altmuslimah.com - Domestic violence: The Saudi bitch slap

The blogs are lighting up with ridicule after a Saudi judge declared this past weekend that husbands can slap their wives on the face if they blow their husband’s money. One headline declared: “Saudi judge says it’s OK to bitch slap your wife.” Said a blogger: “Just more of those Muslim family values in action, folks!” Another headline laid out the news: “Saudi Sharia Judge: Slap the Bitch...”

For my part, I’m thrilled the judge said what he did - and got busted for it.

But first, let’s start with the facts. The incident occurred at, of all places, a conference on domestic violence, sanctioned by the Saudi royal family. During the conference, Sheik Hamad bin Mohammed Al-Razine, a judge in the Saudi city of Jeddah, tried to explain an increase in spousal abuse by suggesting spendthrift women were partly to blame, a Saudi newspaper reports.

“If a person gives SR1,200 [$320] to his wife and she spends SR900 [$240] to purchase an abaya [a full black gown worn mostly with a face veil or head covering] from a brand shop and if her husband slaps her on the face as a reaction to her action, she deserves that punishment,” he said, according to an Arab News account. Women in the audience jeered loudly—but because Saudi judges are also Islamic clerics, their comments are influential.

CNN picked up the comment, and the incident has become yet another battle in the struggle for reform in the Muslim world of the modern day. Razine’s statement is emblematic of a disturbing interpretation of Islam exported from Saudi Arabia to the far corners of the world, and we’re better served as a global society every time the absurdity of this ideology is exposed.

To me, the issue of religiously mandated violence against women is part of a continuum of literalist interpretation of the Quran that includes banning women from driving, segregating women, allowing forced marriages of underage girls, and, ultimately, sanctioning intolerance and targeted violence against civilians of the kind perpetuated by al Qaeda. The way I see it, the Muslim world will be stuck in the Dark Ages as long as men with ideologies like this judge’s remain in positions of power, just as the West was crippled as long as preachers, judges, and politicians argued that the Bible sanctioned slavery, segregation, and sexism.

In this case, the debate over the right of Muslim men to “bitch slap” their wives underscores a literal read of verse 4:34 of the Quran, which states, according to a direct translation, that it’s OK to “beat (lightly)” a disobedient wife as an option of third resort after admonishing her and then turning away from her in bed. Trying to reconcile this literal read with the 21st century has led to something I call “the 4:34 dance,” where imams from Saudi Arabia to Texas have extolled the virtues of various degrees of abuse, from wet noodles to yardsticks.

In Woman in the Shade of Islam, a book widely available in mosques and on such Web sites as the online library of Young Muslims of Canada, Saudi sheik and author Abdur-Rahman A. Al-Sheeha advocates a special brand of domestic violence: “Beating without hurting, breaking a bone, leaving blue or black marks on the body and avoiding hitting the face, at any cost.” This book was handed to me at my mosque in Morgantown, W.Va., where we once got a visit from a Muslim preacher who was on record saying it was OK to hit a woman with a yardstick or “rolled up newspaper.”

The latest controversy over the Saudi judge’s remarks underscores the strange challenges facing Muslims in the 21st century on so many levels. The judge assumed that the buck—or Saudi riyal, in this case—stops with the husband, an ironic presumption considering that in the seventh century the prophet Muhammad’s first wife was his boss, Khadija, a successful caravan merchant who proposed to him. Second, the judge used the purchase of an extravagant abaya as justification for abuse when in the seventh century of Islam women of Muslim society weren’t even required to wear these suffocating coverings, which women in Saudi Arabia are expected to wear today.

And, of all things, the judge was speaking at a seminar organized by the National Family Safety Program, a seemingly well-intentioned initiative started in 2005 in an attempt to curb child abuse and domestic violence in Saudi Arabia. A princess, Seetah bint Abdul Aziz, is listed as the head of the program, and another princess, Adila bint Abdullah, is deputy chairwoman. The topic of this weekend’s seminar was “The Role of Judicial and Security Institutions in Fighting Family Violence.”

In the wake of such gruesome murders as the beheading earlier this year of a young mother, Aasiya Hassan, in Orchard Park, N.Y., allegedly by her husband, Muzzamil Hassan, the co-founder of an American Muslim TV enterprise, American Muslims have tried to challenge interpretations like the one put forth by the Saudi judge. But the judge’s statement reveals that we need a serious reprogramming initiative that rejects prevailing backward notions, like the idea that “bitch slaps” are OK, and sets forth a very simple interpretation of Islam toward domestic violence: zero tolerance.

(Photo: Jennifer Hayes)

Asra Q. Nomani is the author of Standing Alone: An American Woman's Struggle for the Soul of Islam. She can be reached at . This article was originally published in The Daily Beast.

I completely agree that we need to vigorously advocate on behalf of a zero tolerance policy when it comes to domestic violence. It is absurd to debate over degrees of abuse—it sends a completely negative message to both men and women and allows abusers to hide behind faulty logic based on purported religious support for their abusive behavior.

I did, however, find some of Asra’s statements in this article to be a stretch.

