attitude of Sahih Muslim, 008.3432. They also asked Muhammad about coitus-interruptus with their captive female slaves. Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah’s Apostle about it and he said, ‘Do you really do that?’ repeating the question thrice, ‘There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence till the Day of Resurrection’ (Sahih Bukhari, 7:62:137; 5:59:459; 3:46:718; The Muwatta’ of Imam Ahmad, p. 240).

As Islam spread out across the globe, Muslims captured huge amount of slaves. Islam enslaved any nation or ethnic group that it conquered, from blacks in Africa to white men, and especially women from the Balkan, Hungary and Ukraine. Muslims also kidnapped young children, boys and girls, and Islamized them, the notorious one was the Ottoman Empire in the Balkans of the Devshirme system. Muslims also raided the European Mediterranean societies, from the 16th century on from North Africa, robed the inhabitants and kidnapped children and women, an era known as the naval piracy.

Slavery and the sexual exploitation of women are deeply ingrained in Islamic cultural tradition and religious commandments. Muslim slave owners were entitled by the Shari’ah to sexually exploit their slaves. Muslim nations had engaged in the slave trade for over 600 years before Europe became involved in the Trans-Atlantic slave trade. Almost 200 years after the British outlawed the slave trade Muslim markets continue in many countries the sale of slaves. There are persistent, credible reports that slavery exists in many Muslim countries in large numbers.

Muhammad owned slaves. He also traded with slaves, mainly women, and exchanged women concubines with others. He even asked his adopted son, Zayd, to give him his wife. Above all, he never decreed slavery as abolished. The institution was too lucrative and deeply rooted during the entire Islamic history. According to Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah (Zad al-Ma’ad, 1:160), Muhammad had many male and female slaves. He used to buy and sell them, but he purchased more slaves than he sold.

After Muhammad fought the ‘Battle of the Trench,’ he slaughtered the Jewish men of Banu Qurayzah tribe and sold the women and children into slavery: verse 33:26-27: “And he drove down those of the People of the Book who backed them from their fortresses and He cast terror into their hearts; some of them you killed and some you took captive.” Ibn Ishaq records Muhammad’s massacre of the Jewish tribe, Banu Quraythah (pp. 465-66). Then the apostle dug trenches, and he sent for them and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches… There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900… Then the apostle divided the property, wives, and children among the Muslims. Some of the captive women he sent to Najd and sold them for horses and weapons.

The same happened when Muhammad attacked Khaybar, where the women were distributed amongst the Muslims.’ Muhammad (then about 60 years old) obtained for himself the very beautiful teenage girl, Safiya who appealed for her freedom. Instead he had sex with her (Ibn Ishaq, p. 511; Sahih Bukhari, 4:52:143; Sahih Muslim, 8:3326; Sunan Abu Dawud, 2:11:2118). Sahih Bukhari (5:59:512) records the occupation of Khaybar: “Khaybar is destroyed. The inhabitants of Khaybar came out running on the roads. The Prophet ordered their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives” “We conquered Khaybar, took the captives, and the booty was collected. Dihya came and said, ‘O Allah’s Prophet! Give me a slave girl from the captives.’ The Prophet said, ‘Go and take any slave girl’” (1:8:367).

The same horror occurred with beautiful Juwairiyah, after her peaceful tribe was attacked as they watered their cattle. The men were killed and the women and children enslaved and shared amongst the Muslims (Sahih Bukhari, 3:46:717; Sahih Muslim, 19:4292; Sunan Abu Dawud, 29:3920).

In many cases Muhammad gave girls to two of his sons-in-law and to a friend just to enjoy them (Ibn Ishaq, p. 593; al-Tabari, vol. 8, pp. 29-30). On pp. 592-3 we read that Muhammad enslaved 6000 women and children plus innumerable sheep and camels. As for Ali he said “Women are plentiful, and you can easily change one for another.

The Qur’an includes multiple references to slaves, slave women, slave concubines. Islam accepts the institution of slavery. It was also perceived as a means of converting non-Muslims to Islam. Slaves are mentioned in at least twenty-nine verses of the Qur’an. Muslims are allowed to have sexual relation with slave-girls. Slaves are called in the Qur’an as Mulk al-Yamin, “the right hand possesses” (4:24). All Islamic Schools of Jurisprudence agree about the enforcement of this verse. ‘What your right hand possesses’ refers to slaves and is found in many places: 4:3,24,25,36; 16:71; 23:6; 24:31,33,58; 30:28; 33:50,52,55; 70:30.

