Sometimes it just doesn’t seem fair… in Islam a man is allowed to have up to four wives. But yet the woman of course is only allowed one husband. Too many men will hold it over their wife’s head that he can take another wife without her permission or concurrence. Some men like to taunt their wife that if she does not treat him nicer, dress a certain way, do certain things, then she cannot satisfy him and he must find another wife. Actually, some men do not just say this but have done it – taken another wife and seemingly out of spite. However it can also be both ways… what about the woman who is not treated fairly, who does not get her sexual needs met, whose husband is not kind or caring? What recourses does she have? Now I realize a woman cannot take another husband for many many reasons; childbirth and paternity issues being top of the list. I do wish though that women had some kind of recourse when they also are a victim of a unsavory husband.
Filed under: gender, islam, relationships, Saudi culture
Just another lesson in patriarchy
I find it wholly distasteful myself. Of course they’ll say that women not happy in their marriage should just divorce and find another, but a man can just tack on a second, third, or fourth? Doesn’t fly.
Men are allowed this because of how names are passed through the blood lines. If Islam were matrilineal, it would not matter about who the father was, because everything would pass through the mother. But as it is based on the man’s power and his name, women aren’t afforded the same rights in marriage as men.
It’s also utilized in a fashion to keep women under constant stress. It’s a less invasive form of handicapping them in the fear of disappointing their mates (or often, bread winners).
It’s one of the several issues pertaining to Islam that prevents me from embracing it. Plain and simple.
I find the Islamic reasons for allowing more than one wife perfectly acceptable, and I’ve known both men and women living happily within the system.
Why, then, do I know more women who have been emotionally scared for life because they expected fidelity from their men, and got instead a “co-wife”?
Why, then, do 99% of the women who read this nod their heads in agreement?
Many men desire multiple women, and women are generally satisfied with one man. This is a biological impulse, hard-wired into the sexual nature. Islam provides for it, but Islam seems not provide for the heartache, the devastated self-esteem, and the subsequent alienation of the first wife and maybe her children, too, from the husband.
Oh, I forgot– patience and prayer. Women must exercise patience and increase prayer, while their husbands exercise their biological impulses.
To my understanding and humble opinion, Islam allows 4 wives with some conditions imposed, and one of them is for the husband to be fair and just to the wives. If the husband chooses to abuse the right given, it’s his own doing, his fault, him being an idiotic man that he is. Nothing to do with Islam, being a fair and just religion to all.
And if one finds the husband to be a complete moron and irresponsible, I say dump the man!! Ha ha..
Ramadhan Kareem everyone!
This topic makes my blood boil and i have had many heated discussions aboiut it with my husband who at one time said he may have to take a second wife on the insistance of his family!!! islamically the reason behind taking another wife i have accepted but only under strict guidlines etc like the women is divorced, disabled, orphaned,homeless etc etc etc. the propeht (pbuh) never married more pure lust there were reasons for it but it just seems these days that the men abuse the right and marry out of lust, and in many cases i have seen have married cause the first wife doesnt have as much time for him anymore. and yet he is the one insiting on the hoard of kids. my hat goes off to those women who can accept it but i am not one of them and it would break me completely if it came to it and i would be out the door in a shot. pity for the women that have no choice but to accept as if they dont then they will lose their kids to the dad and may in some situations be removed form the fathers country. mmmmmmmmmmmmm i could go on and on.
I can see a time and place in history when mulitple wives served a purpose. I do not think we are in one of those times any longer-not in any culture. I’ve said this before, but when men start marrying the disabled, elderly, and widowed women out there who have 6 children to support, then I’ll say that polygyny is appropriate. Until hubby starts brining home blind parapalegics for his 2nd, 3rd, and 4th wives I would argue that he is abusing a religiously permissable act.
I figured this post would touch a chord with many. And I was prompted to write this post again having women share with me the veiled threats made by their husbands to take another wife because this was lacking or that wasn’t happening, etc. THAT is NOT islam. But yet THAT seems to be more of the reality being practiced these days. Shameful and disgusting.
I also meant to add to my earlier comment that the perception a lot of times seems to be that if there are problems it is much easier for a man to choose to take another wife rather than try and work out the problems that may exist.
The entire reason for the “necessity,” of polygamy is based on the concept of women being dependent. It’s a safety net for society when women cannot care for themselves. When we accept polygamy as an acceptable venue, then we are in essence handicapping women and exploiting them into the status of being dependent, and not full adults.
When women can support themselves financially, lead independent lives, and find themselves fulfilled without having to rely on a male figure, then polygamy will vanish. Until that time, it won’t. It’s simply a justification of the perpetuation of infantile women.
Btw, I don’t believe it’s purely a biological impulse for men to want more mates than women. True, women often become attached to men that they sleep with, but if we want to argue biology, we can also say that women are also likely to seek out multiple partners after childbirth. There are only so many years where children are wholly dependent on their parents for life, and beyond that, they can assume the responsibilities of an adult.
Besides, we are products of nurture, not nature. We learn how to view love, marriage, and fidelity through our socialization and our culture. If men and women were taught that (within Islamic societies), it is only acceptable to be with one person for the rest of your life, and you must love them (beyond being a marriage of convenience), then we would see a lot less abuse of the system. Likewise, if women were taught to support themselves beyond that of their husbands, it would be better for them. Unfortunately, men are taught to get what they want, and women are taught to serve. That is why this is occurring.
Have I spoken enough? lol
i wonder if there is anyone reading this that is in the situation of being a co wife and enjoying it or have accepted it or? we all seem to be on the same page when it comes to what we feel but would be interesting to hear from the other side. a friend of mine is a 2nd wife and she said right from the beginning she was friends with the 1st and even looks after her kids after school. but when i started to ask her about how she really feels when he has just come from her and you know that intimacy happened her eyes started to well up so a quick change in topic from me and a mental slap on my wrist for not being the most diplomatic at the time.
Umm Yara,
I couldn’t imagine that woman’s pain
Only a man devoid of love could do that to another human being.
If we are to believe that God is Most Just and Fair…then the multiple wives thing must have been concerned with a particular place and time and according to culture etc…but like slavery…would reach a point when its no longer acceptable and be phased out. Apparently its still acceptable in many parts of the Arab world (I say Arab for a reason) and so it continues….to the continued shame and degradation of the women that are raised to believe its a mans right…when actually its a womans right to be married to a man already married…as the Quran forbids marrying someone already married.
Of all the multiple wives homes I know of ….none appear to be happy…and much drama comes from it for all the neighbors to gloat over and gossip about…sigh.
You know, it isn’t always realized that in areas under Muslim rule not only Muslims but also Jews and Christians are permitted to have up to four wives. However, our rabbis pretty much decided us on monogamy a thousand years ago, on the grounds that multiple wives are too much trouble!
The only Jews I know of who practice this today are those of Yemen, and I’ve never heard of anyone having more than three. (If they immigrate to Israel they are permitted to keep two wives, but must give up the third.)
As for multiple husbands – what for? If the wife’s needs aren’t being met, she can divorce her husband – under Western civil laws it’s easy, and elsewhere if the husband tries to refuse, the Jewish community will likely make it difficult for him. The rabbis almost always choose the woman’s side.
It is truly ironic that we are all discussing this topic as I cannot even find one wife. Come on seriously though, the vast majority of Saudi males take on one wife only. I agree that they might taunt their female partner with taking on another wife, but it is extremely rare.
In fact, a friend of mine whose father had gotten married over 25 times has only been married twice (the second after the disolution of his first marriage). He now tells me that there is no way he would marry another.
Imagine how violent a man can be, I am not saying that men are all violent.. but usually when they lose grasp of the situation there are a few of them that cannot handle anger and resort to violence.
If a women feels unjust and unsatisfied, she can file a divorce. Sure it’s frowned upon in a Muslim judicial system to get a divorce, this is to give incentive to couples who might have been hasty fall into a divorce, but if it’s within the person’s right if it the cause was proved. It’s known that a women has the right to be forcefully separated if her husband is not willing to let her go. However it seems that some Mutawas and Judges have issues against women, eliminating of them who were treated unjustly by their spouses.
If I had a beef about something in scope of this topic, it’s not Islams permissive look at polygyny. But current cultural views for the divorced, widowed and other women who are not sought after because of social stigma.
I have got a chance to view a very interesting show about Family values and what consists a family. It’s from “Penn and Teller: Bullshit” with the title “Family Values”. Even though someone might not agree with them, they actually bring out some really interesting perspective on the topic at hand.
here is a youtube link for the first part. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=nQmAGBbOmas
Well, as the sura about multiple wives came right after a great battle leaving a great many widows and orphans in a world where protection by a family and tribe was a life-nessecity, I can find some reason in it. But these reasons do not apply at this day and age. Besides, if almost all the women had been killed, instead of the men, the sura might have gone the other way around: allowing women up to four husbands…
Just musing here…
In fact there are communities where the matriliniar line is the one that counts. I’m all for it. It’s much more logical: children carry more genetic material from the mothers than the fathers, and it’s always quite clear who gives birth to whom. And men aren’t treated as a secondrate species, the way women are treated in patriarchal societies.