For instance, she wrote: “To me, the issue of religiously mandated violence against women is part of a continuum of literalist interpretation of the Quran that includes banning women from driving, segregating women, allowing forced marriages of underage girls, and, ultimately, sanctioning intolerance and targeted violence against civilians of the kind perpetuated by al Qaeda.“

While I followed along until the end of this sentence, I was perplexed by the jump from discrimination and violence against women to acts of terrorism against the general population. While I agree that some have used literalist interpretations of the Quran to promote biased views towards women, I don’t think it is fair to lump that together with those who use the Quran to justify acts of terrorism. We have go guard against overly generalized statements that wrap abusers into the same fold as terrorists. The number of purported “terrorists” would sky-rocket if every man who abuses his wife was to be considered a terrorist.

In the following paragraph Asra writes that “The way I see it, the Muslim world will be stuck in the Dark Ages as long as men with ideologies like this judge’s remain in positions of power, just as the West was crippled as long as preachers, judges, and politicians argued that the Bible sanctioned slavery, segregation, and sexism.“

I think this oversimplifies the issue and draws a false dichotomy between East and West. There are still many men in power in the “West” who sanction sexism. That is apparent, for instance, in the debates regarding the role of women in the Catholic church. It is also apparent in the fact that women in America still earn less for the same work than their male counterparts.

Secondly, slavery and segregation are outlawed in every country in the world now, not just western countries. The real issue is how well the laws are implemented.

The title is funny.

I had noted in an earlier comment that a Syrian traditionally-trained shaikh talked about the Arabic not translating to “beat” although the English has been used that way. I think the word is “dharaba”. It has “DRB” as its root consonants, which is used in other parts of the Quran that do not indicate physical beating. One is where it says the “khimar” is to cover the chest (as the women in pre-Islamic Arabia didn’t cover it up at all). In any case, there’s no violence involved.

The other example of the root word I saw, but which may need more exploration, was something about a dam and water. To me it didn’t seem to indicate beating, but some sort of physical separation. It would make sense in the context of marital problems, and the rest of the verse.

The other thing is that outside the context of warfare, the Quran mentions ‘curbing ones’s hands’ and restraining anger.

So I am not sure why anyone can honestly justify slapping a wife for going crazy at the abaya store.

@uma1:

I don’t think Asra was lumping violent husbands with terrorists. I believe she was focusing on the continuum of results that come from a literalist interpretation of the Qur’an. She seems to be referencing Wahabbism.

As for the East/West comparison, I agree that there are sexist elements in Western culture, but they are not the dominant position and either exist at the fringes of society or are constantly pushing up against a wave of reform (like the equal pay issue).

This judge made these remarks at an anti-domestic-violence seminar. He’s attempting to redefine domestic violence in a way that broadens permissive behavior. It’s calculated and thoughtful. And that’s scary.

That said, I think it’s unfair of Asra to characterize all of the Muslim world as living in the ‘Dark Ages.‘ Saudi maybe, but not all of the Muslim world.

@Asma: For many of us, humanity is the thread between religious and what we call “secular” - the world around us. But that is also why the idea of a “religious Muslim lobby”, which may behave like a political entity that can potentially co-opt individuals, is not wholly desirable and maybe not completely organic.

It makes it seem like the interest is narrow, parochial, and potentially unaccomodating, instead of universally resonating. Muslims have historically been able to absorb and add to the cultures around them. Also, an overly taxonomical categorization may work against being truly able to create coalitons of common interests between groups that may disagree on a few issues. Those coalitions are vital given that political actors know we live in a global society of not only cultural and ethnic, but religious diversity.

Also, the idea might perpetuate the new immigrant trend of “self-ghettoization” which, as one scholar (who I won’t name) said, isn’t healthy.

I still think it can be acknowledged that its easier and more obvious that minority networks develop, especially given the family-like dynamics of Muslim societies. For others, networks develop within the majority Judeo-Christian culture and so they might be less conspicuous.

The political interest lies is being able to work toward civil rights issues (but coalitons with other groups have often formed), being able to understand and explain trends in Muslim or otherwise native countries, and being able to counter extreme ideologies using sound scholarship. The last is important as a way to mitigate extremism while lessening the need for the military option overseas.

One of the biggest problems is that women continue the cyycle. The reconstruct and allow the cycle of their oppression to continue through their support of stereotypes, for me and women. It’s definitely something that I struggle with my family, who are all middle eastern and Muslim. And when I attempt to argue with them about the stereotypes and question why they say what they say, I get labeled as a “liberal American” or as “apart of them.“

The problem with people just believing in traditions and religion all the time is that they become blind followers instead of inquisitive followers. If Allah is truly as might and powerful as we believe him/her to be than human questioning should not be a threat to his/her power. I think it’s ridiculous that some Muslims think questioning God and the Quran is being ‘unfaithful’ or ‘heretic.‘

Everyone has been blessed with the power to think, I just wish some people would use that power intelligently.


	Login \| Register				Sunday, March 14, 2010 \| 29 Rabi al-Awwal 1431