The verse (4:24) says: And forbidden to you are wedded wives of other people… except those whom your right hands possess. Ibn Kathir, one of the most authoritative and highly regarded classical commentators of the Sunni world, writes of these female captives of war: “except those whom you acquire through war, for you are allowed such women after making sure they are not pregnant. Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Said Al-Khudri said, “We captured some women from the area of Awtas who were already married, and we disliked having sexual relations with them because they already had husbands. So, we asked the Prophet about this matter, and this Ayah was revealed… Consequently, we had sexual relations with these women.”

Thus, women captives are forced to have sex with their Muslim masters, regardless of the marital status of the women. That is, the masters are allowed to break their marriage and have sex with them. Other verses maintains: “…you may marry other women who seem good to you: two, three, or four of them. But if you fear that you cannot maintain equality among them marry one only or any slave-girls you may own” (4:3). “Prophet, we have made lawful for you the wives to whom you have granted dowries and the slave-girls whom Allah has given you as booty…” (33:50).

In 33.50, Allah gives Muhammad and all Muslim men the right to take slaves and have sex with female slaves. These are Allah given religious rights. See also 23:1-7; 70:29-30; 4.24. The Hadith contains many hundreds of descriptions of Muslims raping women captured in battle or having sex with their household slaves. This is their right ordained by Allah. Many descriptions of sex with slaves is also found dealing with ‘Azl. Coitus interruptus, withdrawing the penis before ejaculation (Sahih Muslim, 22:8; Sahih Bukhari, 8:77:600; Sunan Abu Dawud, 11:2166).

So, A Muslim men were allowed to have sex anytime with slave females (4:3, 4:29, 33:49). A Muslim could not be put to death for murdering a slave (2:178). Verse 33:52 says: “You [Prophet] are not permitted to take any further wives, nor to exchange the wives you have for others, even if these attract you with their beauty. But this does not apply to your slave-girls. Muhammad took a slave woman right immediately after his massacre of the Qurayza Jews, taking an extra-beautiful one from them.

Beheading the men and dividing up the boys as human spoils of war carry on Muhammad’s policy seen in Quran 33:26-27, in which he enslaved the women and children of the Qurayzah tribe of Jews. Tabari (vol. 11, p. 55), describes conquests during the caliphate of Abu Bakr (632-634) that represent many others throughout Islamic history. In Ayn al-Tamr, Iraq, Khalid bin al-Walid, Sayf al-Islam, “beheaded all the men of the fortress and took possession of all that their fortress contained, seizing as spoils what was in it… Khalid found in their church forty boys who were studying the Gospels behind a locked door, which he broke down in getting to them. He asked, “Who are you?” They replied, “Hostages.” He divided them among the Muslims who had performed outstandingly in battle.

In Islam Jihad to occupy the world and to force it to follow or be subjugated under Islam encompasses the ‘institutions’ of Dhimmitude and slavery. The major source of slaves was the constant Muslim raids into infidel areas, which were depopulated. Islam’s slavery was genocidal as males were generally slaughtered, while females and children were taken. The children were removed from their family and culture, forcibly converted, and used as soldiers. Slaves and their offspring were owned by the master and passed on as part of his property to inherit. Under Islam slaves have no legal rights at all – they are just a property.

Dhimmis were also forced to hand over their women and children either to pay their taxes or under laws demanding them as tribute so they became slaves and concubines. Hence the entire occupied populations were destroyed.

Most important the Shari’ah legalizes slavery, and if it is permitted in the Scriptures, nobody can abolish or even change it. All Schools of Islamic Jurisprudence traditionally accepted the institution of slavery. Slaves are regarded as inferior in Islamic law. They are not permitted to possess or inherit property, or conduct independent business. The testimony of slaves is not admissible in court; slaves cannot choose their own marriage mate, and can be forced to marry who their masters want. Slave women were required mainly as concubines and menials. A Muslim slaveholder was entitled by law to the sexual enjoyment of his slave women. There is no limit on the number of concubines a master may possess. The Islamic market demand for children was much higher than adults. Organized slave traders smuggled children into Islamic markets where they are enslaved, mutilated, and also serve as male concubine.

The Shari’ah sets Jihad laws as ‘warfare to establish the religion’ (Reliance of the Traveller, o9.0 p. 599), specify the enslavement or death if they resist, of women and children (o9.10 p. 603). Captured women and children become slaves and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled (o9.13 p. 604). Vassal states were forced to supply thousands of their children annually as ‘tribute’ and these people became slaves.

Ibn Rushd compiled a compendium of the opinions of jurists up to his time. He summarizes various legal opinions about slavery: it is allowed to harm the enemy’s life, property and personal liberty, enslavement and ownership. There is a consensus about slavery, their men and women, old and young, the common people and the elite. For Ibn Rushd the example of Muhammad was extremely important for establishing the Shari’ah concerning slavery.

