A question posed of a Historian writing about Chinese and Japanese History:
Does a culture that allows men to marry more than one woman, but not vice versa, a culture which does not stratify people based on gender? Does a woman who is a second, third, or fourth wife feel that she is equal to her husband?
Well I looked into polygamy and Mormons. I’m not mormon and I am not certain what life is like for women in Mormon country but from wiki I gathered a few things
1) Early Mormons were “comparatively women-friendly”. While they practiced polygyny they also experimented in polyandry! So perhaps polygamy is fine
if equal.
2) The Early Mormon church rejected the Augustinian doctrine of original sin, which held that humanity inherits the sin of Adam and Eve in which they ate the forbidden fruit. This sin was historically blamed on Eve, and was thought to be the source of women's submissive and dependent state. Mormonism rejects the doctrine of original sin.
3) In all frontier areas, women took a more prominent role than they would have in the East.
4) Because it was a new religion the promotion of women's rights, within a in the secular sphere, allowed women in Utah, to work toward equality in sacred matters.
5) Women in Mormon
Fundamentalist Mormon groups are treated
unequally.
This means that it is more likely that women in a liberal Muslim society, like the one Sam has in mind (where homosexual Muslims are normal) would probably afford women more rights versus a fundamental Muslim society.
If two in every one hundred men decide to marry one extra wife, then there will be virtually no effect. Besides, your example from slaves to women doesn’t work well for me. Accepting institutionalized slavery only affects your view on slaves, just as polygamy affects only your view on marriage. Not women.
I will agree with you on this much: Polygamy affects only your view on marriage. Yes this is true. But Qur’anic doctrine isn’t one of polygamy it’s one of
polygyny. I think that a society the accepts marital discrimination based on sex will have an effect on the society. Honestly, a society that acceptes
polyandry is probably more liberal than one that is monogamist.
The West entered the industrial revolution because of its success in WW2. America wanted slaves (Africans), and benefited through them by free labour. America would have run better with the free labour, and it would have been completely protected from any possible pre-emptive strikes by the likes of Japan/Russia.
I just have no idea what’s going on here. The Industrial revolution happened in England and happened centuries before. Basically Slavery is in antithesis towards industrial progress. No nation that accepted Slavery has undergone an industrial revolution.
How in the world you can think that things would be better for Americans, Japanese and Germans had America enslaved the Germans and Japanese is beyond me. I think your judgment is clouded on this matter.
Can you imagine what it would take to enslave AlQuida members in Afghanistan? Lets say after every American war campaign any people they rounded up they then set about turning into slaves. Probably right now you are thinking – it wouldn’t happen. Make no mistake, it would happen - of that there is certainty. But what it would require to degrade, humiliate and break a human spirit – to turn someone into a Slave - does harm to both people.
Slavery is evil and thank the Gods Americans never made Japanese or Germans into Slaves.
We will agree to disagree. Forget the Slavery example.
Why do they do it? Because they can.
This doesn’t make sense. American, England, Germany, ect.. all gave women legal equality without a Dictator. It was the men themselves after all who demanded that women to be treated equally.
How long have you lived in these democracies to truly know? I’ve lived in a Muslim democracy (Turkey) for quite a while, and I can tell you first-hand that women are treated equally. Women can dress as they please, people have their own religions and aren’t scared of it, women occupy all sorts of jobs, etc. Before you actually live and experience a democracy mostly involved of Muslims, you can’t really put your say in it.
Would you say that present day Turkish people are more, or less, fundamentally Religious when compared to people living in say Pakistan or KSA?
Often the Turkish people I talk to tell me that Turkey is part of Europe. Always has been. That’s why they removed Arabic and revived Turkish. I wonder: Is Turkey culturally European? I do like going to eat and watch belly dancers
I even gave it a go once to the horror of my then girl friend (lifting up my shirt was a little too much!)
What answer do you propose? You adore criticizing answers, but abhor offering them.
What do you mean? I gave my (A) (B) (C) hypothesis in addition to monogamy.
Let’s see, Women Rights, as in Legal Equality, can be arrived at from more than one avenue and I agree one avenue may be that of a liberal dictator.
This still doesn’t explain why the people themselves choose (of their own accord) to mistreat women.