Anyway, I always thought it reasonable, before I had a real look at Islam, that when men are allowed four wifes, women should be allowed four husbands.
I do not believe in the culturally influenced urban myth that men nééd more wifes because of their ”natural” urges. According to scientific research women have a greater libido than men, so they might really need two men.
(Yes, Saudi in US: I like science when it suits me)
However, I want only one man ever.
And he will not be allowed to do anything else but look at other women.
And there are many men who also love only one woman. And I am sure there are many who are decent and responsible enough not to use polygamy as a cheap blackmail over their powerless wives.
Solomon2, But in Israel men use an old law, to keep women in a kind of ”divorce limbo” while re-marrying themselves, only releasing the women in middle age, so they can’t get children with another man. And the rabbi’s are very happy to acommodate this injustice.
I saw a long documentary following several women trying to get released and the obstacles that were put in their path to justice for years on end. Only one managed to get her freedom.
Actually thinking some more… I always wonder a bit about how every little bit of scripture or hadith (however dodgy the narrator) is always given full or exaggerated credance, when it suits men.
And every bit that gives women rights, is always completely glossed over and conveniantly forgotten!!!
Like women having to give their personal consent in marriage. The prophet releasing women who were married against their will, the prophet not wanting polygamy for his own daughter, giving the right to divorce to women who were not happy in their marriages, etc. etc.
two words.
Lorena Bobbit
no…. i’m not the jealous type. Or the violent type.
Bahahaha
I couldn’t imagine having more than one husband. However, I often imagine molding a perfect husband, borrowing a little of this and a little of that from various people.
Aafke, that sounds pretty bad, I’m surprised that this happens. I imagine a gap between Israeli civil and religious law makes it possible, a gap that could be filled. Do you recall the name of that documentary? I’d like to see it.
Solomon2, I saw it a year, or two years ago, I can’t remember, But I think its an old religious law, and they did speak about that particular law as one that was used (in the olden days) to make sure women got to keep certain rights when their husbands got lost on long travels or campaigns, but that it is now used to keep women from being fully divorced, while the men are completely free. And that it is used so extensivly nowadays.
When the women marry, why DON’T they put a clause in the marriage contract that the husband must seek permission of the first wife before marrying a second wife? Or something like that?
Islam has given this option to women – but it seems most women are blissfully unaware as well as unwilling to research all this when they are getting married – too busy dreaming!
I’m very passionate about this topic because I’m a second wife. I think some of the points made about this issue are valid ones and most of them are in fact problems that do accrue in Muslim communities in regards to multiple wives. However as I read others responses to this issue I decided not to get in to it because whatever most of you think about polygyny will not change based on what I think.
I do think that the issue of polygyny is abused by a lot of men and I wish that it wasn’t so but until people fear God and wish to follow His commands then the issue will continue to be so and that is a sad but true fact.
So on to my experiences, I will not lie in the beginning it was a bit shaky and it was definitely an adjustment that had to me had on all of our parts. However there has never been any real drama and we are settled in and deal with one another in as fair and just a way as we can. The main reason I believe that our marriages are a successes is that my hubby is a God fearing man and is always concerned with being equal and being just between us both.
When I first became Muslim I took the stance that ok fine Islam allows more than one wife I can’t disagree because it is part of the Quran but I choice not to have it for myself that is after all my right. So you are all asking how in the world did I become the second wife. About a year after being Muslim I decided that I was ready to get married so I told the women at my masjid that I wanted them to help me find a suitable man. I specifically told them I wanted a man that spoke Arabic, not only was religious but had religious knowledge and that his faith and knowledge of the religion where more important to me than anything else. I knew that if my husband was religious then all of my rights would be fulfilled. Soon after a friend of mine said that her husband had a friend that was looking for a wife and he was a religious teacher. So I agreed to exchange e-mails in order to discover whether or not we where compatible. So we did and things where going along just fine until my friend calls me one day and tells me she is so sorry she had no idea that her husband’s friend is already married with children but that her husband made her sweat not to tell me. I remember getting off the phone with this friend sitting down on the back steps of my mother’s kitchen and being shocked and not for the reasons some of you may think. I was shocked that I wasn’t angry or hurt and I didn’t seem to care about him already being married. I had no feelings of jealousy or a need to call off the wedding. The only thing that ever did give me pause about us getting married was the fact that he was Saudi and the only reason I had that moment of pause was because my friends and family where whispering in my ear you can’t trust him he is Saudi but I never truly felt that way. And even though I called everything off he still came to America as planned and we did get married in Ramadan 9 years ago.
I have discovered since then that God knew better than me and put peace in my heart about being in a marriage with more than one wife. I strongly believe that I could not be the only wife. Some men are like children and need to be taken care of and doing that 24/7 can be exhausting. I like my time to visit friends, read, watch T.V, work, go back to school, and just be alone. I defiantly need my me time.
by the way what is up with that face….it makes me look mad. Is there a way I can change it?
Desert flower, very interesting, one doesn’t often read a personal experience of a second wife who got married knowing what she was getting into.
Thanks for sharing.
You can get your own avatar, that way you’ll have something of your own choosing!
http://en.gravatar.com/
For those of you not aware, following are links to earlier posts I have done of interviews of those who have or are in polygamy:
http://americanbedu.com/2008/05/07/the-second-wife-she-too-feels-pain/
http://americanbedu.com/2008/05/04/saudi-arabia-growing-up-in-polygamy/
http://americanbedu.com/2008/03/18/polygamy-a-first-wife-speaks-out-reflections-of-a-western-wife/
Thank you so much for sharing your story and experience, Desert Flower. If I may be so brazen to ask, was your husband’s other wife aware of his search and intent to marry you in advance? Is she a Saudi?
Desert Flower, do you think your friends were right to initially hide the fact that this man already had a wife and children?
Solomon2,
If I understand from what Desert Flower wrote it was the husband of her friend who said not to reveal this fact.
I’m not surprised since the men usually will stick together and support one another on such issues.
Desert Flower, I was wondering why your husband didn’t tell you he was married when he first started talking to you by e-mail. Or maybe he thought you knew already or maybe it never crossed his mind that it would be an issue (which ended up being the case.) I am really glad you wrote. Very, very interesting to hear a second wife’s point of view.
I read a couple articles about Muslims in America who practice polygamy and was surprised by a few of the women who were accepting of it, enjoying it and encouraging it. One woman said she even helped find a second wife for her husband! Amazed me.
I’m happy it worked out well for you. Thanks again for your comments as they were of great interest!
This topic is sooo interesting.
But all I’ll say about it is – what? willingly marry multiple men?! Hell no!
Aafke, Thanks for the link!
Carol, Yes, the other wife was told that he wanted a second wife but from what I understand she thought he was joking so it was a shock for her in the beginning and yes she is a Saudi woman.
Susanne, I’m not sure why he didn’t tell me in the beginning I never thought to ask that but he was probable unsure how I an American would take that kinda of news and maybe he was testing the waters or maybe he thought I knew already. Great question I will ask him and let you know…lol
Or maybe he wanted you to care for him and develop real feelings for him so that when you eventually did find out…it would be that much more difficult to pull yourself away and break from the relationship…just a thought.
Personally I dont care if the second third or fourth wife are happy and accepting of the situation…if the man didnt obtain those multiple wives through clearly written islamic requirements then he did something not agreeing with what God sanctioned…which sounds contrary to Islam in my opinion…but I dont judge cause its not my life…egads if someone judged me.
Desert Rose,
If you do not mind my inquiry and I do not mean to pry, but why was your husband searching for another wife?
Thank you
Culture Shock,
I suppose that would be a question for my hubby to answer but he did seek me and marry me according to Islamic ruling and I believe his reasoning being that he wanted someone that would help him in his passion to spread the word of Islam in the English language. He sees that Islam is truly misunderstood sometimes and he wishes to change that.
Desert Flower,
Why did he feel he had to marry someone to have to do that?
Regardless, I hope your partnership is a beneficial and accomplishes just that and more.
Coolred38, That evil assumption had passed my mind too….
I’m sorry, I can’t pass this one up, even though I do admire Desertflowers candidness and her courage and generosity in sharing.
This one goes to Saudi Hubby:
So Saudi hubby presents himself and woo’s foreign gullable girl under false pretenses, not telling her until she hears the truth from a friend, and very late in the relationship, while not really telling his Saudi wife about it. And all for the cause of spreading Islam in the english language, and putting aside our pre-concieved prejudices that all saudi men lie to their wives, and marry foreign women as second wives while usually keeping quiet about their marital status?
Doesn’t really work for me. I am as prejudiced as ever.
