Woman’s Reflection : Food for Thought

[Najabat]

'Given my privilege as a woman, I only degrade Myself by trying to be something I'm not--and in all honesty--don't want to be: a man. As women, we will never reach true liberation until we stop trying to mimic men, and value the beauty in our own God-given distinctiveness.' [By: Yasmin Mogahed]

On March 18, 2005 Amina Wadud led the first female-led Jumuah (Friday) prayer. On that day women took a huge step towards being more like men. But, did they come closer to actualizing their God-Given liberation? I don't think so.

What we so often forget is that God has honored the woman by Giving her distinct value. But as western feminism, there are no standard left-but men. As a result the western feminist is forced to find her value in relation to a man. And in so doing she has accepted a faulty assumption. She has accepted that man is the standard, and thus a woman can never be a full human being until she becomes just like a man-the standard.

When a man cut his hair short, she wanted to cut her hair short. When a man joined the army, she wanted to join the army. She wanted these things for no other reason than because the 'standard' had it.

What she didn't recognize was that God dignifies both men and women in their distinctiveness--not their sameness.

For 1400 years there has been a consensus of the scholars that men are to lead prayer. As a Muslim woman, why does this matter? The one who leads prayer is not spiritually superior in any way. Something is not better just because a man does it. And leading prayer is not better, just because it's leading. Had it been the role of women or had it been more divine, why wouldn't the Prophet have asked Ayesha or Khadija, or Fatima -the greatest women of all time-to lead? These women were promised heaven-and yet they never lead prayer.

On the other hand, only a woman can be a mother. And God has given special privilege to a mother. The Prophet (PBUH) taught us that heaven lies at the feet of mothers. But no matter what a man does he can never be a mother. So why is that not unfair?

When asked who is most deserving of our kind treatment? The Prophet replied 'your mother' three times before saying 'your father' only once. No matter what a man does he will never be able to have the status of a mother.

Fifty years ago, society told us that men were superior because they left the home to work in factories. Women were mothers and yet, they were told that it was women's liberation to abandon the raising of another human being in order to work on a machine. Women accepted that working in a factory was superior to raising the foundation of society -just because a man did it.

Then after working, women were expected to be superhuman-the perfect mother, the perfect wife, the perfect homemaker -and have the perfect career. And while there is nothing wrong, by definition, with a woman having a career, women soon came to realize what they had sacrificed by blindly mimicking men. They watched as their children became strangers and soon recognized the privilege they'd given up.

According to the United States Department of Agriculture, only 31 percent of mothers with babies, and 18 percent of mothers with two or more children, are working full-time. And of those working mothers, a survey conducted by Parenting Magazine in 2000, found that 93% of them say they would rather be home with their kids, but are compelled to work due to 'financial obligations'. These 'obligations' are imposed on women by the gender sameness of the modern West, and removed from women by the gender distinctiveness of Islam.


Reference: I extracted this food for thought from Yasmin Mogahed Writings.

Folks you can take this thread for discussion too but my motive for this extraction is to answer the queries often emerges in our minds as a Muslim.


Jaan Di dii hui ussi ki thi
Haq to yay hay kay haq adaa na hua

[irum]

Pakistan’s ambassador to Afghanistan, Mr Tariq Azizuddin, has been released by the Taliban after nearly three months of captivity The security advisor to the prime minister, Mr Rehman Malik, says it was not a swap, but facts about how he was liberated will be made public later. Mr Azizuddin was released on Sunday but a day earlier Pakistan had released 55 Taliban militants in return for a lower number of Taliban militants. On the day Mr Azizuddin was let off, the Taliban admitted striking Mardan with a suicide-bomber.
On Tuesday, the TV channels in Pakistan broke the news that Mr Azizuddin was swapped for a big Taliban leader, Mullah Ubaidullah, ex-defence minister of the Taliban regime and Mullah Umar’s deputy for militant operations, who appears on a UN list of sanctions. This could not be true because he was captured by Pakistan in 2007 and already exchanged in an earlier swap. Others swapped for Ambassador Azizuddin were Mufti Yusuf and Muslim Dost from the custody of ISI and IB respectively.

We may be in the realm of speculation here but chances are that a swap has taken place with more to follow on the Pakistani side, including the release of the Lal Masjid top cleric, Maulana Abdul Aziz, currently going through the bail proceedings on the last case he has against him. The man who negotiated the swap was Baitullah Mehsud, reportedly in hiding after his stronghold was overwhelmed by military operations by the Pakistan Army. Some reports say Mullah Ubaidullah could not be made available because he had already been handed over to the allied forces in Afghanistan. In his place, Pakistan is supposed to have coughed up a “fine” of Rs 20 million. To break this logjam of rumours and speculation, Mr Rehman Malik should do what he promised the journalists: tell us exactly how the release was made possible. Let us recall that President Karzai had to let go of a whole lot of top terrorists last year in return for the release of a kidnapped Italian reporter, Daniele Mastrogiacomo. Ambassador Azizuddin was certainly more important.