Summary
The article critiques the constructed notion of the “ideal Muslimah,” highlighting how Muslim women in public spaces face unrealistic expectations, and clarifies that early Muslim women combined piety with strong personalities, independence, and active societal roles.
IT IS HUMAN nature to be hyper aware and critical of those in the public eye, and Muslims are no different. Imams, shuyûkh, and other popular figures in the Muslim public sphere are all subject to scrutiny and fascination.
Muslim women who are engaged in the public sphere are even more vulnerable to criticism. Every aspect of their lives – whether it’s their marital status, the color of their hijabs and jilbâbs, how many children they have or (God forbid they get a divorce!) why they weren’t good enough wives to begin with (and how their publicity was probably the reason for it) – is up for discussion by the general masses, who are vicious critics with lots of sanctimonious self-righteousness and very little ḥusn al-ẓann (benefit of the doubt).
No matter how religious or scholarly, Muslim women who find themselves having a public presence are always expected to fit a very specific mould – one of the ‘ideal Muslimah.’
However, this ‘ideal Muslimah’ is fictional: it was not fully embodied even by the best of women, the wives of the Prophet ﷺ, his female Companions, and the women of the Tâbiʿîn. We have allowed ourselves to create a false narrative that the women of those times spoke only in a certain way, dressed only in a certain way, and interacted with society at large in a very limited and specific way. We have been led to believe that they were devoid of personality quirks, strong opinions, and personal conflicts with even their husbands; we have been led to believe that they were Madonnas whose piety ensured a lack of normal humanity.
Yet none of this is true. It is true that they were women of taqwa; women of knowledge, wisdom and understanding; women of modesty and chastity; women who were dedicated to the worship of Allah. But they were also women who chose to lead armies into battle; women who not only disagreed with their husbands, but insisted on following their own opinions; women who were passionate and did not allow others to dictate how they would speak or behave.
One such woman was ʿÂishah bint >alḥa ibn ʿUbaydillâh. Her father was the Sahabi >alḥa ibn ʿUbaydullâh, her mother was Umm Kulthûm bint Abi Bakr Al-Siddîq, and her aunt was Umm al-Mu’minîn ʿÂishah bint Abi Bakr.
ʿÂishah bint >alḥa was a muḥadditha (scholar of Hadith), a faqîha (jurist), a muftiyya (one who issues non-binding legal rulings), and an ʿabida (worshiper) who was considered nearly equal to ʿÂishah bint Abi Bakr, the Prophet’s wife, in piety, knowledge, and intellect.
She was also known to be the most beautiful woman of Madinah, a woman who had three husbands, and who was unmatched in the sheer force of her personality.
She also did not cover her face. Though she observed hijab and covered herself with a khimâr and jilbâb, she left her face bare – and as a result, her beauty became famed both within Madinah and outside of it.
It is narrated that once ʿAishah got into a fight with her husband ʿAbdullâh ibn ʿAbd Al-Raḥmân ibn Abi Bakr Al-Ṣiddîq and left her home in a state of fury. On her way to Al-Masjid Al-Nabawy, where she was going to visit her aunt ʿÂishah, she came across the Sahabi Abu Hurairah. In shock, he stared at her and exclaimed, “SubḥânAllah! I’ve just seen one of the Hûr Al-ʿÎn!” (As for the fight with her husband – ʿÂishah stayed with her aunt for four months before she decided to go back home.)
Anas ibn Mâlik once told her directly, “By Allah, I have never seen anyone more beautiful than you other than Muʿawiyah ibn Abi Sufyân when he is sitting on the minbar of RasûlAllâh!” Her response was one of complete self-assurance. “By Allah, I am more beautiful than a powerful flame seen by a man who is freezing on an icy night!”
Imagine how such a woman would be considered today – a woman who has the audacity to reply with such confidence, who not only acknowledges what others say about her, but emphasizes it. (And forget about a woman who leaves her husband’s home in anger and doesn’t go back until she so chooses!)
One point of note is that ʿÂishah demonstrated that it was apparently not considered harâm for her to leave her husband’s home without his permission; after all, she spent the duration of those four months in the home of Umm Al-Mu’minîn ʿÂishah. If she had committed a sin in doing so, wouldn’t her aunt have rebuked her and sent her back to her husband? The situation was a far cry from what we hear from many people today – that for a woman to even step foot outside of her husband’s home without his permission is wrong; that for a woman to leave her husband’s home out of anger is tantamount to minor kufr!
Her second husband, Musʿab ibn Al-Zubair, was a man who loved her deeply and began to feel jealous over the fact that her beauty was so obvious to all who saw her. One day he told her, “Either stay within your home or cover your face when you go out!”
Her reply?
Allah has given me this distinction of beauty, so I want people to look upon me and know my virtue over them; I will never cover it when it comes from Allah. And by Allah, Allah knows that there is no fault in my character upon which anyone can comment!
The narrator who was relating this story to Imam Al-Ṣafadi commented, “This was true. She was extremely strong in character, and that was what the women of Banu Taym were like.” In this incident, what stands out is that – lack of niqâb aside – this was a clear case of a man commanding his wife to do something… and the wife choosing to follow her own fiqh opinion in the full confidence that she was not doing something displeasing to Allah. While one may disagree with her choice not to wear niqâb, it is particularly intriguing that for a woman known to be one of the greatest Tâbiʿiyyât of her time. She was described as thiqa (strong and trustworthy in the Science of Hadith) by Yaḥya ibn Maʿîn, Al-Dâraquṭni, Imam Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal and others; she was also classified as ḥujja (one whose statements and actions are used as evidence in legal matters), which is a category very few individuals were considered worthy of. Also, she defied what is commonly taught as a primary requirement in the marital relationship: the unwavering obedience of a wife to her husband in absolutely every sphere of life. Obviously, it is undeniable that Allah gave men the role of qawwâm (guardian – a man responsible towards the women of his family) – but perhaps it is also time for us to acknowledge that over time, Muslims have over-exaggerated what that role entails. The Sahaba and Tâbiʿîn, it appears, did not have such a stringent concept of wifely submission to a husband’s every whim and desire. Examples from her life were recorded in the books of fiqh. After the death of ʿÂishah’s first husband, Musʿab ibn Al-Zubair proposed marriage to her, but for one reason or another, she refused to accept… and went as far as swearing an oath of dhihâr. “If I marry him, he will be forbidden to me like my father’s back!” she declared. It was an unprecedented moment of Islamic jurisprudence. For one reason or another, she eventually relented, and the scholarly decision was that she needed to pay an expiation for her oath. As kaffâra (expiation), she bought and freed a slave worth 2,000 dinars. On another occasion, she swore an oath of dhihâr once again – and again, to her husband Musʿab. She locked herself in her rooms and refused to allow him anywhere near her, reminding him of her oath, though he begged and pleaded to be able to even speak to her. In the end, he summoned ʿÂmir Al-Shaʿbi, the faqîh of Kufa, to discuss the matter with ʿÂishah. Having had a change of heart, she asked ʿÂmir Al-Shaʿbi how to resolve the matter. His fatwah was that the oath was invalid, and that she was required to pay the kaffâra. She agreed with his conclusion, and allowed Musʿab to return to her. In appreciation, she gave ʿÂmir Al-Shaʿbi 4,000 dirhams for his efforts in solving the fiqh conundrum. There are numerous other stories from ʿÂishah bint >alḥa’s life that demonstrates just how different she was from our preconceived notions of what ‘true scholarship’ was like. Today, a woman who conducts herself in such a manner would never be accepted as a person of righteousness and authority. She would be spoken of in harsh terms, accused of being a ‘fitna’ (temptation, tough test) to those around her, denied any public position of Islamic education to the masses. Yet in ʿÂ’ishah bint >alḥa’s time, she was considered to be a woman of extreme piety and worship, a woman who taught men of the Tâbiʿîn, a woman who was recorded as being a muḥadditha, a faqîha, and a muftiyya. Despite all these stories that were known about her, no one seem to have found a contradiction in the fact that she spoke and behaved in such a way, and that she was still such a woman of righteousness. There were many Sahabah who lived at her time, yet they apparently accepted her for the way she was. What we can learn from ʿÂ’ishah bint >alḥa’s life is not necessarily to derive fiqh opinions about niqâb or dhihâr –or whether wives can walk out on their husbands– but rather to reflect upon how we consider women, their personalities and their conduct, and their presence in the public sphere. Our ideas of what an ‘appropriate Muslim woman’ is meant to be has been so clouded by our own filters – both cultural ones and Islamicly justified ones – that we fail to realize that the greatest generations of Muslims often had very different ideas of what was considered acceptable. Though we have come to believe that a pious woman is a silent woman, or a woman who restricts any and all aspects of herself to the private setting, or a woman whose public presence is as minimal and stark as possible, it is obvious from the biographies of female scholars of the past that this was not always considered the ideal. A woman’s role was seen as far more flexible as it is today; a woman’s ability to stand her ground and be more than automatically obedient was recognized and not castigated. The Ṣahâbiyyât and Tâbiʿyyât lived as normal human beings with emotions, temptations, quirks of personality, issues in their relationships, and so on – yet this did not detract from their greatness as believers and scholars whose worth was recognized. It may just be that we have a great deal of changing to do when it comes to how we perceive and perpetuate ‘the ideal Muslimah’ – whether she is a scholar in the public sphere, an individual in the domestic sphere, or both. For us to be able to raise new generations of heroines of Islam to revitalize the Ummah, it is necessary for us to challenge our own narrow ideas of what type of women those first heroines of Islam were to begin with. (Author’s Note: The source for the narrations about ʿÂishah bint >alḥa were related by Sh. Muhammad Akram Nadwi, referencing Imam Al-Ṣafadi.)Frequently Asked Question
Answering the most relevant questions to help you better understand the article.