Bernard Lewis has put it correctly: the essence of the Shari’ah is three key elements: a) Muslim superiority over non-Muslims; b) male superiority over females; c) the legitimacy of violence to extend Islam to occupy the world. In his Race and Color in Islam, he brings many quotations and historical examples as to introduce the high need for slaves, whether acquired by violence or by commercial exchange. It was also legitimized by Islamic Scriptures and by racist felling of the Arabs, being superior species compare to the inferiority of blacks.

According to Peter Hammond, Slave Raids into Africa, the overall toll of black Africans who were transited to American and Muslim slave markets, is estimated at least 112 million, and more than 50%, in some areas and eras even 80% of those killed in the raids or died in transit. Over a million of white Europeans also ended up in the Islamic slave markets, women being a particular favorite of Arab slavers.

Humphrey J. Fisher, in his book, Slavery in the History of Muslim Black Africa, shows the ever cruel history of Islamic slave trade in Africa. The tribes’ territories were harshly Islamized, while 120 million blacks were captured as slaves, almost half of them were perished while driven on the routes to be shipped to America and the Middle East markets.

Ronald Segal in his Islam’s Black Slaves documents that from its emergence Islam has established and institutionalized slavery and slave trade. When Islam conquered the Persian Sassanid Empire and much of the Byzantine Empire, female slaves were required in considerable numbers as concubines and domestic workers. The harems of rulers became enormous in size, and castration of male slaves was common place.

Segal records: In the 1570’s, a Frenchman visiting Egypt found many thousands of blacks on sale in Cairo markets. In 1665 Father Antonios Gonzalis, a Spanish/Belgian traveler, reported 800-1000 slaves on sale in the Cairo market on every single day. In 1838, it was estimated that 10000 to 12000 slaves were arriving in Cairo each year. He also observed that “White slaves from Christian Spain, Central and Eastern Europe’ were also shipped into the Middle East and served in the “palaces of rulers and the establishments of the rich.”

Even as late as the 19th Century, it was noted that in Mecca “there are few families that do not keep slaves, and they all keep mistresses in common with their lawful wives.” Even Ronald Segal, who was most sympathetic to Islam and prejudiced against Christianity, admits that well over 30 million black Africans have died at the hands of Muslim slave traders or ended up in Islamic slavery.

The Islamic slave trade took place across the Sahara Desert, from the coast of the Red Sea, and from East Africa across the Indian Ocean. The Trans Sahara trade was conducted along six major slave routes. As for the 19th Century alone, of which we have more accurate records, 1.2 million slaves were brought across the Sahara into the Middle East, 450000 down the Red Sea and 442000 from East African coastal ports. That is a total of 2 million black slaves. At least 8 million more were calculated to have died before reaching the Muslim slave markets.

For John Alembillah Azumah, Legacy of Arab Islam in Africa, “…the worst, most inhumane and most diabolical institution of the black African slave trade was initiated, refined, perpetrated and implemented by the Mohammedan Arabs and later aided and abetted by the black converts to Mohammedan Islam.”

Robert O. Collins and James M. Burns in their A History of Sub-Saharan Africa, prove that “The advent of the Islamic age coincided with a sharp increase in the African slave trade.” Africa has become a major supplier of slaves for North Africa and Islamic Spain. The other route was through the shores of East Africa to the Americas. The earliest Muslim account of slaves crossing the Sahara to Tripoli on the Mediterranean coast was written in the seventh century. From the ninth century to the nineteenth slave trade was the biggest Islamic industry in Africa. In fact it was the only industry.

By the Middle-Ages, the Arab word ‘Abd’ was in general use to denote a black slave while the word “Mamluk” referred to a white slave. Ibn Khaldun (1332–1406) wrote: “The Negro nations are as a rule submissive to slavery, because they have attributes that are quite similar to dumb animals.” When the Fatimid came to power in Egypt they slaughtered all the tens of thousands of black military slaves and raised an entirely new slave army. From Persia to Egypt to Morocco, slave armies became common-place. After Muslim armies attacked and conquered Spain, they took thousands of slaves back to Damascus. The key prize was 1000 virgins as slaves. They were forced to go all the way back to Damascus.

Robert C. Davis, in his Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast and Italy, 1500-1800, estimates that North African Muslim pirates abducted and enslaved more than 1 million Europeans between 1530 and 1780. Thousands in coastal areas were seized every year to work as galley slaves, laborers and concubines for Muslim slave masters in what is today Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Libya, Oman and Saudi-Arabia. He indicates that perhaps one and one-quarter million white European Christians were enslaved by Barbary Muslims. Jihad piracy and slave raids were a fact of life in the Mediterranean and Black Sea regions for the better part of a thousand years.