So what has been saudi-hubby’s progress in spreading Islam in the English language, and how does his American wife fit in? What is her major important role, which made it so important for him to get married to a second, English speaking wife? Does he own a blog or website? Does he write? Is he a journalist? Or on television? What is the exact role of the English-speaking wife in this bid for mutual, cross-language understanding? How has the spreading of Islam been positively influenced? What projects to further the cause is this couple currently running?
I vote for Aafke to interview Sarah Palin!!!
Bismillaah (In The Name of Allaah)
Out of mercy (rahmah) Allaah’s men to marry more then one woman. There is fifty to one ratio of women vs. men. This means that 49 women out of every ration can not and could not marry a man in the even if she wanted too.. as there are not enough. Just because there are lots of sinful and deviant men that do not marry for righteous reasons and treat their wife bad does not make this rule of Allaah a bad one. This just means that there are many sinful men out there. There is two sides for every story.
Thank you so much for your time.
Sincerely & Gratefully
Halimah bint David
http://survivorsareus.wordpress.com
p.s. I really like this blog A Lot!!
Salam Alaikum Survivorsareus and welcome!
“There is fifty to one ratio of women vs. men. This means that 49 women out of every ration can not and could not marry a man in the even if she wanted too..as there are not enough”
These stats that you mentioned are completely untrue. In virtually every country in the world there are almost equal ratios of men vs women. The only countries in which the ratio is most likely skewed would be India and China who used to or are still practicing female infanticide. And so in certain parts of those countries there is an abundance of males not females. Polygamy would actually be even more detrimental to society in that case.
survivorsareus, please state the source of your statements as they conflict with everything I’ve ever read and studied in the Humanities. Thank you.
survivorsareus:
What fairytale book did you get those statistics from? ”Polygamous men seeking more reasons to get more wives”???
Statistically more males are born then females, but as male children get sick more often, and die more often, by the time we are around 18 the statistics are equal.
Except in countries with poor healthcare for women, or where baby-girls get murdered, or where small girls are married off too young and die in childbirth. In those places men outnumber women.
The only reason women will outnumber men is after a major war. And in old age statistics.
Interestingly, in Saudi Arabia, Oman , Kuwait, even with all the traffic deaths, men outnumber women. The same goes for UAE and Qatar, where the ratio is actually 2 men per woman.
High time for a dispensation I’d say.
But in most countries on the planet Earth (no idea which planet you are from) The ratio is about equal.
So if many men would really insist having four wives, they will have to resort to the ways of a creepy American sect, where surplus teenage boys are weeded out and thrown out of the community.
Check out this link for the United Nations for some trustworthy statistics.
http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/products/indwm/ww2005/tab1a.htm
Hats off to Desret Flower for her courage to speak about this delicate topic, yours is an interesting story & an eye opener too.May you continue to be blessed & live a contented life with your husband.
I just want to share my husbands point on this topic, before i embrace Islam, this is the part that i find hard to accept,but my husbands explanation kind of assured me, according to him,having multiple wives is permissible in Islam under certain circumstances, the most difficult part is to treat all wives equally emotionally (humans tend to have favoritisms), if this will not be met, men will be punished by ALLAH in the hereafter, he said he doesnt want the punishment.
Aafke, I’m still looking for that documentary, but I haven’t found it yet. If you remember the title, please drop me a note, thanks!
Om Mohd,
Your husband certainly gave you the correct interpretation. Sadly so few men who choose to have more than one wife seem to follow that.
Aafke,
Well, he didn’t woo me under false pretenses, I asked and he thought I had been informed, we had only exchanged a few e-mails and there was by no means an emotional attachment at the point when I was told.
Because I want to keep my anonymity I can’t give you specific links but we do in fact have a web site, we have contributed articles to and managed another one, we have volunteered and lectured at Islamic centers both here and in America, and he goes to hajj every year to help English speaking pilgrims.
My role is as his partner and him as mine we support each other. Me by editing his English or helping to locate English resource, etc and him always there to answer my never ending questions about Islam as well as buying books, Cd’s and things about Islam in English. Since getting married my knowledge of the religion has grown and lead me to write a few booklets and give lectures at hospitals and Islamic centers. And his English has improved and lead us both to be able to do the above mentioned things and hopefully with time we will be able to do more.
Desert Flower,
I greatly appreciate your candor and speaking out and answering so many questions. I wish you all the very best always.
Regards,
Carol
Carol,
Thanks!
DesterFlower, I think you are a very special person, a strong and couragious woman, it seems you make a good team, thank you for your candour.
The Chicago Sun Times chose to pick up this post:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/blogentries/index.html?bbPostId=B6kcqoGH9Pf8Bzn7nRZ5sNNoCz9A61cXh5XI9Cz3aQkqrr0YN8
Reuters decided they liked this post too:
http://www.reuters.com/article/blogBurst/entertainment?bbPostId=B6kcqoGH9Pf8Bzn7nRZ5sNNoCz9A61cXh5XI9Cz3aQkqrr0YN8
In contrast to common sense (which is sometimes wrong), I believe that being able to marry more than one woman is Beneficial to the women more than to the men (or in worst case scenarios it gives equal benefit).
Anybody want to go through the logic of my claim?
Sorry, my name was in Arabic (I was automatically logged in to wordpress).
My name is: Essam Al-Zamel
Call me old fashioned but in spite of what Islam may decree as halal, I believe in the one man for one woman adage which it comes to marriage, fidelity and life partnership. Once there is a triangle there are ineviablty many problems and issues. Who really wants that headache?
American Bedu,
In Islam a woman can put a condition in the Marriage Contract that her new husband CANNOT marry a second wife.
Problem Solved.
Essam,
With all respect, I am aware of such a clause being put in marriage contracts and sadly at some point, these husbands (of which I am aware) still opted to take another wife. It may sound like a simple solution to an issue but only if it is enforced.
I’m not an expert but what I have understood when I questioned where I am aware of this issue happening is that the women were told they are allowed to place such stipulations in their marriage contract such as no other wives (or the wife is allowed to divorce) but that since Islam allows a man to have up to 4 wives as long as certain conditions are (alledgedly) met then a wife can not prevent her husband from taking another wife if he so chooses. Furthermore he is not even mandated to inform her if he has taken another wife.
This is happening here in Saudi (and perhaps elsewhere).
American Bedu,
Well, every where in the world, the man Can divorce his wife and marry another women (except for some traditional Catholics).
So, to say that a man would still marry another woman is irrelevant in this case. And also, to say that a man can marry another woman without telling his first wife, is also possible every where in the world, it even happens in the US! doesn’t it?
So, if a man marries a second wife while there is a clause in the marriage contract to prohibit him from doing so, then he is Doing something ILLEGAL, just like the man who marries a second wife in the US.
Essam, it is so that inn America and Europe, a man can divorce and take another spouse, but if doing so on the sly it is bigamy, and anyway: éverybody will consider the bastard the louse he truly is.
Also, in the rest of the world there are laws (enacted laws) which will give women rights and protection, and maintenance.
Many women in islamic marriages cannot get divorced for many reasons, such as their husband not being coöperative, their husbands taking their mahr back, their ex-husbands not giving them maintenance, and, very important, the husband will keep their children. And most women will suffer the greatest evil and hardships to be with, and try to protect their children.
So it’s bit silly to compare these two.
well said Aafke!
Aafke,
First of all, we’re talking about Islam, not the situation in Saudi Arabia in specific.
If you read all my posts, I was saying that a woman can add a clause to the marriage contract, that her husband can’t marry a second woman. And Carol said this is can’t be enforced, and I said, every where in the world things may not be enforced, so, her argument is Not true about Islam only.
So, to re-state, when a woman add that clause, the Man is FORCED BY LAW to divorce her once he marry a second woman. Actually the divorce is almost automatic.
Also, even without a clause, the woman in Islam can get divorce (it will be called in Islam Kul’e) if she just go the judge and say: I don’t like my husband. And the judge will separate her from her husband.
So, yes, I can compare the two.
Aafke, nothing you said is polygyny specific.Monogamous marriages have issues too. Women who want a divorce for any reason, from any country, of any faith must weigh the things you mentioned.
Well, I know that women have a lot of rights in Islam. But from what I’ve heard of women’s actual experiences they don’t get those rights in Islamic countries.
Sure women have the right to divorce, they don’t even have to pay back mahr, but that’s not really how it works out in the real world does it?
I mean what if you have a clause in your contract, and hubby marries in secret?
And as this is a KSA oriented blog, what are the chances of women getting a divorce, getting maintenance, and keeping her children? Fairly minimal is my impression up to now.
I mean it’s not as if she’s still eligable for a second marriage as ”damaged goods” so she will have to get the money to live from somewhere.