The article explains that public Muslim women face intense criticism about personal aspects like appearance, marriage, and behavior from a judgmental audience.
It refers to a socially constructed, unrealistic standard imposed on Muslim women, expecting them to fit a specific, narrow mold.
No. It states that this ideal is fictional and was not fully embodied even by the best generations of Muslim women.
They are portrayed as having limited personalities and passive roles, which the article states is inaccurate.
They had taqwa, knowledge, modesty, and dedication to worship, along with wisdom and understanding.
Yes. The article states they had strong opinions, expressed themselves freely, and were not devoid of individuality.
Yes. Some participated in major societal roles, including leadership and involvement in significant events.
They sometimes disagreed with their husbands and upheld their own views when necessary.
It leads to unfair judgment and unrealistic expectations that ignore the diversity and humanity of real Muslim women.
ʿĀ’ishah bint Ṭalḥah is mentioned as a woman from a prominent family who exemplified strength and individuality.
351 Comments
Fascinating tabaarakAllah. How have I never heard about her before? And what is the argument for women disobeying their husbands?
Wow. There’s so much I want to say but I just… May Allah bless you, Zainab.
This is SO strong and SO powerful, not to mention a blasting eye opener. Do you have the ‘ForgottenHeroines’ compiled as yet ?
Not yet, but very soon inshaAllah – please make du’a for its success :)
Because there is a very concerted effort to *not* share certain information with us.
As for ‘disobedience’ – the point is that the idea of blind obedience for every reason has been driven into us so strongly that the idea that we might actually be allowed to follow our own (Islamic) opinions on various issue seems bizarre.
Sh Akram repeatedly emphasizes the point that Qiwamah is about men making the final decision with regards to the family unit – not over every little thing in a woman’s life.
Awesome, Masha’Allah. Keep them articles comin’.
Yes, yes and well..YES! Masha’Allah keep it coming.
May Allah reward you. Such an eye-opening article.
I LOVE this. This just succinctly sums up a lot of issues many Muslim women struggle with daily. Thank you for this ?
Al-Asbahani reports in Al-Aghaani (vol. 11, p.122)
Al-Husain bin yahya said: Hammad said: My father said: Mus’ab said: Aisha bint Talhah doesn’t cover her face in front of anyone. Mus’ab criticized her for this. So she said: Allah the Most Glorious and High, has given me this distinction of beauty, so I want people to look upon me and know my virtue over them, so it is not for me to cover it. And by Allah, there is no bad character in me which anyone can mention!”
The author of the book is extremely unreliable and reports many lies, according to Ibn Al-Jawzi, Al-Khateeb Al-Baghdadi, Ibn Taymiya and Al-Dhahabi.
The narrator Al-Husain ibn Yahya is majhool (unknown). A narrator must be know and trustworthy.
Hammad’s narration from his father is disconnected.
The father of Hammad had not been considered trustworthy excepy by Ibn Habban, and if Ibn Habban is alone in this ruling, the scholars of hadeeth don’t consider it.
This is the source of As-Safadi’s report in al-Wafi (vol. 16, p. 343) which he mentioned without a chain.
Bottom line: Extremely weak report
Is there really a fiqh opinion (other than her actions) which states that it’s ok for women to go out without permission of the husband for a long period of time under circumstances like this? It’s an honest question.
great article btw :)
Though I understand the essence of the article, a guy’s comment on the website says that the chain of narrationof the stories are extremely weak or fabricated, if that’s true it would be quite un-salafistic to use them.
please reply to that one if you have time.
I’m posting this response from a reliable student of knowledge (not on FB)- this is with no offense, of course:
“Jazakum Allahu Khairan for your efforts. A few points: Most of the stories mentioned about her by As-Safadi and by Al-Asfahani in Al-Aghani are extremely weak or fabricated, especially the part of her refusing to cover her face, as well as the companions praising her for her beauty. So basic any lessons derived from that have no basis. If we were to assume the report was authentic that she left her husbands house, then the full report is that her husband swore he will not have relations with her (eelaa’). So obviously she has grounds to leave, and he didn’t expect her to stay. The scholars obliging a woman to seek permission to leave the house is based on authentic hadeeths of the Prophet (praise and be peace be upon him), nothing more.
A woman can have a strong personality and have strong influence in society, but within the bounds of the laws set by Allah and His Messenger.
Please consider these few points, and Jazakum Allahu Khairan. (1 of 2)
Continued:
”
Al-Asbahani reports in Al-Aghaani (vol. 11, p.122)
Al-Husain bin yahya said: Hammad said: My father said: Mus’ab said: Aisha bint Talhah doesn’t cover her face in front of anyone. Mus’ab criticized her for this. So she said: Allah the Most Glorious and High, has given me this distinction of beauty, so I want people to look upon me and know my virtue over them, so it is not for me to cover it. And by Allah, there is no bad character in me which anyone can mention!”
The author of the book is extremely unreliable and reports many lies, according to Ibn Al-Jawzi, Al-Khateeb Al-Baghdadi, Ibn Taymiya and Al-Dhahabi.
The narrator Al-Husain ibn Yahya is majhool (unknown). A narrator must be know and trustworthy.
Hammad’s narration from his father is disconnected.
The father of Hammad had not been considered trustworthy excepy by Ibn Habban, and if Ibn Habban is alone in this ruling, the scholars of hadeeth don’t consider it.
This is the source of As-Safadi’s report in al-Wafi (vol. 16, p. 343) which he mentioned without a chain.
Bottom line: Extremely weak report”
Putting aside the discussion of authenticity, I think it’s more interesting to point out that the sahabah and the tabi’een were normal human beings (and that it’s ok to be normal), but I disagree with using this to say it’s ok to not be the “Ideal Muslimah”.
If I pick a Companion like Zubayr ibn-al Awwam, he was known as being particularly harsh as a husband. I would not lionize his harshness as a type of allowable quirk that we would say is not only found in men today, but in men of the past as well. I would say these are not ideal characteristics, and the most ideal are found in the best of men, the Prophets and Messengers.
If i were to point out the ideal female role models to follow, then I would look at the four the Prophet (SAW) stated had perfected iman – Fatimah bint Muhammad, Maryam bint Imran, Khadijah bint Khuwalid, and Asiyah zawjat Fir’aun.
For everyone else, there’s a mix of good and bad characteristics – we should strive for the good and not make their bad characteristics an excuse, anymore than we would make adultery an excuse because certain Companions fell into it.
Neveen Wahab Jazaakillaahi khayran for sharing. If that is correct, then Allah knows best and obviously, my point is definitely not to these stories as a basis of fiqh opinions regarding niqab or otherwise. And obviously, there’s definitely no call for disobeying Allah and His Messenger (sallAllahu ‘alayhi wa sallam).