Hugh Thomas, The Slave Trade, records. In 1796, a British traveler reported a caravan of 5000 slaves departing from Darfur. Just in the Arabic plantations off the East Coast of Africa, on the islands of Zanzibar and Pemba, there were 769000 black slaves. In the 19th Century, East African black slave trade included 347,000 slaves shipped to Arabia and Persia.

Suzanne Everett, in her History of Slavery records: In 1818, al-Mukani ruler in Tripoli “waged war on all its defenseless neighbors and annually carried off 4000 to 5000 slaves. The traders speak of slaves as farmers do of cattle. Murders, tortures and rape abuse were day by day habits. Records in Morocco in 1876 show that the market prices for slaves varied from £10 to £30; female slaves comprised vast majority of sales with ‘attractive virgins’ £40 to £80. “A considerable majority of the slaves crossing the Sahara, were destined to become concubines in North Africa and the Middle East.”

Murray Gordon records: “Muhammad took pains in urging the faithful to free their slaves as a way of expiating their sins. Some Muslim scholars have taken this to mean that his true motive was to bring about a gradual elimination of slavery. Far more persuasive is the argument that by lending the moral authority of Islam to slavery, Muhammad assured its legitimacy. Thus, in lightening the fetter, he riveted it ever more firmly in place.”

He analyzes the sexual aspects of slavery. “For a better part of the Middle-Ages, Europe served as a valuable source of slaves who were prized in the Muslim world as soldiers, concubines, and eunuchs.” It is important to note that this pattern was established long before the European colonial period. In fact, “Eunuchs commanded the highest prices among slaves, followed by young and pretty white women… White women were almost always in greater demand than Africans, and Arabs were prepared to pay much higher prices for Circassian and Georgian women.” This was also the Fate of Slav women from the Balkans and Hungary. Abyssinian (Ethiopian) girls were considered the “second best.”

Slave taking rapidly advanced into a full-scale industry, with a disastrous impact that was apparent at the time and for centuries to come. Giles Milton in his White Gold, has noticed that the seventeenth century represented a dark period out of which Spanish and Italian societies emerged as mere shadows compare to the past. Arab slavery raids of kidnapping women and young children continued just below the surface of the coastal culture of the European Mediterranean even into the first years of the twentieth century.

The Indian historian, K. S. Lal, in his books, Theory and practice of Muslim state in India, and Islamic Jihad: the Legacy of forced conversion, imperialism and Slavery,   brings horrible data of how Islamic Jihadists conquered India, butchered its inhabitants by millions, and developed a huge peculiar system of slavery there. Raiding non-Muslim territories became a constant phenomenon. Five centuries after Muslims came to power in the territory, the animist hill peoples completely disappeared as a result of their conversion through enslavement into the Muslim populace of Malaya, Sumatra and Borneo. By the raiding system, especially of children, these areas has become Islamic. In many places of Southeast Asia, the enslavement was so entrenched so that the entire population, polytheistic Hindu, Buddhist and Animist creeds, became Muslim or exterminated.

New Social Compact

Reimagining Governance after Covid-19

Published

on

What will it take to rescue the global economy in the wake of COVID-19? Are adjustments, improvements or amendments enough? Haven’t we done this before? Maybe it’s time to rethink this with a mindset, not of ‘starting again’ which would tend to invite ‘again’ thinking, but instead to begin with a completely blank slate – no preconceptions – just goals.

 I suggested a new paradigm, a total reset.

Change most often happens incrementally, over decades, if not centuries and many historical truths define the present long past their relevance. For one, the fundamental principles of our global economy still rest on the agrarian and industrial revolutions. Tilling the soil and staffing factories remain the foundations of today’s economic planning – despite the fact that we have well entered the digital, automated world.

Another of these historical, yet increasingly outdated conventionsis the pervasiveness of male leadership.

The position of women has evolved incrementally and at best- unevenly – throughout the world. Although women comprise half the population, the world’s political, economic and social systems continue to be based on designs stemming from and reflecting men’s nature. 

All things being equal, it is very costly to knock down the entirety of something and start from scratch. Perhaps fortunately, the devastation caused by COVID-19 is happening at a time of acute and increasing awareness of the imbalance in society. This offers a rare, first-ever opportunity to revisit the definition of effective.

That is whyit make sense to re-architect these systems now, imbuing governance with a mix of qualities of success that are peculiar to women as well as those of men.An op-ed in the British Medical Journal recently noted that to avoid ‘groupthink’ and blind spots, policy decisions must include representatives with diverse backgrounds.  But during the outbreak of covid-19 the male-led governments of the UK and Sweden relied mainly on epidemiological modeling by internal advisors. Few channels were open for dissenting views. By contrast, Merkel looked to outside sources, beyond epidemiology to medical providers, and as far as South Korea’s successful testing and isolation procedures.