Esam
I have to disagree with that statement ….”Also, even without a clause, the woman in Islam can get divorce (it will be called in Islam Kul’e) if she just go the judge and say: I don’t like my husband. And the judge will separate her from her husband.”…
I live in what is humorously called an Islamic country and I stood in front of a judge several times and I said pretty much those same words….I was basically shamed out of the courtroom and told to have patience and pray….only when I discovered my husband was a pedophile and our children were his playthings did I manage to get the judge to listen to me when i said…”I dont like my husband”….so thats crap.
btw I currently know 4 other women who “dont like their husbands” and 3 of them have medical records and police records to prove how much they dont like their husbands…and yet are still married because the judge they stood in front of and declared those words to…was not sufficiently moved to pass a fair and just judgement based on Islamic Sharia…so thats crap.
I have been reading some of the discussions and I see some logical flaws. I will summaries some here:
- A comment was made about polygamy favors a woman: The funny part about that it was made by a man. You cannot make women’s positions for them, unless you think they are incapable of making their own analysis. The way I see it from my interaction with women is that they do not favor a position where they are married to a polygamist.
- A contract can solve the problem taking a second wife without his first wife’s knowledge: That is a wild assumption. Yes it gives relief in certain cases, but you have to realize for a woman to ask for such clause she must be very well informed about her rights and the complexity of marriages and be in control of her destiny. In the case of most women in Saudi they are married very young without the comprehensive knowledge that is required to make such decisions and they are under social pressures that do not allow them to take such controls. I would agree that a contract provision can solve the problem if there are advocacy laws that teach young women their rights under marriage contracts and give them the command of such decisions. The most pressing issue in Saudi Arabia is to develop laws to protect the less empowered segments of society.
- Argument that a man can marry multiple women in the west without knowledge of his previous wife: True, but the same man can also rob a bank. Both actions will be considered criminal under western law. The point that is missed here is that allowing a man to marry a second wife without knowledge of his previous wife is lawful in Saudi. That is the core issue.
There are many other issues, but I will stop here.
Afake,
The first thing I said in my previous comment is that I’m talking about Islam and NOT about Saudi Arabia. But you keep repeating that in Saudi Arabia, etc etc.. For God Sake, in Saudi Arabia, if I have a bad check it would take me more than 2 years to close the case, that’s if it closes.
So, lets concentrate on the abstract issue of polygamy in Islam and whether it is Fair or Not to the woman.
You brought the point of secret marriage again. And again, I would say, that this is also applicable in places where polygamy is illegal like the US. A man in an Islamic country can have an affair with another woman in Secret, but this is of course not related to Islam and is against the law. And it is actually huge Sin as we all know. And if a man had a promise to his wife that he won’t marry a second wife and added it to the marriage contract, then he would be committing huge sin if he does marry another woman in secret, actually his contract for the second marriage may be unlawful because it conflicts with the contract of the first marriage.
I’m not sure I got your last statement about “damaged goods”.
coolred38,
I would have to repeat myself again. I’m not talking about Saudi Arabia. I am talking about Islam Shari’a. I do have something to comment about what you said. But for now, I would prefer that we concentrate on the abstract situation in Islam.
In Islam it’s pretty clear. If the woman doesn’t like her husband, she can get a divorce. And you can go back to Bu’Kari, there is a Hadeeth which is very straight forward, a woman goes to Prophet Mohammed PBUH and says: My husband is a “decent” and “religious” , but I just don’t like him! etc.. and she got separated from him. I wonder how that works in the west? let’s see… a woman goes to judge, and says I want to get divorce, the Judge: ok no problem, you have to give up half of your wealth that accumulated from your “own” work during the last 30 years. Oopss…. maybe we should discuss that of being fair or not to woman (or man). Sorry for diverting from the core issue, if you have something about this, lets postpone it
I assume we have all the world time to discuss anything later.
So, coolred38, we know Islam from its sources not from what happens in Saudi or any other country that claim to practic Islam.
–
Essam Alzamel
Saudi in US
Actually, a man making an opinion about women, has nothing to do with Logic. Men has been the dominant thinkers for all over the history, based on your statement, everything written by them related to women (emotions, preferences, etc) is Illogical. Well.. that’s illogical.
By the way, I still did Not state why polygamy favors women yet
so, why don’t wait a little bit. Maybe you will get convinced too.. Currently I’m only paving the argument logic and building my case. Besides, just to clarify, I did Not mean that a woman would favor to marry a polygamist, I would doubt any woman does. I was saying that the availability of polygamy option in General would at least benefit the woman just like it benefits the man.
It is great progress that you agree partially with the (solution). So, in IDEAL case scenario, if women are informed, and supported by society, then the “Clause” would actually solve the dilemma? and no woman can say: “Islam” is NOT fair to me because it’s allowing my Husband to marry a second woman. Are we in the same line here?
- Multiple women vs. Robbing a bank. Again, I don’t care about Saudi Arabia, in Islam if you have a clause in your contract with your wife that you cannot marry a second wife, then it’s absolutely NOT LAWFUL to marry a second wife. So, bottom line is, that man with that clause, would be treated just he is treated in the west Now. (of course maybe he wouldn’t be jailed, but at least forced to divorce)
—
Essam Alzamel
Essam,
This blog IS about Saudi Arabia and the views/incidents cited usually depict how polygamy (and Islam) is practiced in Saudi Arabia.
In the majority of cases of which I am aware, polygamy in Saudi Arabia DOES NOT favor the woman. Most the woman I know did not willingly choose polygamy regardless of where they fell in the ranking of the wives and all seem to have lost in many aspects such as financial status, security and dignity.
I’ve yet to see or hear in Saudi Arabia where a man has been forced to divorce because he was viewed as “in the wrong” by taking another wife if there was a clause in the marriage contract that he would not do so.
Carol,
You started this blog entry by: “Sometimes it just doesn’t seem fair… in Islam a man is allowed to have up to four wives. But yet the woman of course is only allowed one husband.”
So, I was assuming that you were talking about Islam, Not “Islam as practiced (or claimed to be practiced) in Saudi Arabia.
So, for me, I won’t advocate myself to defend practices in Saudi Arabia, as I don’t personally approve of most. So, if you insist that you “do NOT” want me to talk about the ploygamy in Islam in abstract, then I have to respect your wishes as it is your blog and I will stop the discussion from my side about the issue.
Otherwise, I will only continue about ploygamy in Islam.
—
Essam Alzamel
Essam I don’t want to go into detail, but I think we should make clear what exactely we are talking about.
I was speaking specifically about KSA, Coolred38 is speaking of Bahrein. And I have no idea where you are coming from. You are quite wrong by supposing that a woman has to give 50% to her husband in case of divorce in the west, that depends on your marriage-contract.
So let’s make clear which world we are describing and discussing here: Most people here are talking about the ”Real World”, and those countries who paradoxally dare to call themselves ”Islamic”, and you seem to be talking about some non-existant Islamic-Dream-Utopia.
Aafke,
You want to speak about Saudi, Bahrain, Egypt. It is up to you. If you are replying to “my comments”. Then I want to remind that I’m not talking about specific country. But rather, I’m talking about ploygamy in Islam. I’m NOT interested to discuss the situation in specific country because as you said (they just call themselves “Islamic” but in reality they are not. So, I won’t bother wasting keyboard strokes on it. If you are NOT interested in discussing “ploygamy in Islam” it is also up to you
. I can’t force you, and you shouldn’t force me to talk about another issue.
As for the (non-existant-Islamic-dream-utopia). What I’m talking about is the wild spread understanding of “Islamic Shari’a”. And nothing of what I said is fancy or “not-applicable”. They are just clear cut laws that are already there in Islam and are easy to impose and practice. So, I see no “dream-utopia” here.
—
Essam AlZamel
Also Aafke,
About the 50% thing in the US. I may be wrong. It’s something we got from movies
I didn’t want to research it NOW, because it’s not the subject I’m interested in discussing now.
Essam,
Regarding the awaited elegant explanation that you’re trying to pave the road for, if you have a statement then make it and drop the arrogance that makes you think you’re talking to children who you have to school first. I find your entire argument line of doing women a favor with polygamy, when they do not favorite it as an elitist position coming from a person that thinks he is superior.
By the way my position is never against polygamy that is a personal choice. My position is always against forcing or coercing women into it.This is why the idea of does a woman agree with the concept is a core point.
Regarding contracts, for your information it takes years of experience for a person to understand contractual agreements. This is the reason countries have laws to spell out common rules that society should operate under. Contracts should be left to handle miscellaneous issues. Polygamy and its governance are common enough to enact laws for it. You cannot expect a teenage bride to understand how to ask for a contract to protect herself. Society through its laws should step up and provide protections for her through laws.
As Aafke pointed out you are describing a utopia that does not exist in the real world. Giving men the right to marry and divorce as they wish without laws to prevent abuses will result in victims. We are beyond the logical argument of whether a good man can be fair to his wife(s). You’re stuck behind trying to educate us on very simple concept when that is not necessary. If you cannot produce laws to protect women (which is permitted under Shari’a) then you’re simply talking about a utopia world that many use as an acrobatic act to avoid substantive discussion which can produce results.