Aishah M Nasarruddin Definitely not claiming that her actions are the basis of a fiqh opinion, but I for one would like to see more about just how ‘obligatory’ it is for a woman to be so stringently held to the idea that her husband is able to command her in every aspect of her life, even if she disagrees with it (and it doesn’t involve disobedience to Allah).
Siraaj Muhammad Obviously, no one is trying to encourage bad character or outright disobedience. However, the point I’m trying to make is that we have constructed ‘the ideal Muslimah’ in terms that don’t necessarily reflect the reality of the Sahabiyyaat or Tabi’iyyaat – even if we completely remove the story of A’ishah bint Tal’ha from the equation.
Qasim Neyaz See above.
I guess my point is that contrasting the reality of the Companions against ideal conceptions doesn’t negate the validity of ideal conceptions, it simply means that when we fall short, we can take solace in that the best of mankind also fell short – but we still should strive to hit the ideal.
Perhaps – but women in particular are held to rigorous standards that men rarely, if ever, are.
For example, on the topic of modesty, many will quote Fatimah (radhiAllahu ‘anha) when she said, the best of women are those not seen by men – and that’s used to browbeat women into staying silent and out of sight.
However, how many men will be told about Uthmaan ibn Affan’s modesty, to the extent that the angels were shy of him? Nope, then we just get to hear, “Well technically a man’s awrah is navel to the knees so it’s all cool.”
so is it that we need to relax standards on women from ideal to less than ideal, or is that we need to raise standards on men from less than ideal to ideal? I’d say it’s the latter.
A bit of the latter, but also a good hard look at what ‘ideal’ constitutes – esp for women. How realistic is it considering what we *do* see from the Sahabiyyaat?
Again – if we take the standards of “the ideal Muslimah” as considered today and then compare the Sahabiyyaat to them, many of them wouldn’t match up to those unrealistic (and frankly, often unhealthy) standards.
I would say i the ideal Muslimah standard is higher than what we expect of the 4 women who perfected iman, you’d have a point. in the same way if we had an ideal male personality that was out of sync with what the Prophet (SAW) brought or practiced in terms of character or manners.
So if we say modesty and obedience is noble characteristic, I’ll look to the best women quoted and see how they were with their husbands – how was khadijah as a wife? how was fatimah? I wouldn’t look at the woman who has a temper tantrum and makes statements that eventually she admits are wrong and has to pay kaffarah for.
It may be more accurate to say that it’s not as big a deal if we don’t hit the ideal, but that will vary on a case-by-case basis, depending on what ideal was missed.
The point still remains that women are conditioned to believe certain things are the ‘ideal’ (i.e. staying out of sight) – when that *isn’t* the true ideal to begin with.
As I said in the beginning of the article, Muslim women in the public eye are often held to stringent public scrutiny about whether or not they fit that particular ideal – if they dress a certain way, speak a certain way, what their family life is like, how they speak… the list goes on and on. These standards they’re held to are, as I said, both unrealistic and unhealthy, and not what we saw necessarily from the greatest women of Islam – Khadijah (radhiAllahu ‘anha), for all that she was a supportive and loving wife, was no pushover, yet today when women are lectured about being a good wife, the implication is that a good wife *is* a pushover.
So yes, of course we should hold ourselves to high standards – men and women alike – but we also need to look at the standards that we *do* hold as ‘ideal’ for Muslim women, when they’re really just a warped idea of what the true ideal Muslim women of our history were like.
I agree that it’s easy to fall into extremes when citing an ideal – completely out of sight is impractical and unhealthy. However, to claim that there is no encouragement to minimize outside ventures, that there is no virtue or value in remaining home would not be accurate either. There is encouragement to remain home, but the difference is more about what is required vs what is encouraged, fatwa vs taqwa. I think conflating the two can lead to extremes, one which you are mentioning, but another in which we act such encouragement doesn’t exist because western culture frowns upon such ideals.
Yes, there are the two extremes, both of which we see in our community (along the spectrum)… but among ‘conservatives,’ the “ideal Muslimah” standard remains very strong in perpetuating a very specific idea of what a Muslim woman *should* be like.
I’m not denying it exists, what I’m saying is that in trying to counter one extreme, you may be perpetuating another by not clarifying what the ideal to strive for should be.
Why must there be an assumption that countering one extreme means encouraging another? Why isn’t the point that we need to change our attitudes from an unhealthy one, to a more realistic one, enough? Why must there be a presumption that to shift our perceptions requires going contrary to what *is* established in the Qur’an and Sunnah?
It doesn’t have to, but when you present one extreme and demonstrate another as some type of virtue, you automatically perpetuate the other extreme.
As I said earlier, if we did this for men, I could choose az-Zubayr ibn-alAwwaam and say, “Why do modern feminists act as though men should be kind and emasculated? Look at az-Zubayr, he was harsh and yet Abu Bakr married his daughter to him. Women should not have this ideal of a romantic gentleman in mind, they should be willing to put up with his harshness if he’s “religious” enough.”
The counter response would be that isn’t ideal behavior, we should look to the Prophet (saw) and see what he said. Likewise, the same is true of women. If there are extremes in the ideal perpetuated, then lets talk about what the ideal should look like, not make what isn’t ideal look as though it’s OK – its not ok, and it should be mentioned that it isn’t.
Zainab Bint Younus so are you saying that since he was harsh and yet still considered to be respectable, we should challenge notions that men can’t be harsh to their wives and still be considered respectable? If yes, then at least you’d be consistent between both genders.
But if not, then you should again be consistent and agree that because someone was considered respectable doesn’t mean that everything about them was respectable, and that we should not look at that as acceptable for ourselves, but rather, something to remove from our character.
I suspect she was able to get away with much because of her beauty, very similar to how ‘Umar reminded Hafsa not to backtalk to the Prophet (SAW) like ‘Aisha because the former didn’t have what the latter had.
Consistency *is* what I’m looking for. People do say such things about male Sahabah; shouldn’t we recognize that the same applies the other way around?
The issue is *not* that the behaviour is to be encouraged, but that someone can have done XYZ and 1) it either was not as severe as we make it out to be today and/or 2) it doesn’t mean that they cannot be considered, in general, individuals worthy of respect.
When it comes to women, even a whiff of knowing that she has done ABC becomes a reason to discredit her from any position of authority, or even to accord her respect.
THAT is what needs to change – the idea that a Muslim woman can only be considered worthy of respect/ position of authority if she fully meets a very particular standard, and that she’s automatically UNworthy of that if she exhibits certain (not entirely praiseworthy) characteristics.
No, we shouldn’t, that’s my point – we shouldn’t recognize excuse-making of negative characteristics of anyone to scapegoat personal or social failures.
If an man is guilty of harshness in contradiction to Prophetic advice that the best of us are best to our families, we need to call it out, not look for excuses buried in the mistakes of the Companions like it’s an implicit sunnah.
Take the serial marriage / divorce imams – you’ll find this behavior among the Companions – we respect them still, do we respect those shuyookh and imams who do this, taking into account their full body of work, or does it leave a permanent mark on our opinion of them once we know who they are? I’m all for equality here, treating men and women with the same standard of acceptance or rejection.
THAT IS MY POINT DAMMIT HOLD WOMEN TO THE SAME FLIPPING STANDARDS AND NOT A TOTALLY SEPARATE SET OF UNREALISTIC ONES.
Bloody mansplainers.
http://bitchbuzz.com/library/babe/4591-4913-medium.jpg
http://nancyfriedman.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4f9453ef0133f426db7c970b-pi
Heh, you almost made it through that without femspazzing ;)
Yes, you do want to hold us to the same standards, the problem is you’re moving in the wrong direction – instead of saying that men should be held to the same high standards as women, you’re saying women should be held to the same low standards as men.
Both are equality, but both are not correct.
Or maybe we can all just go about the business of being normal human beings encouraged to better human beings while not expecting one gender to be some bizarre Stepford ideal?!
Does anyone really think Zainab is saying let’s scapegoat to excuse our negative characteristics? I mean, I dont even know her in person and I’m not taking that rather dim view of her words.