Of course this assumes women are in a fight with patriarchical societies. In early Japan women may have been equal. The Japanese didn’t write themselves, but in the earliest written history of Japan the Chinese wrote that there was no social distinction between men and women and there were women rulers in Japan (this may have been propaganda though). Also, Shinto (prior to Buddhism) was a strongly matriarchal religion. It’s been suggested that it was the Chinese ideas of social order and “civilization” that introduced Patriarchy to the Japanese. So, perhaps one manner in which women are equal is one in which the early Mother Earth Shamanism is never abandoned for a male-dominated Religion and women are consistently valued as important leaders in the arts, sciences, and politics.
As for our male-deity dominated religious societies I’d say these can play a role:
1) Separation of church and state – that is, a secular government.
2) Secular societies tend to be religiously liberal.
3) Equality in marriage (that is, if there is polygyny there is also polyandry)
4) Women are needed to work and are therefore able to work.
5) Strong liberal Dictator with a penchant for women rights.
Well what about the Middle East?
1) Separation of church and state – that is, a secular society.
In the middle east, there has rarely been a successful separation of church and state. While they have known of these ideas since being conquered by the Greeks in 300BCE it’s never taken root. In the past dictators/emperors/kings claimed divine validity - hence there was little incentive to separate their own authority from that of whichever God they were representing. This was the case pre-Islam and this is still the case.
2) Secular societies tend to be religiously liberal.
All ME societies are male-dominated and this is reflected in that all of the successful religions in the ME have a patriarchal God-head (pre-Islam and post-Islam).
3) Equality in marriage (that is, if there is polygyny there is also polyandry)
For Islamic counties polygyny is acceptable while polyandry is not. This is not conducive towards female equality (see opening question)
4) Women are needed to work and are therefore able to work.
If I am not mistaken I think most women are wanted to create god-awful large Catholic-sized families/mini-tribes. It’s kind of hard to have equality while prego 9 months out of every 10. That said, I do think in wealthy pre-Gulf war I Iraq women were finally given a go and things were looking up – for a bit.
5) Strong liberal Dictator with a penchant for women rights.
It certainly is possible in combination with a will of the people. Mao together with his Communist Manefesto promoted female legal equality and it really did work in China.
As for Turkey, Atatürk in his own words:
"
the social change can come by (1) educating capable mothers who are knowledgeable about life; (2) giving freedom to women; (3) a man can change his morals, thoughts, and feelings by leading a common life with a woman; as there is an inborn tendency towards the attraction of mutual affection.
[OMG Qa`Dark
that's what I said - remember regarding monogamy!!!
]
Atatürk decreed that the religious insignia (aka veil and turban) used outside times of worship was to be considered antiquated and not forward looking even the fez was considered “a symbol of oriental backwardness” and thus banned.
Atatürk again "
everything we see on Earth is the product of women" and the Turkish woman should be brought to the status which she deserved. The place of women in Kemal's cultural reforms was best expressed in the civic book that was prepared under his supervision.[57] Kemal said that "
there was no logical explanation for the political disenfranchisement of women. Any hesitation and negative mentality on this subject is nothing more than a fading social phenomenon of the past. ……Women must have the right to vote and to be elected; because democracy dictates that, because there are interests that women must defend, and because there are social duties that women must perform.
Polygamy in the Ottoman Empire, which was an accepted social phenomenon of Muslim Arab society even today, under Atatürk's reforms
polygamy was made illegal.
Atatürk's promoted secularism together with a modernization drive and a desire to be more European.
IMHO, it seems that Turkey is more liberal and have granted women legal equality
in spite of Islam - certainly not due to it. Just look at Atatürk's reforms
- secularization (reducing the influence of Islam in daily life)
- changing the language from Arabic to Turkish
- making polygamy illegal
- reducing even the outward religious attire (aka liberalizing a more secular society)
- banning slavery
- Accepted the
Swiss European civil code which defined the rights of women in a marriage as equal to men.
Even when he married Lâtife Uşaklıgil he did so with a
civil ceremony in contrast to a religious one.
Well, how is that that for an answer? Me and Atatürk seem to be on the same wavelength here!
Michael