Saudi in US
Lets skip the bashing language (arrogance, children, superior). No need to make the discussion personal. You are not the owner of the blog. If the owner think that I’m not respecting people here, she can ask me to stop writing. As a matter of fact, she can just (not approve) my posts. If you don’t like the way I’m explaining my position, you are not forced to discuss it with me. I assume there are what? 10 million other discussions going on in the Internet right now? you can go and choose any of them that fits your criteria of the right way of debate.
I’m not sure I understand what you mean by “My position is always against forcing or coercing women into it”.
About contracts, actually a woman doesn’t need to add clause to the marriage contract. It is just extra-optional protection. Because, even WITHOUT contract clause. When the man marries a second wife. The first wife can go to the Judge and say: My Husband married a second wife. I don’t like him anymore. I want to get a divorce (or Kul’e). If the judge is following Islam Shari’a, he MUST give her what she wants, that is separating her from her husband. Problem Solved. Simple.
I’m not describing utopia. I’m stating the “Law of Islam”. Because I’m talking about Islam and ploygamy in “Islam”.
You said:”Giving men the right to marry and divorce as they wish without laws to prevent abuses will result in victims”, this is off-topic, but I’m curious to know what are you suggesting to prevent men from (divorcing) women as they wish? are you proposing to limit their right to divorce also? and are you implying that the west has laws that prevent this abuse and limit divorce? if so, I would like you to enlighten me about it.
—
Essam Alzamel
Essam,
First, I have opinions also and I will say them the way I want. You have to understand that is a right I will not give up and you have to learn to deal with it or fold. I am not very concerned about you taking offense to what I say as you are taking a position that I know hurt many women in our societies. I know too many of those victims to just ignore the argument.
Regarding Laws and Shari’a, if you watch all the different contradicting fatwas, a rational person will understand that there is no standard interpretation. This is why I think you live in a utopia world where every judge will have the proper interpretation. There is no excuse for not developing laws that protect women from abusive relationships and set the specifics for the interpretation of Shari’a. We should not buy into the arguments of lazy governments that do not do the work required to develop our judicial system and protect their citizens.
By the way your understanding that Islam allows women to divorce easily is wrong. In Islam a man is given the power to divorce without having to explain a cause. A woman has to provide reasonable grounds to a judge and he will have the final judgment to accept those reasons or not. This often results in cases like coolred38 tried to convey to you.
I think you also ignore some important issues about divorces. Those include the rights of dealing with custody issues, ability to achieve support if teh woman is not able to work, etc.
The point is the absence of laws makes the entire process of achieving divorce very subjective for women. It is open to the judge’s interpretation of Islamic text.
I’m not describing utopia. I’m stating the “Law of Islam”. Because I’m talking about Islam and ploygamy in “Islam”.
Esam, you keep stating that women can do this and they can do that and they have all these options open to them. Yet in absolutely zero muslim countries are these options actually afforded to women with regards to polygamy or divorce. So yes, the “Law of Islam” is in actuality the perfect example of a utopia. It is something that only exists in a book. If you have a set of rules that exist only on paper or in someone’s mind and are not actually practiced than it makes no sense to continually speak about it because it really has no relevancy to the discussion. Everybody is well aware of what the rules are regarding polygamy and divorce in Islam.
It does seem however, that if the Judges who are supposedly trained in the Law of Islam (trained in the Laws of the 17th Century Misogynistic Male is probably closer to the truth) can’t even implement it properly than maybe people/the gov should really consider taking up ‘Saudi in the US’ suggestion. Because clearly the current method of action is not working.
Saudi in US
Of course you are entitled for your opinion, and you can disagree me all you want. As long as we both respect each other. You are also free to bash me, and I’m free to ignore what you write if you do so.
You said:”Regarding Laws and Shari’a, if you watch all the different contradicting fatwas, a rational person will understand that there is no standard interpretation. This is why I think you live in a utopia world where every judge will have the proper interpretation.”
Since we are now talking about (Kul’e and Ploygamy). Then I think you are wrong. I’m not aware of contradictions in the issue of Kul’e for example. So, to be practical, here is a list of fatwas about (Kul’e) for more than 10 clerics:
http://islamtoday.net/questions/question_select_cat_content.cfm?maincatid=25&catid=140
If you find any contradictions, tell me.
And here is one of the fatwas:
http://islamtoday.net/questions/show_question_content.cfm?id=55586
It clearly states that a woman can get (Kul’e) just for (not liking) her husband.
You said:”There is no excuse for not developing laws that protect women from abusive relationships and set the specifics for the interpretation of Shari’a. We should not buy into the arguments of lazy governments that do not do the work required to develop our judicial system and protect their citizens.”
I 100% agree with you. The judicial system in Saudi Arabia has to be fixed. And they must put specific interpretation for the Islamic Shari’a to be used by all judges. But again, this is not relevant to what I’m talking about. But since that we agree now on this point, I hope that we don’t have to bring it back again.
You said:”"In Islam a man is given the power to divorce without having to explain a cause.”
Yep, just like everywhere in the world!
You said:”"A woman has to provide reasonable grounds to a judge and he will have the final judgment to accept those reasons or not. This often results in cases like coolred38 tried to convey to you.”
Nop, not true. In Islam, if she Doesn’t like the husband. That’s it, she can get separated from her husband (read fatwa/s above)
Regards,
Essam
Tulip,
Actually (Kul’e) is very common here in Saudi. It happens every day. Yes, it may take a while (a year or so). But eventually, if the woman doesn’t want the husband, she will be separated. Actually, to add some fun to this heated discussion, here is a news about a woman that got (Kul’e) from the judge because her husbands mouth smell bad!
http://tinyurl.com/3hply6
—-
Essam
Essam, I would like you to say that to my neighbor’s ex.
The women was kicked out two times by a judge when she tried to get a divorce. It’s not about the Islamic text, Saudi Arabia needs a judicial reform. Giving a person who failed to get enough grades from high school to get into science majors the power to become a judge is self destructive. They can call themselves Scholars, sorry but I call them under achievers. The Saudis have revered them enough. We need lawmakers, we need Civil rights, we need a constitution that protect our rights.
As for polygyny, I already gave my say about it. I might not have explained myself but I left a link to an extremely interesting video about the issue, it opened my eye to a new view of the issue..
I’ll just try to explain myself in short.. I would like anyone reading this, ask yourself.. What consists a family? Is one wife to one Man the only way to have a family? When did polygyny became something close to a crime? If you would like to view the same material I did, check this video, there might be some things that conflict with your belief in religion, Penn and Teller might have a lot of uses for the word ‘fuck’, but they do put the issue at hand in some perspective and research it well.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=nQmAGBbOmas
Essam,
You just made my point for me.
Here is a link with a different interpretation of the same Hadith provided in one of the links you posted.
http://www.islamonline.com/news/newsfull.php?newid=96284
Quote: “The basic principle is that it is not permissible for a woman to ask for divorce unless there is a reason for that. The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: âAny woman who asks her husband for a divorce with no reason, the fragrance of Paradise will be forbidden to her.â Narrated by Ahmad (21874), Abu Dawood (2226) and al-Tirmidhi (1187); classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Irwaâ al-Ghaleel (2035).”
The point is there are many interpretations of the same text. Just because you found a few scholars that agree does not mean all of them do. It is amazing that people have to argue about which scholar has the right interpretation instead of depending on reliable one set of laws. And by the way even judges that mean well have to face the same dilemma, but with severe consequences to the people they preside over.
Regarding men being able to divorce without cause anywhere in the world, I am very familiar with US laws and I can tell you that does not fly here without severe financial penalties.
Essam,
I forgot the link to Mr. Stinky’s divorce was very funny
Saudi in US,
Where is the contradiction? of course it’s prohibited to ask for divorce for no reason! But this is between her and God. If she ask for divorce for the sake of divorce then there is no doubt it’s something bad that is she doing. However, “Not Liking” her Husband IS a reason. And it’s a major reason. And if she goes to the judge and says: I don’t like my Husband and I want to get Divorce, he can NOT say, you have to prove this reason (that is not liking her husband) and he has to give her what she wants. So, I see no contradiction at all here.
You said:”Regarding men being able to divorce without cause anywhere in the world, I am very familiar with US laws and I can tell you that does not fly here without severe financial penalties.”
I cannot see the relation between the two arguments. Facing financial penalties has nothing to do with (having to explain a cause) for the divorce. He may just divorce for the (fun of it) with no reason. AND pay the cost.
Also, in Saudi the man would be losing all he spent on the marriage, that is , if newly married, more than 300,000 (on average). And he can’t get it back.
Finally, if you claim that it’s harder to divorce in the US, why didn’t it help them bring down the divorce rate? which is more than 40%.