Forest for the trees, males….
Tricia Veknach, I know that’s not what’s meant, but that’s what it boils down to. I’ve switched out genders to show how the same position looks when we discuss male Companions of the Prophet. We might make excuses for them, but we wouldn’t say, “no one ostracized them, so we should tolerate this behavior and not ostracize or stigmatize others who fall into this.”
I’m perfectly happy stigmatizing contemporary male leaders who engage in technically halal behaviors that occurred in the past rather than calling on acceptance – I hope women can do the same with their own.
Seems to me there is an assumption that the women described in this article were exhibiting bad characteristics, and so we should not use the male sahaba to excuse their bad characteristics. However I question the assumption that theirs were bad characteristics. In any event, how is a woman being outspoken or simply being beautiful and not wearing niqab on par with a man being harsh towards his wife? Not in the same universe, really.
It was mentioned on multiple occasions she swore mu’sab was like her father’s back and even locked him out. A very harsh thing to do to a spouse. If we heard someone in the modern day doing this, we’d tell them to grow up, act like an adult, and work out their issues. She eventually paid kaffarah for both broken oaths.
Men already hear this type of talk from Muslim leaders. “When Aisha broke her co-wifes plate, look how the Prophet responded.”
As for her choices you mentioned, it isn’t that she made those choices that’s the issue, but that her attitude was harsh and flippant and that it’s made to look on that the means of expression is OK that would be a problem for me. In both males and females, my ideal is respectful discussion, not ad hominems and name calling.
True enough, he was patient with it, but underlying that is a cut at women – women are jealous irrational creatures that you must be patient with. I’m all for patience in conflict, but I also believe in treating women like full adults and saying that is irresponsible behavior no matter if a male or female does it – how you deal with it in the heat of the moment and how we should think of it are two different things.
I guess my point is that contrasting the reality of the Companions against ideal conceptions doesn’t negate the validity of ideal conceptions, it simply means that when we fall short, we can take solace in that the best of mankind also fell short – but we still should strive to hit the ideal.
I guess my point is that contrasting the reality of the Companions against ideal conceptions doesn’t negate the validity of ideal conceptions, it simply means that when we fall short, we can take solace in that the best of mankind also fell short – but we still should strive to hit the ideal.
I guess my point is that contrasting the reality of the Companions against ideal conceptions doesn’t negate the validity of ideal conceptions, it simply means that when we fall short, we can take solace in that the best of mankind also fell short – but we still should strive to hit the ideal.
I guess my point is that contrasting the reality of the Companions against ideal conceptions doesn’t negate the validity of ideal conceptions, it simply means that when we fall short, we can take solace in that the best of mankind also fell short – but we still should strive to hit the ideal.
I guess my point is that contrasting the reality of the Companions against ideal conceptions doesn’t negate the validity of ideal conceptions, it simply means that when we fall short, we can take solace in that the best of mankind also fell short – but we still should strive to hit the ideal.
I guess my point is that contrasting the reality of the Companions against ideal conceptions doesn’t negate the validity of ideal conceptions, it simply means that when we fall short, we can take solace in that the best of mankind also fell short – but we still should strive to hit the ideal.
I guess my point is that contrasting the reality of the Companions against ideal conceptions doesn’t negate the validity of ideal conceptions, it simply means that when we fall short, we can take solace in that the best of mankind also fell short – but we still should strive to hit the ideal.
I guess my point is that contrasting the reality of the Companions against ideal conceptions doesn’t negate the validity of ideal conceptions, it simply means that when we fall short, we can take solace in that the best of mankind also fell short – but we still should strive to hit the ideal.
I guess my point is that contrasting the reality of the Companions against ideal conceptions doesn’t negate the validity of ideal conceptions, it simply means that when we fall short, we can take solace in that the best of mankind also fell short – but we still should strive to hit the ideal.
I guess my point is that contrasting the reality of the Companions against ideal conceptions doesn’t negate the validity of ideal conceptions, it simply means that when we fall short, we can take solace in that the best of mankind also fell short – but we still should strive to hit the ideal.
I guess my point is that contrasting the reality of the Companions against ideal conceptions doesn’t negate the validity of ideal conceptions, it simply means that when we fall short, we can take solace in that the best of mankind also fell short – but we still should strive to hit the ideal.
I guess my point is that contrasting the reality of the Companions against ideal conceptions doesn’t negate the validity of ideal conceptions, it simply means that when we fall short, we can take solace in that the best of mankind also fell short – but we still should strive to hit the ideal.
I guess my point is that contrasting the reality of the Companions against ideal conceptions doesn’t negate the validity of ideal conceptions, it simply means that when we fall short, we can take solace in that the best of mankind also fell short – but we still should strive to hit the ideal.
I guess my point is that contrasting the reality of the Companions against ideal conceptions doesn’t negate the validity of ideal conceptions, it simply means that when we fall short, we can take solace in that the best of mankind also fell short – but we still should strive to hit the ideal.
Perhaps – but women in particular are held to rigorous standards that men rarely, if ever, are.
For example, on the topic of modesty, many will quote Fatimah (radhiAllahu ‘anha) when she said, the best of women are those not seen by men – and that’s used to browbeat women into staying silent and out of sight.
However, how many men will be told about Uthmaan ibn Affan’s modesty, to the extent that the angels were shy of him? Nope, then we just get to hear, “Well technically a man’s awrah is navel to the knees so it’s all cool.”
Perhaps – but women in particular are held to rigorous standards that men rarely, if ever, are.
For example, on the topic of modesty, many will quote Fatimah (radhiAllahu ‘anha) when she said, the best of women are those not seen by men – and that’s used to browbeat women into staying silent and out of sight.
However, how many men will be told about Uthmaan ibn Affan’s modesty, to the extent that the angels were shy of him? Nope, then we just get to hear, “Well technically a man’s awrah is navel to the knees so it’s all cool.”
Perhaps – but women in particular are held to rigorous standards that men rarely, if ever, are.
For example, on the topic of modesty, many will quote Fatimah (radhiAllahu ‘anha) when she said, the best of women are those not seen by men – and that’s used to browbeat women into staying silent and out of sight.
However, how many men will be told about Uthmaan ibn Affan’s modesty, to the extent that the angels were shy of him? Nope, then we just get to hear, “Well technically a man’s awrah is navel to the knees so it’s all cool.”
Perhaps – but women in particular are held to rigorous standards that men rarely, if ever, are.
For example, on the topic of modesty, many will quote Fatimah (radhiAllahu ‘anha) when she said, the best of women are those not seen by men – and that’s used to browbeat women into staying silent and out of sight.
However, how many men will be told about Uthmaan ibn Affan’s modesty, to the extent that the angels were shy of him? Nope, then we just get to hear, “Well technically a man’s awrah is navel to the knees so it’s all cool.”
Perhaps – but women in particular are held to rigorous standards that men rarely, if ever, are.
For example, on the topic of modesty, many will quote Fatimah (radhiAllahu ‘anha) when she said, the best of women are those not seen by men – and that’s used to browbeat women into staying silent and out of sight.
However, how many men will be told about Uthmaan ibn Affan’s modesty, to the extent that the angels were shy of him? Nope, then we just get to hear, “Well technically a man’s awrah is navel to the knees so it’s all cool.”
Perhaps – but women in particular are held to rigorous standards that men rarely, if ever, are.
For example, on the topic of modesty, many will quote Fatimah (radhiAllahu ‘anha) when she said, the best of women are those not seen by men – and that’s used to browbeat women into staying silent and out of sight.
However, how many men will be told about Uthmaan ibn Affan’s modesty, to the extent that the angels were shy of him? Nope, then we just get to hear, “Well technically a man’s awrah is navel to the knees so it’s all cool.”
Perhaps – but women in particular are held to rigorous standards that men rarely, if ever, are.
For example, on the topic of modesty, many will quote Fatimah (radhiAllahu ‘anha) when she said, the best of women are those not seen by men – and that’s used to browbeat women into staying silent and out of sight.
However, how many men will be told about Uthmaan ibn Affan’s modesty, to the extent that the angels were shy of him? Nope, then we just get to hear, “Well technically a man’s awrah is navel to the knees so it’s all cool.”
