ON BEING MUSLIM AND WOMAN

You would be forgiven for thinking that Muslims are not as bad as they are made out to be by the Western media if you had based that judgment on what you see and know of me.

Nothing in my appearance, neither in public nor private, would give away my Muslim identity. To the average person I am just another Modern Millie in my jeans and T-shirt. When I open my mouth to speak you will become even more convinced that Islam is a perfectly reasonable religion if I am to be your idea of a Muslim. In my conduct you will find more reason to think that maybe it is Osama Bin Laden who is not a Muslim despite what everyone says. But, I assure you we both are. We sit at the two extremities of an Islamic spectrum. I am, to him, ultra modern and he is, to me, ultra conservative. Mind you, it would be a long shot indeed if the likes of Bin Laden would embrace me unconditionally as a co-religionist and fellow traveller.

Bin Laden, currently the icon of Islamic extremism, and his cohorts would have women such as I trussed up like a Christmas turkey and publicly shot in the head, as happened in Taliban-ruled Afghanistan, for the simple mistake of daring to be modern in a conservative Muslim environment. That is beyond doubt cruel in the extreme. And when widows and orphans were left to starve in their homes because women were banned from the public space where markets generally are, it became reason enough to justify the invasion of Afghanistan by the so-called international community spearheaded by the United States. (My female instincts tell me it was a necessary intervention to end a misogynistic policy that is potentially capable of genocidal consequences, but my political beliefs need assurances that this act of interfering in a nation's domestic affairs, no matter how divided that nation is, had not other motivations than humanitarian ones.)

But how have I and other like-minded Muslim women sinned against God or for that matter, the religion?

To the conservatives, and the extremists more so, a woman may not be allowed in public without being covered from top to toe in a way that does not flaunt the female form. That is a definite NO. Why? Because, according to them, just by her being woman she can give rise to fitnah. Maybe true in the Arabia of Prophet Mohammad saw's time where a slander against Aishah, his wife, prompted the revelation of verses 11-20 of surah 24 of the Quran. Is the same, however, true of the modern world or is it even true of primitive societies? Look at the vestiges of what was our ancient ancestors. Despite their nakedness, the social mores of native Amazonians are no less structured. The family unit does exist. If what some men want us to believe is true, that the female form can provoke the uncontrollable urges of a rampant male sexuality, then how come the father, mother, sons, daughters, cousins, aunts, uncles, grandfathers and grandmothers are distinct social identities amongst primitive peoples.

My problems as a Muslim woman living in an Islamic society that is willing itself into regression even as I write, has its roots here -- women's sexuality. This is my take on the problem. I believe this to be so because the mother-nurturer character of being woman is no adequate reason for gender segregation, the purda and, most importantly, a less than equal status. A woman's reproductive role both physical and social does not limit her to the four walls of her home, as is obvious in today's world of working mothers. And, I agree wholeheartedly when in her book "This Is How We Do It" Carol Evans argues that modernity has provided us with so many possibilities of personal and professional development and advancement that a mother's financial contribution has become essential if the average family unit is to progress. A mother's economic contribution would avail the children of a good education, health care, nutrition and such extras as horizon expanding experiences, which only money can buy in today's less than self-effacing capitalist world. When children succeed wouldn't the ultimate beneficiary be humanity in general?

It is not unreasonable when a dependent is treated unequally but with respect. Contemporary women though are never voluntarily dependent. The state of dependence is nowadays one of choice and is not gender specific. Therefore, gender inequality is simply, unjust. When this unequal human construct is camouflaged as divine injunction and practised absolutely rigidly, my life is turned into a living hell.

But as luck would have it my Malay, woman-friendly cultural heritage and my multi-religion country, Malaysia, provides a buffer against Islam's apparently many misogynists and allows me the democratic space that my non-Muslim countrywomen enjoy. Nevertheless, without a spirited wariness on the part of my Muslim sisters that space can be lost. Everyday somewhere in the country some right is being taken away from a Muslim woman. Then there are the unforgettable miseries of losing the simple right to self-affirmation as when overnight Muslim women were barred from participating in beauty pageants. Often we wake up to insults that injure our honour and dignity as happened when laws to protect women are allowed, by the powers-that-be, to be openly circumvented by polygamous men, for instance. The Islamic law courts, too, do little to enforce their own judgments vis-a-vis alimony and child support. The greatest injury of all to Muslims in general in this country is that when the Islamic law system fails them they have no recourse to justice because as precedents indicate, judges of the civil courts have little stomach to sit over disputes about the religion. Is it not unconstitutional to deprive a citizen of the law's protection?

Picture: The Atta'wan Mosque in Puncak, Indonesia, nestled among the mountains and the tea gardens.
Disclaimer: This is a distinctly personal perception not intended to offend anyone. If you have anything to add to enrich the writer's opinions please feel free to comment.