—
Essam
Touya
It is certainly not a drive through court, where the woman ask for divorce in the first window and get it the second (thanks God its not). As I said, it usually takes an average of a year. And they slow it down on purpose, hoping that things will change and the two couple will sort out their problems.
I saw the 15 minutes of the clip. Seems funny, but how is that relevant to what we say? they are basically suggesting that humans should be living like “animals”!
good for them.
—
Essam
Let me recapulate,
”The west” is a very large chunk of the planet with many different countries, cultures and laws.
However, on the whole, if people (that is both men and women) want a divorce they can do so, but it takes some time and a lawcourt, adn you need to give some really good reaswons. I know that in Germany, for example, the court can order you to spend year apart, so you can have time to reconsider, or you can be sure.
In Islam, in theory women have a lot of rights.
In reality, in Islamic countries, these rights are not given to women. Moreover, it is very easy for men to divorce, and it is made very difficult, if not impossible for women to divorce men. In reality.
Also, women cannot count on being protected and maintained after divorce, a problem we in the larger part of ”the west” have laws for. Also divorced women are stigmatised. Nowadays, in real life. Also, women are being held ”hostage” by retaining their children. That is a very real and evil way of keeping women stuck in an unhappy/abusive/unwanted marriage.
In reality, in Islamic countries, rights are given to men which they do not have.
The written word is twisted and editted for the benefit of men. Men càn marry up to four women conditinally only. Those conditions are not met nowadays. I don’t think they are ever met, so men cannot really marry four women at all.
Besides as the numbers between men and women are equal, having some men marry more than one woman leave sa lot of men without the possibillity of a mate.
Considering that according to statistics in some countries men outnumber women 2 to 1, it would be logic to allow women two men, but very unlogic to have men marry more than one woman.
And to stay with the original title, If we look only at logic, and justice, and equality: ìf men can have four wifes, then women can have four husbands.
I don’t think that will really work out well though…
Essam,
You obviously did not read the article. Must I quote everything.
“And the words âwith no reasonâ mean without there being any hardship that compels her to ask for a divorce. ”
Is the very next sentence from the article. Then it goes on with the Mufti advising the woman to be patient with her drug addicted husband. Not liking a person is not hardship by any definition.
The point again 2 Muslim scholars can interpret the same Hadith very differently.
Aafke,
You said:”However, on the whole, if people (that is both men and women) want a divorce they can do so, but it takes some time and a lawcourt, adn you need to give some really good reaswons. I know that in Germany, for example, the court can order you to spend year apart, so you can have time to reconsider, or you can be sure.”
Yes, just like in Islam (and) in Saudi. And woman doesn’t really have to have good reason, read above (woman got divorced by court in Saudi because her husband’s mouth smells bad)
–
You said:”In reality, in Islamic countries, these rights are not given to women. Moreover, it is very easy for men to divorce, and it is made very difficult, if not impossible for women to divorce men. In reality.”
Not true. refer to my previous answer. If you are saying that based on stereotype or assumption then you have to re-check them out.
—
You said:”Also, women cannot count on being protected and maintained after divorce, a problem we in the larger part of ”the west” have laws for.”
If the woman has already some wealth, then she will NOT share it with her ex-husband. And she can survive easily if she is working. Otherwise, her father or closest relative MUST (enforced by law) take responsibility for her and provide her with whatever she needs. (hmm, doesn’t seem fair to poor Men).
—
You said: “Also, women are being held ”hostage” by retaining their children. That is a very real and evil way of keeping women stuck in an unhappy/abusive/unwanted marriage.”
Are you aware of the applied law in Saudi concerning custody of children? or you are just assuming?
———
You said:”In reality, in Islamic countries, rights are given to men which they do not have.
The written word is twisted and editted for the benefit of men. Men càn marry up to four women conditinally only. Those conditions are not met nowadays. I don’t think they are ever met, so men cannot really marry four women at all.”
Have you done/read a research about this? do you really know if men are meeting the conditions of marrying multiple wives? or you are just assuming?
Also, do you know what the percentage of men (in Saudi) who actually have more than one wife? if not, can you give an estimate based on what you think?
————–
You said:”Besides as the numbers between men and women are equal, having some men marry more than one woman leave sa lot of men without the possibillity of a mate.”
In Saudi for example, there is an excess number of unmarried Men and unmarried Women above 30 years old. So, we have no problem.
———-
You said:”Considering that according to statistics in some countries men outnumber women 2 to 1, it would be logic to allow women two men, but very unlogic to have men marry more than one woman.”
I would really like to know what country is that! 2-1?! I will move right away to this country.
Regards,
Essam
Saudi in US
Not liking a person is not a hardship!? we are talking about the husband, the person that the woman will live the rest of her life with. So, not liking the husband is absolutely a “Hardship” by all definitions, in my opinion.
So, what you are stating is actually (your own interpretation) of the fatwa. So, to prove your point, you have to bring a fatwa that clearly states: If the woman does Not like her husband then it is NOT good reason for the divorce. Because the Hadeeth of the prophet says clearly that the woman wanted divorce because she is not liking her husband, so to contrast this, it has to be clear fatwa also.
—
Essam
If the world were black and white the laws and fatwas would be clear but (speaking from the Saudi perspective) life is always in various shades of grey. That’s not to say that every woman is dissatisfied or not getting her rights but suffice to say that a large proportion are not satisfied or receiving rights. I’m just one person residing in the Kingdom but in my own circle I am aware of dozens repeat dozens of instances of abuses on the part of the man. As Aafke, Saudi in US and others have pointed out, the man is the one taking other wive(s) in spite of previous agreements or assurances; the woman may be caught in a corner (and especially if a foreign woman) that she will stay in a marriage with a deceitful or an abusing husband in order to remain with her children…and the reasons go on and on.
I remember one woman telling me her shock and anger when she learned her husband had taken another wife — in spite of the clause in their marriage contract. She met with a sheik to discuss this and told the sheik she wanted out. The sheik in turn “reminded” her that it was the man’s right in islam to take up to four wives and that she needed to simply come to terms and “embrace” her new situation. Welcome to Islam, Saudi style…
Essam,
Exactly it is hardship in your definition, but not most judges.
You really need to do some research about women issues before you can have this discussions. You have this view of the word that is too rosy and it is either that you have lack of knowledge or just stuck your head in the sand and ignoring all the problems women encounter in cases of divorce.
I am not going to waste my time providing you with information if all you do is argue basic facts. It sounds like I am dealing with a person that has fallen in love with his own intellect regardless if it is misguided or not.
The first rule of learning and developing intellectual capacity is to understand that you may have positions that are wrong and adjust when presented by evidence. There is no shame in that, you gain by becoming a more knowledgeable person.
American Bedu,
You said:”the woman may be caught in a corner (and especially if a foreign woman) that she will stay in a marriage with a deceitful or an abusing husband in order to remain with her children…and the reasons go on and on.”
This is her choice. Maybe she prefer staying with her children! It is certainly better for the children, compared to what would happen if the man has no choice other than Divorce like in the US. Remind me of the number of children who lives with single parent in the US? how is that for a functional family.
—
You said: “in spite of the clause in their marriage contract. She met with a sheik to discuss this and told the sheik she wanted out. The sheik in turn “reminded” her that it was the man’s right in islam to take up to four wives and that she needed to simply come to terms and “embrace” her new situation.”
Can you continue the story. It doesn’t seem complete. So, the woman has clear clause in the marriage contract, she went to the judge and he said, live with it? then what? she got convinced by the judge suggestion? or she still wanted to get divorce but couldn’t? and for how long?
—
Essam
“This is her choice. Maybe she prefer staying with her children! It is certainly better for the children, compared to what would happen if the man has no choice other than Divorce like in the US. Remind me of the number of children who lives with single parent in the US? how is that for a functional family.”
In what planet do you live on where it is better for a woman being abused to stay with her abusive husband for the sake of the children. This is one of the ludicrous things I have ever heard. Yes, it is indeed better for a boy to see his father smash his mother’s face in on a regular basis. That way the cycle of abuse can just be continued when that boy gets married one day and proceeds to do the same to his wife. And than the wife can go to court and be told to “have patience” by the moron of judge. Yippee. Your arguments have absolutely no basis in reality. I suggest you go do some reading. And by reading I mean about the real world and what actually goes on inside it. Not various ahadith and Quranic verses that are not even adhered to.
“Can you continue the story. It doesn’t seem complete. So, the woman has clear clause in the marriage contract, she went to the judge and he said, live with it? then what? she got convinced by the judge suggestion? or she still wanted to get divorce but couldn’t? and for how long?”