Two notable characteristics of leadership of women leaders during Covid-19 were inclusiveness and compassion: embracing diversity in political institutions and empowering society. In the battle against corona this meant transparency, clarity of responsibility with everything visible – not behind the scenes. It meant swiftly finding ways to allow the populace to become stakeholders in the solution. It included appealing to the citizenry with an executive demeanor that conveyed commitment and a sense that there was a consistent plan of action that demanded civic responsibility while at the same time, leaving the people with a great deal of discretion and personal influence over their own experience. 

Compassion informed a compelling vision presented with warmth. 

Some like Peter Huang of the University of Colorado Law School, have already noted the most important leadership lesson of COVID-19:put more women in charge. But is that enough when the system itself is informed by and imbued with male characteristics, language, energy?

Societal norms are defined and shaped by millennia of men at the helm.  Thus most women remain compelled to conform to the existing framework, created by and for men, to attain and hold their positions. In most cases, that means; act like a man. Adapt to systems where leaders are expected to be aggressive, domineering and cut-throat.

The devastation wreaked by COVID-19 shows that the existing framework is no longer relevant, opening an opportunity to invent something totally new. The virus has created a moment where we can begin to see the possibilities devoid of the limitations of our old ways. The time has come to expand the definition of what is effective and reimagine measures for governance based on entirely new systems that emerge from a cooperative process of creation. For the first time in the history of humanity, society can be built on foundations rising from a fully cooperative process between men and women.  With a clean slate and a balanced – male and female, yin and yang -defined approach, we have the opportunity to do it right.

Continue Reading

New Social Compact

Contextualizing the causes of rape: Battle of ‘wrong’ perceptions

Wardah Irum

Published

on

The recent sexual assault committed at the outskirts of Lahore motorway has sparked tremendous outrage in Pakistan, from highlighting CCPO’s misogynist remarks, defending him, demanding public hanging, justice for the victim and overall security for women to spreading gender awareness in the society. However, to my utter surprise, the discourse rarely mentioned the perpetrators the way they should have been mentioned. The predominant yet absolutely fallacious focus remained on how ‘rape’ stems out of some ‘sexual deprivation’ or ‘uncontrollable sexual urges’. In other words, rapists seek ‘sexual gratification’ through rape. The problem with this statement is that it minimizes the legal responsibility of rapists and attributes the causes of rape to something beyond their control. Once the legal responsibility of rapists is removed or reduced, then either the circumstances or the victims themselves are blamed for creating situations in which the criminal lose control of themselves for sexual fulfilment. How can one consider and accept this supposed ‘uncontrollability’ of men, when this very society ‘informs’ us that men are more ‘rational’, ‘sound’ and ‘prudent’ while women are ‘emotional’ and ‘sentimental’. In religion and in wider social discourse, majority of leadership and managerial positions are reserved for men because they are considered logical and mentally more stable than us females. How can someone who is allegedly more rational, more reasonable and sensible have no control over their sexual behavior? Have no sense of individual dignity and self-restraint, personal responsibility and moral accountability? If we accept this wrong perception about men’s incapability to control their sexual desires, then, we should immediately overhaul the society and put men into the confines of their homes and must restrict their exposure to public space, because they have no power over themselves. Do you see where this argument may lead if we keep thinking that men cannot control their sexual urges and rape just happens out of lust and sexual desires?

The truth is both genders have equal sexual needs and desires, the only difference between them is that society has ‘normalized’ male sexuality and stigmatized ‘female sexuality’. And yes, both genders have equal control over their sexual urges. Rape never happens randomly and just out of extreme sexual urges, remember, it is an act carried out by the rapists intentionally. Moreover, majority of rapists (as various researches shows) have multiple venues to fulfil their sexual needs through extra-material ‘consensual sex’ and prostitutes. Paradoxically, a lot of rapists are married men, and men in powerful positions who have unlimited access to free but ‘consensual sex’. Therefore, we need to reject widespread notions that perhaps sexual impulses are uncontrollable, and because they cannot be controlled, they will ultimately lead to sexual crimes or rapists are essentially some ‘sex-deprived individuals’. The wrong emphasis will lead to wrong solutions to eradicate this social evil.