Perhaps – but women in particular are held to rigorous standards that men rarely, if ever, are.
For example, on the topic of modesty, many will quote Fatimah (radhiAllahu ‘anha) when she said, the best of women are those not seen by men – and that’s used to browbeat women into staying silent and out of sight.
However, how many men will be told about Uthmaan ibn Affan’s modesty, to the extent that the angels were shy of him? Nope, then we just get to hear, “Well technically a man’s awrah is navel to the knees so it’s all cool.”
Perhaps – but women in particular are held to rigorous standards that men rarely, if ever, are.
For example, on the topic of modesty, many will quote Fatimah (radhiAllahu ‘anha) when she said, the best of women are those not seen by men – and that’s used to browbeat women into staying silent and out of sight.
However, how many men will be told about Uthmaan ibn Affan’s modesty, to the extent that the angels were shy of him? Nope, then we just get to hear, “Well technically a man’s awrah is navel to the knees so it’s all cool.”
Perhaps – but women in particular are held to rigorous standards that men rarely, if ever, are.
For example, on the topic of modesty, many will quote Fatimah (radhiAllahu ‘anha) when she said, the best of women are those not seen by men – and that’s used to browbeat women into staying silent and out of sight.
However, how many men will be told about Uthmaan ibn Affan’s modesty, to the extent that the angels were shy of him? Nope, then we just get to hear, “Well technically a man’s awrah is navel to the knees so it’s all cool.”
Perhaps – but women in particular are held to rigorous standards that men rarely, if ever, are.
For example, on the topic of modesty, many will quote Fatimah (radhiAllahu ‘anha) when she said, the best of women are those not seen by men – and that’s used to browbeat women into staying silent and out of sight.
However, how many men will be told about Uthmaan ibn Affan’s modesty, to the extent that the angels were shy of him? Nope, then we just get to hear, “Well technically a man’s awrah is navel to the knees so it’s all cool.”
Perhaps – but women in particular are held to rigorous standards that men rarely, if ever, are.
For example, on the topic of modesty, many will quote Fatimah (radhiAllahu ‘anha) when she said, the best of women are those not seen by men – and that’s used to browbeat women into staying silent and out of sight.
However, how many men will be told about Uthmaan ibn Affan’s modesty, to the extent that the angels were shy of him? Nope, then we just get to hear, “Well technically a man’s awrah is navel to the knees so it’s all cool.”
Perhaps – but women in particular are held to rigorous standards that men rarely, if ever, are.
For example, on the topic of modesty, many will quote Fatimah (radhiAllahu ‘anha) when she said, the best of women are those not seen by men – and that’s used to browbeat women into staying silent and out of sight.
However, how many men will be told about Uthmaan ibn Affan’s modesty, to the extent that the angels were shy of him? Nope, then we just get to hear, “Well technically a man’s awrah is navel to the knees so it’s all cool.”
Perhaps – but women in particular are held to rigorous standards that men rarely, if ever, are.
For example, on the topic of modesty, many will quote Fatimah (radhiAllahu ‘anha) when she said, the best of women are those not seen by men – and that’s used to browbeat women into staying silent and out of sight.
However, how many men will be told about Uthmaan ibn Affan’s modesty, to the extent that the angels were shy of him? Nope, then we just get to hear, “Well technically a man’s awrah is navel to the knees so it’s all cool.”
so is it that we need to relax standards on women from ideal to less than ideal, or is that we need to raise standards on men from less than ideal to ideal? I’d say it’s the latter.
so is it that we need to relax standards on women from ideal to less than ideal, or is that we need to raise standards on men from less than ideal to ideal? I’d say it’s the latter.
so is it that we need to relax standards on women from ideal to less than ideal, or is that we need to raise standards on men from less than ideal to ideal? I’d say it’s the latter.
so is it that we need to relax standards on women from ideal to less than ideal, or is that we need to raise standards on men from less than ideal to ideal? I’d say it’s the latter.
so is it that we need to relax standards on women from ideal to less than ideal, or is that we need to raise standards on men from less than ideal to ideal? I’d say it’s the latter.
so is it that we need to relax standards on women from ideal to less than ideal, or is that we need to raise standards on men from less than ideal to ideal? I’d say it’s the latter.
so is it that we need to relax standards on women from ideal to less than ideal, or is that we need to raise standards on men from less than ideal to ideal? I’d say it’s the latter.
so is it that we need to relax standards on women from ideal to less than ideal, or is that we need to raise standards on men from less than ideal to ideal? I’d say it’s the latter.
so is it that we need to relax standards on women from ideal to less than ideal, or is that we need to raise standards on men from less than ideal to ideal? I’d say it’s the latter.
so is it that we need to relax standards on women from ideal to less than ideal, or is that we need to raise standards on men from less than ideal to ideal? I’d say it’s the latter.
so is it that we need to relax standards on women from ideal to less than ideal, or is that we need to raise standards on men from less than ideal to ideal? I’d say it’s the latter.
so is it that we need to relax standards on women from ideal to less than ideal, or is that we need to raise standards on men from less than ideal to ideal? I’d say it’s the latter.
so is it that we need to relax standards on women from ideal to less than ideal, or is that we need to raise standards on men from less than ideal to ideal? I’d say it’s the latter.
so is it that we need to relax standards on women from ideal to less than ideal, or is that we need to raise standards on men from less than ideal to ideal? I’d say it’s the latter.
A bit of the latter, but also a good hard look at what ‘ideal’ constitutes – esp for women. How realistic is it considering what we *do* see from the Sahabiyyaat?
Again – if we take the standards of “the ideal Muslimah” as considered today and then compare the Sahabiyyaat to them, many of them wouldn’t match up to those unrealistic (and frankly, often unhealthy) standards.
A bit of the latter, but also a good hard look at what ‘ideal’ constitutes – esp for women. How realistic is it considering what we *do* see from the Sahabiyyaat?
Again – if we take the standards of “the ideal Muslimah” as considered today and then compare the Sahabiyyaat to them, many of them wouldn’t match up to those unrealistic (and frankly, often unhealthy) standards.
A bit of the latter, but also a good hard look at what ‘ideal’ constitutes – esp for women. How realistic is it considering what we *do* see from the Sahabiyyaat?
Again – if we take the standards of “the ideal Muslimah” as considered today and then compare the Sahabiyyaat to them, many of them wouldn’t match up to those unrealistic (and frankly, often unhealthy) standards.
A bit of the latter, but also a good hard look at what ‘ideal’ constitutes – esp for women. How realistic is it considering what we *do* see from the Sahabiyyaat?
Again – if we take the standards of “the ideal Muslimah” as considered today and then compare the Sahabiyyaat to them, many of them wouldn’t match up to those unrealistic (and frankly, often unhealthy) standards.
A bit of the latter, but also a good hard look at what ‘ideal’ constitutes – esp for women. How realistic is it considering what we *do* see from the Sahabiyyaat?
Again – if we take the standards of “the ideal Muslimah” as considered today and then compare the Sahabiyyaat to them, many of them wouldn’t match up to those unrealistic (and frankly, often unhealthy) standards.
A bit of the latter, but also a good hard look at what ‘ideal’ constitutes – esp for women. How realistic is it considering what we *do* see from the Sahabiyyaat?
Again – if we take the standards of “the ideal Muslimah” as considered today and then compare the Sahabiyyaat to them, many of them wouldn’t match up to those unrealistic (and frankly, often unhealthy) standards.
A bit of the latter, but also a good hard look at what ‘ideal’ constitutes – esp for women. How realistic is it considering what we *do* see from the Sahabiyyaat?
Again – if we take the standards of “the ideal Muslimah” as considered today and then compare the Sahabiyyaat to them, many of them wouldn’t match up to those unrealistic (and frankly, often unhealthy) standards.
A bit of the latter, but also a good hard look at what ‘ideal’ constitutes – esp for women. How realistic is it considering what we *do* see from the Sahabiyyaat?
Again – if we take the standards of “the ideal Muslimah” as considered today and then compare the Sahabiyyaat to them, many of them wouldn’t match up to those unrealistic (and frankly, often unhealthy) standards.
A bit of the latter, but also a good hard look at what ‘ideal’ constitutes – esp for women. How realistic is it considering what we *do* see from the Sahabiyyaat?