A woman in this situation does not get “convinced by the judge”. She gets forced by the judge to remain in a situation that she clearly does not like. Which happens all over the middle east. Commenters have provided you with examples over and over again of the problems in Saudi and the rest of the middle east about polygamy and divorce laws yet you still choose to retain this rosy view that everything works exactly as it should be and all women get divorces when they want and are not threatened with loss of custody of their children, when this couldn’t be further from the truth. I really don’t understand what additional proof you need to show you that your viewpoint is incredibly flawed. As I said, pick up a book, read a news article or something. There is certainly no shortage of articles regarding this issue
On a side note, why must a woman even choose between a divorce and custody of her children as you stated? Why can she not have both?
So, the woman has clear clause in the marriage contract, she went to the judge and he said, live with it?
I note that the acceptance of the mangling, mis-enforcement, or unilateral abrogation of contracts and laws seems to be prevalent in Islam. The party who complains about it seems to get sympathy only if they are considered entirely guiltless of every sin – “saint” is the word I hear most from Muslims, as in, “why should he stick to the agreement, since it appears you may have been in the wrong about xxxx?” [xxxx doesn't necessarily have to be related to the matter at hand.] “You’re not a saint, either!”
Essam,
It is very clear that we will continue to agree to disagree. I’ve shared my views but have no desire (for me) to continue the dialogue. I’m sure others will give plenty of fodder to chew on though.
Tulip,
I was talking about a woman with “Normal” Husband and not abusive, who happened to want to marry another woman (for whatever reason). If the husband is abusive it is no doubt better for everybody to leave him, and custody MUST be with the mother.
About divorce, I live in Saudi, I have relatives, and I know many cases of even close woman of mine who got their divorce from the judge. The ruling is clear, very clear. If the woman doesn’t want the husband she can get that.
You said:”On a side note, why must a woman even choose between a divorce and custody of her children as you stated? Why can she not have both?”.
She doesn’t. I was implying that it’s better for the children to live with both of their parents. As for custody the law is clear, if the children are under 7 years, the mother will take them. Once they are 7+ , the Son can choose, and the Girl will go with her father. (i’m talking here about the law in Saudi Arabia), in Islam it’s more flexible and there is not one set law, but it depends on the situation.
—
Essam
Saudi in US
You said:”The first rule of learning and developing intellectual capacity is to understand that you may have positions that are wrong and adjust when presented by evidence. There is no shame in that, you gain by becoming a more knowledgeable person.”
Teach yourself! I have showed more than once, that (kul’e) is clear cut in Islam (and in Saudi). If the woman want divorce, she will get it, EVEN IF THE REASON IS THAT “She doesn’t like her husband”.
And basically, you couldn’t prove this to be wrong. And you can NOT prove it to be wrong.
—
Essam
Essam,
It is up to you whether to accept simple rationale based on facts or not. I cannot change that. The objective here is to bring a better understanding to those who want to hear different opinions. I think I have accomplished that. You can hold any misguided believes you like, as it impacts you not me. Enough said.
1st PAGE.
Christian Wedlock.
QUESTION:
Can a woman have more than two husbands?
ANSWER:
No, a woman cannot have more than two living husbands. A man has no choice, as he must be in wedlock with one wife. But a woman has three choices. Firstly, no wedlock with a husband. Secondly, wedlock with one husband. Or thirdly, wedlock with two husbands. That’s it, there are no further choices for a woman, and there is no choice at all for a man.
1 Corinthians 7:2 King James 1611.
Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
Yr. 1783. 10th George Prince of Wales Own Hussars. (King George III).
Yr. 1898. 19th Alexandra Princess of Wales Own Hussars. (Queen Victoria).
Therefore two women can own a regiment of cavalry, and two men can own a regiment of cavalry.
1 Corinthians 6:16 King James 1611.
What! know ye not that he which is joined to a harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
Therefore in the New Testament a man and woman lying together are one flesh, as follows:
A husband and wife who lie together by carnal copulation shall be one flesh.
A man and courtesan/prostitute who lie together by carnal copulation shall be one flesh.
A man and common courtesan or common prostitute who lie together by carnal copulation shall be one flesh.
An adulterer and adultress who lie together by carnal copulation shall be one flesh.
An adulterer and fornicatress who lie together by carnal copulation shall be one flesh.
A fornicator and adultress who lie together by carnal copulation shall be one flesh.
A fornicator and fornicatress who lie together by carnal copulation shall be one flesh.
Clearly the New Testament lays down that a man must be in wedlock with his own wife, and a woman must be in wedlock with her own husband. Furthermore the New Testament specifically limits the number of wives that a man can have to only one, but sets no limit to the number of husbands a woman can have. But there must be some limit for a woman, or one woman could be in wedlock with thousands of men. Rationally, if one woman can satisfy the bodily lust of one man every day, and forty men can satisfy the bodily lust of one woman every day, then is one wife for every man and forty husbands for every woman what the New Testament requires? No, because the New Testament is a document of truth, not a document of reason.
2nd PAGE.
Luke 1:28 King James 1611.
Luke 1:31 King James 1611.
Luke 1:28-35 King James 1611.
In the New Testament, the angel Gabriel came in unto Mary, a virgin woman, and Mary conceived and delivered her firstborn son, Jesus, the son being God the Son, the father being God the Father. And when Mary’s womb delivered her firstborn son Jesus unto the world, then Mary was like all women delivered of a firstborn son unto the world, as a woman’s firstborn son can never belong to the mother but must belong to the Lord God.
Luke 2:23 King James 1611.
Exodus 13:2&12 King James 1611.
And so like all women delivered of a firstborn son, Mary was no longer a virgin woman, but like all said women, Mary was a holy woman.
Matthew 13:53-56 King James 1611.
Mark 6:1-4 King James 1611.
And husband Joseph Jacob came in unto Mary and husband Joseph Heli came in unto Mary, and Mary conceived and delivered Jesus’ brothers, James, Joses, Simon, Judas, and also Jesus’ sisters.
Matthew 1:6&16 King James 1611.
Luke 3:23&31 King James 1611.
Joseph Jacob was the descendent of King David’s son Solomon, and Joseph Heli was the descendent of King David’s son Nathan.
Genesis 38:16-18 King James 1611.
“Came in unto her” means congress or carnal copulation. In the Old Testament, Judah came in unto Tamar, his daughter-in-law, and Tamar conceived and delivered twin sons. Tamar had lain in wait for Judah on the side of a far away road, and Judah had been unable to recognize Tamar because she was wearing a veil, and only common harlots wore veils. Upon first seeing this strange woman wearing a veil, Judah bargained a payment of his personal signet ring, his personal wrist bangles, and his personal walking staff, for coming in unto her. Tamar had been in wedlock with Judah’s first son, who God had killed for being wicked. Tamar had then been in wedlock with Judah’s second son, who God had then killed when he saw the second son deliberately spill his seed on the ground during carnal copulation with Tamar. Judah then pledged Tamar that she could marry his third son when he became old enough for wedlock. But when his third son became old enough to marry, Judah broke his pledge and forbade his third son to marry Tamar. When Tamar was seen in her third month to be heavy with child, Judah was told that Tamar was with child through harlotry. Judah then summoned Tamar to him in order to be burnt to death for harlotry. Tamar came and Judah demanded that Tamar tell him by which man she was with child. Tamar then produced the signet ring, the wrist bangles, and the walking staff, and said the man who gave me these is the man by whom I am with child. Then Judah confessed to all that he had broken his pledge and sinned by going back on his word that Tamar could have wedlock with his third son when his third son became of age, and then denying such wedlock to her. Six months later Tamar safely gave birth to the twin sons conceived with Judah.
3rd PAGE.
Genesis 1:27-28 King James 1611.
Genesis 2:7&18-19 King James 1611.
Genesis 3:20 King James 1611.
The first man and first woman in this world were Adam and Eve. Adam means “man” in the hebrew tongue, and Eve means “life” in the hebrew tongue. Therefore a man is man, but a woman is life.
Romans 7:4-6 King James 1611.
Old Testament law dead and gives as an example that a woman can have more than one husband.
1 Timothy 3:2 King James 1611.
A bishop can have only one wife, and as he must be an example to other men, a man can have only one wife.
1 Timothy 3:12 King James 1611.
A deacon can have only one wife, and as he must be an example to other men, a man can have only one wife.
Titus 1:6 King James 1611.
An elder can have only one wife.
1 Timothy 5:4&9 King James 1611.
Elders are not to provide for widows under three score years of age without children, who have only had one husband.
The Estate of Marriage. Martin Luther 1522.
Although Martin Luther confirmed that a woman could have two husbands, he nevertheless immediately restricted it to women who were in a marriage which had produced no children and who had then obtained permission from their first husband to take their second husband. Confusingly, Martin Luther did not make it clear as to how long a woman had to wait before taking her second husband.
To sum up, the New Testament upholds the example of deacons, elders, and bishops, for men to follow. That example is one wife. The New Testament also lays down that the Old Testament no longer applies to men or women, except for the 10 Commandments, and gives as an example of this that a woman is no longer bound to have only one husband. If men must follow the example of the male Christian leader, whether bishop, deacon, or elder, then surely women must follow the example of the female Christian leader. What leader is that? The primary one in the New Testament is Mary, the Mother of Jesus, God the Son.