In this context, it is extremely necessary to understand the reasons and motives behind rape and sexual harassment. Various researches on this subject indicates that majority of rapists are motivated by an impulses of aggression incorporating power, acceptance of violence, revenge and anger. They are also encouraged by a combination of aggression and sexual expression emerging directly from the traditional male sex-role which is why when rapists are asked about motivations, ‘they often indicated that rape most commonly stemmed from a sense of sexual entitlement, and it was often an act of bored men… seeking entertainment’ (Rachel Jewkes, 2010)

Also, Rape is often ‘used’ as a weapon by the rapist to control, violate, and belittle the victim or to compensate for his perceived inadequacies such as lack of power, control, identity, and authority through the act of rape. There are extensive interviews of rapists available, in which, the perpetrators have elaborated how the act of rape was not really about ‘sexual pleasure’ but rather how it satisfied their wish to attain control, spread violence, and seek punishment and domination. Susan Brown miller, a feminist scholar, famously proclaimed that: “Rape is not a crime of irrational, impulsive, uncontrollable lust, but is a deliberate, hostile, violent act of degradation and possession on the part of a would-be conqueror, designed to intimidate and inspire fear…’Moreover, another feminist researcher MacKinnon found out that ‘aggression against those with less power is often experienced as sexual pleasure, an entitlement of masculinity that creates and maintains a sexual/gender hierarchy’. This has been demonstrated through Sanday’s Study on rape that distinguished between ‘‘rape-prone’’ and ‘rape-free’’ societies. Her cross-cultural study found that rape-prone societies were associated with interpersonal violence, male social dominance, and the subordination of women. In contrast, rape-free societies were characterized by respect for female authority and decision making and the near absence of interpersonal violence.

Besides, if we look at the history we will realize that rape has been used as aweapon of war and oppression throughout history. It has been used to degrade women and weak, vulnerable- unprivileged man and their communities and for ethnic cleansing and genocide. In jails all over the world, male rape is pervasive and never even highlighted through ‘breaking news’. In the famous rape case of Mukhtar Mai, the focus almost entirely diverted towards her, whereas her 14 years old brother was, also, a victim of repeated gang-rape by the three Baloch Mastoi men. And let’s never forget that it was the local Jirga who ordered the rape of Mukhtar Mai. How sick is this society where men are not punished for their criminal acts but rather their sisters, daughters, wives and mothers are punished. If a man sexually assault a woman, that man should be punished not woman belonging to his family. There are hundreds of examples where woman and man were sexually assaulted to humiliate or dominate and take revenge or inflict pain and injury either directly on the victim and their family or to disgrace one gender as a whole. Therefore, It can be established that rape has numerous motives as Beverly McPhail, renowned feminist scholar who has done extensive research on causes of rape, asserted that rape is both “a political, aggregate act whereby men as a group dominate and control women as a group,” and “a very personal, intimate act in which the body of a singular person is violated by another person(s).” She asserts further that “Rape occurs due to multiple motives rather than the single motivation… The multiple motivations include, but are not limited to revenge, power/control, and attempts to achieve or perform masculinity recreation or sexual gratification (of violent ‘nonconsensual sex).” 

However, the common misperception in the society is that rape occurs because of ‘uncontrollable sexual urges’, ‘late marriages, ‘broken families’, ‘women not wearing veil’ and the like. The whole notion that the rapists might have felt ‘out of control’ is a gross rejection of the fact that rapists ‘intentionally’ commit assault to ‘control’ the victim. This line of thinking perpetuate the false notion that perhaps man are some desperate beasts and therefore cannot control their sexual urges. Unfortunately, there is a subtle acknowledgment of such wrong, delusionary and misplaced perception in the tone of so many people, who, perhaps think our society is ‘sex starved’. In fact, our society is obsessed with sex and the daily news of sexual assaults are emblematic of this. Men in our society have raped ‘dead females after exhuming’, minors, (both boys and girls) and animals. If this is not obsession then what it is? This doesn’t sound like ‘starvation’.