Again – if we take the standards of “the ideal Muslimah” as considered today and then compare the Sahabiyyaat to them, many of them wouldn’t match up to those unrealistic (and frankly, often unhealthy) standards.
A bit of the latter, but also a good hard look at what ‘ideal’ constitutes – esp for women. How realistic is it considering what we *do* see from the Sahabiyyaat?
Again – if we take the standards of “the ideal Muslimah” as considered today and then compare the Sahabiyyaat to them, many of them wouldn’t match up to those unrealistic (and frankly, often unhealthy) standards.
A bit of the latter, but also a good hard look at what ‘ideal’ constitutes – esp for women. How realistic is it considering what we *do* see from the Sahabiyyaat?
Again – if we take the standards of “the ideal Muslimah” as considered today and then compare the Sahabiyyaat to them, many of them wouldn’t match up to those unrealistic (and frankly, often unhealthy) standards.
A bit of the latter, but also a good hard look at what ‘ideal’ constitutes – esp for women. How realistic is it considering what we *do* see from the Sahabiyyaat?
Again – if we take the standards of “the ideal Muslimah” as considered today and then compare the Sahabiyyaat to them, many of them wouldn’t match up to those unrealistic (and frankly, often unhealthy) standards.
A bit of the latter, but also a good hard look at what ‘ideal’ constitutes – esp for women. How realistic is it considering what we *do* see from the Sahabiyyaat?
Again – if we take the standards of “the ideal Muslimah” as considered today and then compare the Sahabiyyaat to them, many of them wouldn’t match up to those unrealistic (and frankly, often unhealthy) standards.
A bit of the latter, but also a good hard look at what ‘ideal’ constitutes – esp for women. How realistic is it considering what we *do* see from the Sahabiyyaat?
Again – if we take the standards of “the ideal Muslimah” as considered today and then compare the Sahabiyyaat to them, many of them wouldn’t match up to those unrealistic (and frankly, often unhealthy) standards.
I would say i the ideal Muslimah standard is higher than what we expect of the 4 women who perfected iman, you’d have a point. in the same way if we had an ideal male personality that was out of sync with what the Prophet (SAW) brought or practiced in terms of character or manners.
So if we say modesty and obedience is noble characteristic, I’ll look to the best women quoted and see how they were with their husbands – how was khadijah as a wife? how was fatimah? I wouldn’t look at the woman who has a temper tantrum and makes statements that eventually she admits are wrong and has to pay kaffarah for.
It may be more accurate to say that it’s not as big a deal if we don’t hit the ideal, but that will vary on a case-by-case basis, depending on what ideal was missed.
I would say i the ideal Muslimah standard is higher than what we expect of the 4 women who perfected iman, you’d have a point. in the same way if we had an ideal male personality that was out of sync with what the Prophet (SAW) brought or practiced in terms of character or manners.
So if we say modesty and obedience is noble characteristic, I’ll look to the best women quoted and see how they were with their husbands – how was khadijah as a wife? how was fatimah? I wouldn’t look at the woman who has a temper tantrum and makes statements that eventually she admits are wrong and has to pay kaffarah for.
It may be more accurate to say that it’s not as big a deal if we don’t hit the ideal, but that will vary on a case-by-case basis, depending on what ideal was missed.
I would say i the ideal Muslimah standard is higher than what we expect of the 4 women who perfected iman, you’d have a point. in the same way if we had an ideal male personality that was out of sync with what the Prophet (SAW) brought or practiced in terms of character or manners.
So if we say modesty and obedience is noble characteristic, I’ll look to the best women quoted and see how they were with their husbands – how was khadijah as a wife? how was fatimah? I wouldn’t look at the woman who has a temper tantrum and makes statements that eventually she admits are wrong and has to pay kaffarah for.
It may be more accurate to say that it’s not as big a deal if we don’t hit the ideal, but that will vary on a case-by-case basis, depending on what ideal was missed.
I would say i the ideal Muslimah standard is higher than what we expect of the 4 women who perfected iman, you’d have a point. in the same way if we had an ideal male personality that was out of sync with what the Prophet (SAW) brought or practiced in terms of character or manners.
So if we say modesty and obedience is noble characteristic, I’ll look to the best women quoted and see how they were with their husbands – how was khadijah as a wife? how was fatimah? I wouldn’t look at the woman who has a temper tantrum and makes statements that eventually she admits are wrong and has to pay kaffarah for.
It may be more accurate to say that it’s not as big a deal if we don’t hit the ideal, but that will vary on a case-by-case basis, depending on what ideal was missed.
I would say i the ideal Muslimah standard is higher than what we expect of the 4 women who perfected iman, you’d have a point. in the same way if we had an ideal male personality that was out of sync with what the Prophet (SAW) brought or practiced in terms of character or manners.
So if we say modesty and obedience is noble characteristic, I’ll look to the best women quoted and see how they were with their husbands – how was khadijah as a wife? how was fatimah? I wouldn’t look at the woman who has a temper tantrum and makes statements that eventually she admits are wrong and has to pay kaffarah for.
It may be more accurate to say that it’s not as big a deal if we don’t hit the ideal, but that will vary on a case-by-case basis, depending on what ideal was missed.
I would say i the ideal Muslimah standard is higher than what we expect of the 4 women who perfected iman, you’d have a point. in the same way if we had an ideal male personality that was out of sync with what the Prophet (SAW) brought or practiced in terms of character or manners.
So if we say modesty and obedience is noble characteristic, I’ll look to the best women quoted and see how they were with their husbands – how was khadijah as a wife? how was fatimah? I wouldn’t look at the woman who has a temper tantrum and makes statements that eventually she admits are wrong and has to pay kaffarah for.
It may be more accurate to say that it’s not as big a deal if we don’t hit the ideal, but that will vary on a case-by-case basis, depending on what ideal was missed.
I would say i the ideal Muslimah standard is higher than what we expect of the 4 women who perfected iman, you’d have a point. in the same way if we had an ideal male personality that was out of sync with what the Prophet (SAW) brought or practiced in terms of character or manners.
So if we say modesty and obedience is noble characteristic, I’ll look to the best women quoted and see how they were with their husbands – how was khadijah as a wife? how was fatimah? I wouldn’t look at the woman who has a temper tantrum and makes statements that eventually she admits are wrong and has to pay kaffarah for.
It may be more accurate to say that it’s not as big a deal if we don’t hit the ideal, but that will vary on a case-by-case basis, depending on what ideal was missed.
I would say i the ideal Muslimah standard is higher than what we expect of the 4 women who perfected iman, you’d have a point. in the same way if we had an ideal male personality that was out of sync with what the Prophet (SAW) brought or practiced in terms of character or manners.
So if we say modesty and obedience is noble characteristic, I’ll look to the best women quoted and see how they were with their husbands – how was khadijah as a wife? how was fatimah? I wouldn’t look at the woman who has a temper tantrum and makes statements that eventually she admits are wrong and has to pay kaffarah for.
It may be more accurate to say that it’s not as big a deal if we don’t hit the ideal, but that will vary on a case-by-case basis, depending on what ideal was missed.
I would say i the ideal Muslimah standard is higher than what we expect of the 4 women who perfected iman, you’d have a point. in the same way if we had an ideal male personality that was out of sync with what the Prophet (SAW) brought or practiced in terms of character or manners.
So if we say modesty and obedience is noble characteristic, I’ll look to the best women quoted and see how they were with their husbands – how was khadijah as a wife? how was fatimah? I wouldn’t look at the woman who has a temper tantrum and makes statements that eventually she admits are wrong and has to pay kaffarah for.
It may be more accurate to say that it’s not as big a deal if we don’t hit the ideal, but that will vary on a case-by-case basis, depending on what ideal was missed.
I would say i the ideal Muslimah standard is higher than what we expect of the 4 women who perfected iman, you’d have a point. in the same way if we had an ideal male personality that was out of sync with what the Prophet (SAW) brought or practiced in terms of character or manners.
So if we say modesty and obedience is noble characteristic, I’ll look to the best women quoted and see how they were with their husbands – how was khadijah as a wife? how was fatimah? I wouldn’t look at the woman who has a temper tantrum and makes statements that eventually she admits are wrong and has to pay kaffarah for.
