breathingslowly Thu 08-Mar-18 13:19:51

Before going on, I want to warn others that this post contains references to rape and child abuse. I'm sorry the post goes on forever. I didn't know what to leave out. If you aren't interested in Islam, I suggest you don't wade into it.



I'm not a regular on mumsnet and apologise if this post is offensive to anyone. I live in a very rural, traditional backwater of the UK and don't have the opportunity to ask about Islam in RL. My background is non-denominational Christian. I'm under no illusions that the Christian faith is free of contradictions, flaws or repressive elements.



I bought a book called 'Fragile Vessels' - a conservative guide to marriage in Islam. It advised that hitting women should be a last resort and only done with small stick. The writers advised that men were more suited to the public sphere and said women were more emotional so were less reliable witnesses in court. It indicated that the best place for a devout woman to be is at home with her family and she should not leave her home unnecessarily or speak to men. The book teaches that women should prioritise raising their children above earning money or watching tv. It stated that men have the right to divorce but women need a very good reason to divorce or they will face punishment afterwards. The book also quoted from a kind of sacred fable that described a special eternal punishment for women who didn't breastfeed their children. The idea that women own their own property was put forward as a great strike for social justice -

until I realised that everything a husband earns 'belongs' to him, even if a couple divorces. He is only obliged to give as he can (and he may have other wives to support), both during the marriage and afterwards. Divorcing women were urged to take an Islamic portion or face the consequences afterwards, even if a Western court awarded them more. Women also do not have the freedom to spend their own money without permission.



In Fragile Vessels, I read that Muhammad married his wife Aisha when she was six and consummated the marriage when she was nine. The writers stated that this was culturally acceptable, partly because women mature earlier in hot climates and Aisha was no ordinary child (despite playing with dolls). Apparently the Koran does not endorse rape or forced marriage, yet in sacred writings regarded as authentic, Aisha describes having no knowledge of what was going to happen to her on the morning of her wedding.



With supporting material from the Koran and Hadith, the writers of Fragile Vessels advocated that a woman should be available to give her husband sex whenever he wants it. Even if she is riding a camel, she should be in a state of permanent readiness. Apparently, husbands have such a right over women that even if a man was covered in pus filled blisters and his wife licked them all off, she would not have fulfilled his right to her. The book seemed to advocate complementary 'responsibilities' in marriage, yet it seemed that men have meet a great deal of their responsibilities by clothing and feeding their wives to a reasonable standard. Many contemporary Islamic teachers seem to deny that the Koran urges traditional roles on men and women, yet it is hard to see how it can be otherwise if only men are suited to the public sphere and women are unable to mix freely with the outside world.



Elsewhere, I have read that Muhammad sucked his 'wife' Aisha's tongue when he was fasting. There do seem to be a plethora of writings detailing his sanctioning of rape when the victims were the 'booty' of war - the women taken captive in battle. Provided they weren't pregnant, Muhammad then allowed his friends to sell the women as slaves afterwards. I also read in the Hadith that Muhammad, acting in accordance with a divine revelation, ordered an adulterous woman to stand in a chest-high pit and be stoned to death. He allowed her to give birth and wean her child first.



Then I bought a book called 'The Koran for Dummies' and listened to some modern Islamic teaching on the internet. It seems that Muhammad is an amazing man, the father of Islam and the greatest moral teacher in the world. I also randomly learned that he was born without an umbilical cord which surprised me because I had elsewhere read that Islam identifies itself as being scientifically advanced. Apparently Islam is a religion of peace, social justice and liberation for women. Anything else is a misconception. If I had been reading about the Koran as it was presented there, I would know nothing about the elements of Mohammad's life described above. I felt misled although I'm happy to agree that in much of the Koran, Muhammad sounds gentle.



Some of the contemporary Islamic teachers on Youtube are credible and impressive, especially when speaking about mercy and forgiveness. I have a great deal of respect for the grace they show towards others. I also acknowledge that the prophet Muhammad had much to say about men and women being equal in theory, even if this didn't translate into the way he structured his home life or behaved on the battle field. I recognise he thought it was better for men not to hit women.



But how does the 'Islam is a peace-loving religion of social justice and gender equality' square with the supposedly 'sealed' teachings of the divinely revealed Koran and the accompanying Hadith/the sunnah? As far as I can make out, Islam is not a religion that can evolve, particularly. It rests on Allah's words as revealed by Muhammad and Muhammad's life as an example of good Muslim living.



I have watched a few debates on Youtube. The answer to any unpalatable story about Muhammad seems to be 'that's not actually in the Koran'. This response seems a little disingenuous - a bit like a Christian saying 'well you're quoting from the book of James now, Jesus didn't actually say that...



I realise the Old Testament of the Bible is sometimes shocking. Without defending that, it is not regarded as 'sealed' in the Christian faith - the New Testament (not that it's perfect either) sets a new standard that Christians see as the final word. There is no talk of going to war, taking slaves, having multiple wives, hitting women, raping anyone. Compared to the early church depicted in the New Testament, the lifestyle of Muhammad and his prophets seems, in many ways, more brutal and repressive than the Old Testament. Given that Muhammad's words and life are regarded by Muslims as the definitive word from Allah, I don't know how to credit the claim that Islam has a remarkable track record in promoting women's rights. Yet it seems that many contemporary Muslims genuinely believe this.



Can anyone help me understand where contemporary Muslims are coming from? While I despise some of the things Muhammad seems to have done and advocated, I realise that Islam inspires many people to live charitably and well. I'd like to understand. If you can help, I'd be very grateful. If I've caused offence, I'm sorry.