The major problem emerges with patriarchy and how ‘sexual violence’ has been normalized and accepted. Yes, our society has stealthily ‘accepted’ sexual violence when majority of populace of Islamic republic chants in unison the notions of ‘chadar and char devari’ to ‘save’ women from sexual harassments. Ironically women are not even safe in their homes or in some cases in their graves, and don’t forget a huge number of girls and minors are raped by family members. Such mentality forgets to look at the causes of rape, ending rape culture, and correcting male behavior, instead it just loves to assume as if ‘chadar and char devari’ has saved and protected women. Our society has accepted and normalize sexual harassment when films and media is blamed for spreading vulgarity and spoiling the young generation, as if before the advent of social media and films, rape cases were non-existent. Our society has normalized sexual harassment when male children are brought up differently than females and when the family and educational institutes do not inculcate gender sensitization in students. This very ‘Islamic republic’ tolerate sexual violence when women are routinely given rape threats but law enforcement agencies rarely take actions; when rapists are not punished and roam freely. When criminals committing domestic violence, acid attacks, honor killings go unpunished. Every time when women is stared at by men in streets (even if she is wearing burqa) , when she is groped or touched in public, in schools, universities, offices and she remains silent out of fear of retaliation and humiliation and cannot hold the culprit responsible, this ‘rape culture’ is nourished and strengthened by ourselves. Moreover, the extent of hypocrisy that is maintained through this rape cultureis such that perpetrators are virtually ‘morally acquitted’ of their heinous crime. For the most part, there is a little reference towards them being ‘real culprits’. Our society has attached no stigma no disgrace towards the offenders of sexual violence, staring, catcalling, eve teasing and the like. Instead, it dearly devotes all its energy towards ‘disgracing’ and ‘dishonoring’ the victims and their family. We never shout out and label the perpetrators as ‘disgraceful’, ‘dishonorable’, ‘criminals’ and of course ‘sinners’ as well. This society tell victims that how they are ‘disgraced’ or have ‘lost their honor’ by the sexual assault whereas in reality the victim is innocent and mazloom. The victim’s human rights are violated and s/he is oppressed, and who is oppressed cannot be ‘dishonored’. It is only the oppressor, the criminal who is disgraced and dishonored by his crimes and sins.  But have we ever, collectively and vocally, renounced and stigmatized the rapists in particular and perpetrators of other acts of sexual harassment in general? Would it be wrong to say that staring, catcalling, abusing, eve teasing etc. by Pakistani men have actually become our ‘national character’ and majority of man are not even sorry for these shameful and inhumane acts. The day when sexual harassment is removed in all these forms at grassroots level, heinous crimes like rape will tremendously reduce as well.

To add insult to injury, the clergy (the Mullahs, the Allamas) has all the time in the world to ‘preach’ and perform their ‘religious duties’ during Ramzan and Moharram, and who, vociferously condemn ‘bad behavior’ in women, suddenly disappear from the scene when incidents of sexual harassment occurs. No ‘jaloos’ or ‘rallies’ by these religious leaders are organized to denounce the crime committed largely by individuals from their gender. Of course they can’t come out and condemn such crimes as most of these religious figures are themselves involved in such crimes and the others simply do not bother about the societal problems because their sole responsibility is to strengthen and disseminate their respective sectarian believes through Mosques, Iman bargahs, jammatkhanas and madrassahs. Because, they are very part and parcel of patriarchal society and all the notions of male superiority and domination have given them tremendous advantages in their personal and professional lives.

Nonetheless, it is their moral responsibility to ‘educate’ the masses (particularly males) that how grave a ‘sin’ rape is (and a crime against humanity in both national and international law), that how God has ordered men to ‘lower their eyes’ and guard their modesty. In the common discourse all the notions of modesty and chastity are only confined to women, as if God has given men the ‘freedom’ to do as he pleases. The truth is modesty (sharm-o-haya) is compulsory for both men and women as God has ordained in verse 24:30 ‘Tell the believing men to lower their gaze, and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts, etc.). That is purer for them. Verily, Allah is All-Aware of what they do’. Have you ever noticed that most of the time no one talks about this, people only talk about how only women need to veil and act modestly, and if they don’t ‘behave’ this way, it is the God given right to men to sexually harass them.

Sorry to disappoint you, God has not bestowed any such right to men, He has, explicitly, ordered men to guard their chastity, but majority of the men in our society have ‘completely’ forgotten and neglected to safeguard their modesty (Sharm-o-haya). In fact, if society had taught this sharm-o-haya to our men, sexual violence would not have become endemic and gender equality would not have become so hard to achieve. Therefore, if we really want to become a civilized and progressive society we need to inculcate this fundamental principal in our men with the same emphasis, because they are fully accountable and responsible for their actions. It is about time that we change our focus from ‘victim blaming’ (or women blaming) to ‘reeducate’ men in our society. To achieve this, we have to break the cycle of patriarchic values and advocate the absolute inviolability of individual dignity and equality of human beings. Don’t wait for the society to miraculously change, start with the person in the mirror.

Continue Reading

New Social Compact

Women Lead More Humanely During Times of Pandemic

Published

on

Erna Solberg, Prime Minister of Norway. Photo: Wikimedia

As insignificant as it may seem to apologists of patriarchal social structures, it is evident that at least during the first phase of the pandemic, nations governed by women have witnessed a lesser number of deaths. This is not to suggest that women inevitably become better leaders in situations of crisis. The challenge ranges from reforming labour markets to waging wars, but the observation is still worth contemplating over, nevertheless.