It may be more accurate to say that it’s not as big a deal if we don’t hit the ideal, but that will vary on a case-by-case basis, depending on what ideal was missed.
I would say i the ideal Muslimah standard is higher than what we expect of the 4 women who perfected iman, you’d have a point. in the same way if we had an ideal male personality that was out of sync with what the Prophet (SAW) brought or practiced in terms of character or manners.
So if we say modesty and obedience is noble characteristic, I’ll look to the best women quoted and see how they were with their husbands – how was khadijah as a wife? how was fatimah? I wouldn’t look at the woman who has a temper tantrum and makes statements that eventually she admits are wrong and has to pay kaffarah for.
It may be more accurate to say that it’s not as big a deal if we don’t hit the ideal, but that will vary on a case-by-case basis, depending on what ideal was missed.
I would say i the ideal Muslimah standard is higher than what we expect of the 4 women who perfected iman, you’d have a point. in the same way if we had an ideal male personality that was out of sync with what the Prophet (SAW) brought or practiced in terms of character or manners.
So if we say modesty and obedience is noble characteristic, I’ll look to the best women quoted and see how they were with their husbands – how was khadijah as a wife? how was fatimah? I wouldn’t look at the woman who has a temper tantrum and makes statements that eventually she admits are wrong and has to pay kaffarah for.
It may be more accurate to say that it’s not as big a deal if we don’t hit the ideal, but that will vary on a case-by-case basis, depending on what ideal was missed.
I would say i the ideal Muslimah standard is higher than what we expect of the 4 women who perfected iman, you’d have a point. in the same way if we had an ideal male personality that was out of sync with what the Prophet (SAW) brought or practiced in terms of character or manners.
So if we say modesty and obedience is noble characteristic, I’ll look to the best women quoted and see how they were with their husbands – how was khadijah as a wife? how was fatimah? I wouldn’t look at the woman who has a temper tantrum and makes statements that eventually she admits are wrong and has to pay kaffarah for.
It may be more accurate to say that it’s not as big a deal if we don’t hit the ideal, but that will vary on a case-by-case basis, depending on what ideal was missed.
I would say i the ideal Muslimah standard is higher than what we expect of the 4 women who perfected iman, you’d have a point. in the same way if we had an ideal male personality that was out of sync with what the Prophet (SAW) brought or practiced in terms of character or manners.
So if we say modesty and obedience is noble characteristic, I’ll look to the best women quoted and see how they were with their husbands – how was khadijah as a wife? how was fatimah? I wouldn’t look at the woman who has a temper tantrum and makes statements that eventually she admits are wrong and has to pay kaffarah for.
It may be more accurate to say that it’s not as big a deal if we don’t hit the ideal, but that will vary on a case-by-case basis, depending on what ideal was missed.
I agree that it’s easy to fall into extremes when citing an ideal – completely out of sight is impractical and unhealthy. However, to claim that there is no encouragement to minimize outside ventures, that there is no virtue or value in remaining home would not be accurate either. There is encouragement to remain home, but the difference is more about what is required vs what is encouraged, fatwa vs taqwa. I think conflating the two can lead to extremes, one which you are mentioning, but another in which we act such encouragement doesn’t exist because western culture frowns upon such ideals.
I agree that it’s easy to fall into extremes when citing an ideal – completely out of sight is impractical and unhealthy. However, to claim that there is no encouragement to minimize outside ventures, that there is no virtue or value in remaining home would not be accurate either. There is encouragement to remain home, but the difference is more about what is required vs what is encouraged, fatwa vs taqwa. I think conflating the two can lead to extremes, one which you are mentioning, but another in which we act such encouragement doesn’t exist because western culture frowns upon such ideals.
I agree that it’s easy to fall into extremes when citing an ideal – completely out of sight is impractical and unhealthy. However, to claim that there is no encouragement to minimize outside ventures, that there is no virtue or value in remaining home would not be accurate either. There is encouragement to remain home, but the difference is more about what is required vs what is encouraged, fatwa vs taqwa. I think conflating the two can lead to extremes, one which you are mentioning, but another in which we act such encouragement doesn’t exist because western culture frowns upon such ideals.
I agree that it’s easy to fall into extremes when citing an ideal – completely out of sight is impractical and unhealthy. However, to claim that there is no encouragement to minimize outside ventures, that there is no virtue or value in remaining home would not be accurate either. There is encouragement to remain home, but the difference is more about what is required vs what is encouraged, fatwa vs taqwa. I think conflating the two can lead to extremes, one which you are mentioning, but another in which we act such encouragement doesn’t exist because western culture frowns upon such ideals.
I agree that it’s easy to fall into extremes when citing an ideal – completely out of sight is impractical and unhealthy. However, to claim that there is no encouragement to minimize outside ventures, that there is no virtue or value in remaining home would not be accurate either. There is encouragement to remain home, but the difference is more about what is required vs what is encouraged, fatwa vs taqwa. I think conflating the two can lead to extremes, one which you are mentioning, but another in which we act such encouragement doesn’t exist because western culture frowns upon such ideals.
I agree that it’s easy to fall into extremes when citing an ideal – completely out of sight is impractical and unhealthy. However, to claim that there is no encouragement to minimize outside ventures, that there is no virtue or value in remaining home would not be accurate either. There is encouragement to remain home, but the difference is more about what is required vs what is encouraged, fatwa vs taqwa. I think conflating the two can lead to extremes, one which you are mentioning, but another in which we act such encouragement doesn’t exist because western culture frowns upon such ideals.
I agree that it’s easy to fall into extremes when citing an ideal – completely out of sight is impractical and unhealthy. However, to claim that there is no encouragement to minimize outside ventures, that there is no virtue or value in remaining home would not be accurate either. There is encouragement to remain home, but the difference is more about what is required vs what is encouraged, fatwa vs taqwa. I think conflating the two can lead to extremes, one which you are mentioning, but another in which we act such encouragement doesn’t exist because western culture frowns upon such ideals.
I agree that it’s easy to fall into extremes when citing an ideal – completely out of sight is impractical and unhealthy. However, to claim that there is no encouragement to minimize outside ventures, that there is no virtue or value in remaining home would not be accurate either. There is encouragement to remain home, but the difference is more about what is required vs what is encouraged, fatwa vs taqwa. I think conflating the two can lead to extremes, one which you are mentioning, but another in which we act such encouragement doesn’t exist because western culture frowns upon such ideals.
I agree that it’s easy to fall into extremes when citing an ideal – completely out of sight is impractical and unhealthy. However, to claim that there is no encouragement to minimize outside ventures, that there is no virtue or value in remaining home would not be accurate either. There is encouragement to remain home, but the difference is more about what is required vs what is encouraged, fatwa vs taqwa. I think conflating the two can lead to extremes, one which you are mentioning, but another in which we act such encouragement doesn’t exist because western culture frowns upon such ideals.
I agree that it’s easy to fall into extremes when citing an ideal – completely out of sight is impractical and unhealthy. However, to claim that there is no encouragement to minimize outside ventures, that there is no virtue or value in remaining home would not be accurate either. There is encouragement to remain home, but the difference is more about what is required vs what is encouraged, fatwa vs taqwa. I think conflating the two can lead to extremes, one which you are mentioning, but another in which we act such encouragement doesn’t exist because western culture frowns upon such ideals.
I agree that it’s easy to fall into extremes when citing an ideal – completely out of sight is impractical and unhealthy. However, to claim that there is no encouragement to minimize outside ventures, that there is no virtue or value in remaining home would not be accurate either. There is encouragement to remain home, but the difference is more about what is required vs what is encouraged, fatwa vs taqwa. I think conflating the two can lead to extremes, one which you are mentioning, but another in which we act such encouragement doesn’t exist because western culture frowns upon such ideals.
I agree that it’s easy to fall into extremes when citing an ideal – completely out of sight is impractical and unhealthy. However, to claim that there is no encouragement to minimize outside ventures, that there is no virtue or value in remaining home would not be accurate either. There is encouragement to remain home, but the difference is more about what is required vs what is encouraged, fatwa vs taqwa. I think conflating the two can lead to extremes, one which you are mentioning, but another in which we act such encouragement doesn’t exist because western culture frowns upon such ideals.