Luke 1:35&41 King James 1611.
Mary had carnal copulation with three men. The Angel Gabriel, Joseph Jacob, and Joseph Heli. However, Mary was only in wedlock with two men, Joseph Jacob, and Joseph Heli. Furthermore, the Angel Gabriel was not a man of this world, and he seems not to have taken a fully visible male form when he had carnal copulation with Mary as ordered by God the Father, for it appears that at some stage God the Holy Ghost came upon or entered Mary. Either this was at the moment Mary conceived or immediately afterwards. After Mary conceived, she immediately went to visit her cousin Elisabeth, who was six months with child, a son, who also had been conceived when Elisabeth had been filled by God the Holy Ghost.
4th PAGE.
Accordingly it would be fully in accordance with the New Testament for a man to have one wife, and a woman to have two husbands. That the Angel Gabriel had carnal copulation with Mary is both interesting and theologically necessary, but it is not enough of an example for a woman to attempt to take a third husband in wedlock, whilst her first and second husbands still liveth.
Matthew 19:11-12 King James 1611.
The New Testament does not give man any choice; he must have wedlock with one woman. Although do bear in mind that Jesus, God the Son, was not in wedlock with any woman.
But the New Testament gives a woman three choices.
1st Choice:
Virgin woman without wedlock.
2nd Choice:
Virgin woman with one husband in wedlock without child.
Virgin woman with one husband in wedlock with female child or female children.
Holy woman with one husband in wedlock with firstborn male child.
Holy woman with one husband in wedlock with male child or children together with female child or children.
3rd Choice:
Holy woman with two husbands in wedlock with firstborn male child.
Holy woman with two husbands in wedlock with male child or children together with female child or children.
A number of denominations have a service for wedlock, but so far every one of them has inserted words that clearly say a woman may be in wedlock with only one man at a time. Even the State Lutheran Evangelical Church of Sweden states this, despite Martin Luther himself saying that a wife can be in wedlock with two living husbands.
But what do you expect. After all, Martin Luther stated in writing that under no circumstances was anyone to call himself a “Lutheran” and under no circumstances was any church to call itself a “Lutheran Church”. So what do all northern europeans called themselves? Lutherans! Ask them what church they belong to? The Lutheran Church!
A number of denominations do not have any service for wedlock, on the grounds that wedlock is not a church matter, as it is a state matter. But every such denomination has nevertheless inserted words in that denomination’s discussion of wedlock, that firmly says that a woman can only have one husband in wedlock at a time.
Nowhere do any of the denominations give any explanation for their defiance of the New Testament. Of course that just might be because there is neither any justifiable explanation or excusable explanation for such defiance.
Still, just looking at using only the principle of choice as a guide, all the above denominations are pointing in the right direction, even if they are not pointing down the correct path.
5th PAGE.
That is, a man has no choice, he must make efforts to be in wedlock with one wife at some stage of his life here in this world.
And a woman still has a choice, in that she may choose not to be in wedlock with a man in this world, or she may choose to be in wedlock with one husband at some stage of her life here in this world. This means that the principle of a woman having a choice remains intact.
The defiance of both the Lord God and the New Testament by the various denominations by the removal of a woman’s option to make efforts to be in wedlock with two husbands at the same time at some stage of her life in this world, still leaves intact the principle of choice for the woman and no choice for the man.
Constitution of The Spartans (Xenophon). 388 B.C.
League of The Iroquois (Lewis Henry Morgan). 1851 A.D.
Only two non-christian groups in the world have been known to practice New Testament wedlock. The Spartans and the Mohawk.
Only monandry and diandry, or New Testament style wedlock, was lawful among the Spartans, citizens of the greatest of the greek city-states, Sparta, and history’s final saviours of Western Civilization at Thermopylae (The Hot Gates) in 480 B.C.
And only monandry and diandry, or New Testament style wedlock, was lawful among the Mohawk, citizens of the greatest of the eastern woodland North American tribes, which forever blocked France’s attempt to seize New York so as to split England’s colonies in twain.
Much criticism of both the Spartans and the Mohawk, has been leveled by outsiders who complain of the extreme freedom of the females and the extreme militarism of the males. It must be noted that there is no record of any Spartan male, Spartan female, Mohawk male, or Mohawk female, complaining of female freedom or male militarism.
Whatever your point of view on Spartan life or Mohawk life, the New Testament lays down cast-iron guidelines for wedlock. The fact that the New Testament complies with Spartan law and Mohawk law is irrelevant.
Of absolutely no relevance to this discussion, the symbol of the United States of America is the bald headed eagle, which is a species that uses both monandry and diandry for conception, and where the one male or two males reside in the exactly the same nest as the one female. The one female and either the one male or two males, stay in the nest together and raise the chick together.
Mark 10:7 King James 1611.
Ephesians 5:31 King James 1611.
Both husbands must leave their families to go and become a member of the wife’s family, or the one husband must leave his family to go and become a member of the wife’s family.
THE NEW TESTAMENT FORBIDS MOHAMMEDRY.
THE NEW TESTAMENT FORBIDS POLYGAMY.
THE NEW TESTAMENT FORBIDS CLITORECTI.
THE NEW TESTAMENT FORBIDS MONKERY.
THE NEW TESTAMENT FORBIDS POPERY.
THE NEW TESTAMENT FORBIDS CASTRATI.
6th PAGE.
CAPITAL LAWES OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE MOHAWK.
1st. If any person within this Government of The Mohawk shall by direct, exprest, impious, or presumptuous ways, deny the true God and his Attributes; he shall be put to death.
2nd. If any person within this Government of The Mohawk shall maliciously and on purpose deny that any Mohawk person may have arms for his defence suitable to his condition and as allowed by law; he shall be put to death.
3rd. If any person shall commit any willful murder, which is manslaughter, committed upon malice, hatred, or cruelty, not in a man’s necessary or just defence, nor by mere casualty against his will; he shall be put to death.
4th. If any person shall slay, or cause another to be slain by guile or by poisoning or any such wicked conspiracy; he shall be put to death.
5th. If any man or woman shall lye with any beast or brute creature by carnal copulation; they shall be put to death, and the beast shall be burned.
6th. If any man lyeth with a man or mankind as he lyeth with a woman; they shall be put to death, unless the one party were forced or under fourteen years of age, in which case he shall not be punished.
7th. If any man forcibly stealth or carrieth away any woman or womankind; he shall be put to death.
8th. If any person shall bear false witness maliciously and on purpose to take away any person’s life; he shall be put to death.
9th. If any man shall traitorously deny his Clanmother’s right and titles to her Eagle Feathers and Dominions, or shall raise arms to resist her Authority; he shall be put to death.
10th. If any man shall treacherously conspire or publiquely attempt, to invade or surprise any town or towns, fort or forts, within this Government of the Mohawk; he shall be put to death.
11th. If any child or children, above sixteen years of age, and of sufficient understanding, shall smite his or their Natural Mother or Lodgemother, unless thereunto provoked and foret for the self preservation from death or mayming, then at the complaint of the said Mother and Lodgemother, and not otherwise, they being sufficient witnesses thereof; that child or those children so offending shall be put to death.
12th. If any stubborn and rebellious son or sons, above sixteen years of age, and of sufficient understanding, shall not obey the voice of his or their Natural Mother or Lodgemother, and that when the said Mother or Lodgemother have chastened such son or sons will not hearken unto them, then at the complaint of the said Mother and Lodgemother, and not otherwise, they being sufficient witnesses thereof; that son or those sons so offending shall be put to death.
7th PAGE.
13th. If any unmarryed man above twentyeight years of age and under fortytwo years of age shall maliciously and on purpose refuse wedlock for over fourteen days with any marryed woman under sixtythree years of age, said marryed woman having borne a son, or unmarryed woman under sixtythree years of age; he shall be put to death.
14th. If any person shall maliciously and on purpose deny any marryed woman wedlock with two husbands, said marryed woman having borne a son, or any unmarryed woman wedlock with one husband; he shall be put to death.
15th. If any marryed man shall lye with a woman by carnal copulation, other than his one wife; he shall be put to death.
16th. If any marryed woman shall lye with a man by carnal copulation, other than her two husbands or one husband; she shall be put to death.
17th. If any unmarryed man shall lye with a woman by carnal copulation; he shall be whipt thirteen strokes, unless he hath his Natural Mother or Lodgemother authority, in which case he shall not be punished.
18th. If any unmarryed woman shall lye with a man by carnal copulation; she shall be whipt three strokes, unless she hath her Natural Mother or Lodgemother authority, in which case she shall not be punished.
19th. If any person shall geld any man or mankind to take away generative power or virility; he shall be put to death.
20th. If any person shall geld any woman or womankind; he shall be put to death.