There is surely a risk in devising these kinds of conclusion even though they sound feminist, for they perpetuate the gender-stereotype that kindness is inherently a feminine trait, which goes on to strengthen the socially enforced gender-based roles that have more to do with our mindsets than biology, but in an age when presidents such as Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro have gone berserk with their politics of toxic machismo, women seem to be treading the path during times of crisis with a lot more calmness and precision.

While Trump and Bolsonaro might be indulging in faux masculinity and denying the severity of the issue, Jessica Ardern, prime minister of New Zealand, has been addressing people of her country via social media in a tone that is informal and yet reassuring and convincing.

Erna Solberg, prime minister of Norway, which has reported 264 deaths, told her country’s children that it is alright to feel scared during unprecedented times such as these. Such a response takes a person’s vulnerability into account while retaining their confidence and faith in the ability to tide through difficult times.

Perhaps more leaders should wield such empathetic approaches that acknowledge people’s apprehensions, fears and vulnerabilities and infuse faith in them without making them feel as if their pain is rendered unseen. Such an approach is more sensitive from the perspective of mental health too.

In a new global analysis, Supriya Garikipati at the University of Liverpool and Uma Kambhampati at the University of Reading have compared the 19 countries being led by women with their neighbours considering a cluster of influencers such as population, economy, gender equality, openness to travel, health expenditures and proportion of elderly people. They had to exclude Taiwan, a country run by a woman, from the research as it is not a member of the United Nations.

They reached an unequivocal conclusion. Countries governed by women literally suffered half as many deaths in comparison to the countries suffered by men. This is partly because female leaders ordered lockdowns much earlier, and “flattened the curves” of outbreaks in their countries. Ardern for instance, implemented a second round of lockdown in her country after a new cluster of cases had emerged following 100 days of no local transmission at all.

One possible reason, as many studies corroborate, is surely that women tend to be more risk-averse during such situations of crisis. But it is not simply a choice between more or less risk. It is also a choice between what to risk and what not to, and up to what extent. So the difference in the approaches of male and female leaders, as observed by the authors of this study, was that women took less number of risks with lives and more with the economy, and men took more number of risks with lives and less with the economy.

Of course, there comes a time when death and economic losses get intertwined together.

Women also, as per the observations, tend to communicate with people differently. For long, it has been hypothesized that men in positions of leadership tend to be more autocratic and directive, while women more often adopt democratic and participatory approaches to leadership. This conjecture has been hard to prove, but researchers are still examining the supposition that women bring more empathy in their decision-making process and accord due importance to emotional information while arriving at a conclusion.

Clearly, an interpersonal, empathetic, and participatory approach does more to heal distress and steer forth a nation during the trying times of a pandemic. This requires a leader to build and maintain a consensus that the threat anticipated or observed is indeed real, that sacrifice is vital to protect others, and that public health considerations deserve to be accorded a greater priority over individual liberties and privileges during times that are anything but normal.

Men who are still attracted to traditionally masculine approaches towards situations of crisis that seem to heighten anxiety with their unflinching narrative of heroism and do little to bring relief on the ground; might find such approaches built on empathy and consensus building difficult to imbibe.

Meanwhile, other more tolerant and progressive leaders, both female and male, could surely learn from such lessons and infuse more empathy in their approach. While individuality and talent trumps gender, and it is not to be assumed that all women leaders would be embodiments of sensitivity and temperance, a lesson could surely be taken from observations such as the ones evident during the first phase of this pandemic.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Middle East1 hour ago

UAE and Israel: Nothing to See Here

Across the world, the August agreement between the UAE and Israel, signed in September in Washington, to normalize their bilateral...

Energy News3 hours ago

World Bank Project to Boost Household Access to Affordable Energy

Today, the World Bank Board of Directors approved $150 million in financing to improve access to modern energy for households, enterprises, and public institutions...

Reports5 hours ago

Pandemic Threatens Human Capital Gains of the Past Decade

The COVID-19 pandemic threatens hard-won gains in health and education over the past decade, especially in the poorest countries, a...

East Asia7 hours ago

The Chinese Agitprop: Disinformation, Propaganda and Payrolls

“If you repeat a lie often enough people will believe it and you will even believe it yourself”. -Joseph Goebbels,...

Newsdesk10 hours ago

ILO: Developing countries should invest US$1.2 trillion to guarantee basic social protection

To guarantee at least basic income security and access to essential health care for all in 2020 alone, developing countries...

International Law11 hours ago

The UN reforms are required to make it functional

Today, the world we live in has become more unpredictable, insecure, and exposed to more vulnerability. Geopolitics is changing rapidly,...

Reports13 hours ago

Building confidence crucial amid an uncertain economic recovery

With the COVID-19 pandemic continuing to threaten jobs, businesses and the health and well-being of millions amid exceptional uncertainty, building...

Trending