I agree that it’s easy to fall into extremes when citing an ideal – completely out of sight is impractical and unhealthy. However, to claim that there is no encouragement to minimize outside ventures, that there is no virtue or value in remaining home would not be accurate either. There is encouragement to remain home, but the difference is more about what is required vs what is encouraged, fatwa vs taqwa. I think conflating the two can lead to extremes, one which you are mentioning, but another in which we act such encouragement doesn’t exist because western culture frowns upon such ideals.
I agree that it’s easy to fall into extremes when citing an ideal – completely out of sight is impractical and unhealthy. However, to claim that there is no encouragement to minimize outside ventures, that there is no virtue or value in remaining home would not be accurate either. There is encouragement to remain home, but the difference is more about what is required vs what is encouraged, fatwa vs taqwa. I think conflating the two can lead to extremes, one which you are mentioning, but another in which we act such encouragement doesn’t exist because western culture frowns upon such ideals.
Yes, there are the two extremes, both of which we see in our community (along the spectrum)… but among ‘conservatives,’ the “ideal Muslimah” standard remains very strong in perpetuating a very specific idea of what a Muslim woman *should* be like.
Yes, there are the two extremes, both of which we see in our community (along the spectrum)… but among ‘conservatives,’ the “ideal Muslimah” standard remains very strong in perpetuating a very specific idea of what a Muslim woman *should* be like.
Yes, there are the two extremes, both of which we see in our community (along the spectrum)… but among ‘conservatives,’ the “ideal Muslimah” standard remains very strong in perpetuating a very specific idea of what a Muslim woman *should* be like.
Yes, there are the two extremes, both of which we see in our community (along the spectrum)… but among ‘conservatives,’ the “ideal Muslimah” standard remains very strong in perpetuating a very specific idea of what a Muslim woman *should* be like.
Yes, there are the two extremes, both of which we see in our community (along the spectrum)… but among ‘conservatives,’ the “ideal Muslimah” standard remains very strong in perpetuating a very specific idea of what a Muslim woman *should* be like.
Yes, there are the two extremes, both of which we see in our community (along the spectrum)… but among ‘conservatives,’ the “ideal Muslimah” standard remains very strong in perpetuating a very specific idea of what a Muslim woman *should* be like.
Yes, there are the two extremes, both of which we see in our community (along the spectrum)… but among ‘conservatives,’ the “ideal Muslimah” standard remains very strong in perpetuating a very specific idea of what a Muslim woman *should* be like.
Yes, there are the two extremes, both of which we see in our community (along the spectrum)… but among ‘conservatives,’ the “ideal Muslimah” standard remains very strong in perpetuating a very specific idea of what a Muslim woman *should* be like.
Yes, there are the two extremes, both of which we see in our community (along the spectrum)… but among ‘conservatives,’ the “ideal Muslimah” standard remains very strong in perpetuating a very specific idea of what a Muslim woman *should* be like.
Yes, there are the two extremes, both of which we see in our community (along the spectrum)… but among ‘conservatives,’ the “ideal Muslimah” standard remains very strong in perpetuating a very specific idea of what a Muslim woman *should* be like.
Yes, there are the two extremes, both of which we see in our community (along the spectrum)… but among ‘conservatives,’ the “ideal Muslimah” standard remains very strong in perpetuating a very specific idea of what a Muslim woman *should* be like.
Yes, there are the two extremes, both of which we see in our community (along the spectrum)… but among ‘conservatives,’ the “ideal Muslimah” standard remains very strong in perpetuating a very specific idea of what a Muslim woman *should* be like.
Yes, there are the two extremes, both of which we see in our community (along the spectrum)… but among ‘conservatives,’ the “ideal Muslimah” standard remains very strong in perpetuating a very specific idea of what a Muslim woman *should* be like.
Yes, there are the two extremes, both of which we see in our community (along the spectrum)… but among ‘conservatives,’ the “ideal Muslimah” standard remains very strong in perpetuating a very specific idea of what a Muslim woman *should* be like.
I’m not denying it exists, what I’m saying is that in trying to counter one extreme, you may be perpetuating another by not clarifying what the ideal to strive for should be.
I’m not denying it exists, what I’m saying is that in trying to counter one extreme, you may be perpetuating another by not clarifying what the ideal to strive for should be.
I’m not denying it exists, what I’m saying is that in trying to counter one extreme, you may be perpetuating another by not clarifying what the ideal to strive for should be.
I’m not denying it exists, what I’m saying is that in trying to counter one extreme, you may be perpetuating another by not clarifying what the ideal to strive for should be.
I’m not denying it exists, what I’m saying is that in trying to counter one extreme, you may be perpetuating another by not clarifying what the ideal to strive for should be.
I’m not denying it exists, what I’m saying is that in trying to counter one extreme, you may be perpetuating another by not clarifying what the ideal to strive for should be.
I’m not denying it exists, what I’m saying is that in trying to counter one extreme, you may be perpetuating another by not clarifying what the ideal to strive for should be.
I’m not denying it exists, what I’m saying is that in trying to counter one extreme, you may be perpetuating another by not clarifying what the ideal to strive for should be.
I’m not denying it exists, what I’m saying is that in trying to counter one extreme, you may be perpetuating another by not clarifying what the ideal to strive for should be.
I’m not denying it exists, what I’m saying is that in trying to counter one extreme, you may be perpetuating another by not clarifying what the ideal to strive for should be.
I’m not denying it exists, what I’m saying is that in trying to counter one extreme, you may be perpetuating another by not clarifying what the ideal to strive for should be.
I’m not denying it exists, what I’m saying is that in trying to counter one extreme, you may be perpetuating another by not clarifying what the ideal to strive for should be.
I’m not denying it exists, what I’m saying is that in trying to counter one extreme, you may be perpetuating another by not clarifying what the ideal to strive for should be.
I’m not denying it exists, what I’m saying is that in trying to counter one extreme, you may be perpetuating another by not clarifying what the ideal to strive for should be.
Why must there be an assumption that countering one extreme means encouraging another? Why isn’t the point that we need to change our attitudes from an unhealthy one, to a more realistic one, enough? Why must there be a presumption that to shift our perceptions requires going contrary to what *is* established in the Qur’an and Sunnah?
Why must there be an assumption that countering one extreme means encouraging another? Why isn’t the point that we need to change our attitudes from an unhealthy one, to a more realistic one, enough? Why must there be a presumption that to shift our perceptions requires going contrary to what *is* established in the Qur’an and Sunnah?
Why must there be an assumption that countering one extreme means encouraging another? Why isn’t the point that we need to change our attitudes from an unhealthy one, to a more realistic one, enough? Why must there be a presumption that to shift our perceptions requires going contrary to what *is* established in the Qur’an and Sunnah?
Why must there be an assumption that countering one extreme means encouraging another? Why isn’t the point that we need to change our attitudes from an unhealthy one, to a more realistic one, enough? Why must there be a presumption that to shift our perceptions requires going contrary to what *is* established in the Qur’an and Sunnah?
Why must there be an assumption that countering one extreme means encouraging another? Why isn’t the point that we need to change our attitudes from an unhealthy one, to a more realistic one, enough? Why must there be a presumption that to shift our perceptions requires going contrary to what *is* established in the Qur’an and Sunnah?
Why must there be an assumption that countering one extreme means encouraging another? Why isn’t the point that we need to change our attitudes from an unhealthy one, to a more realistic one, enough? Why must there be a presumption that to shift our perceptions requires going contrary to what *is* established in the Qur’an and Sunnah?
Why must there be an assumption that countering one extreme means encouraging another? Why isn’t the point that we need to change our attitudes from an unhealthy one, to a more realistic one, enough? Why must there be a presumption that to shift our perceptions requires going contrary to what *is* established in the Qur’an and Sunnah?
Why must there be an assumption that countering one extreme means encouraging another? Why isn’t the point that we need to change our attitudes from an unhealthy one, to a more realistic one, enough? Why must there be a presumption that to shift our perceptions requires going contrary to what *is* established in the Qur’an and Sunnah?
Why must there be an assumption that countering one extreme means encouraging another? Why isn’t the point that we need to change our attitudes from an unhealthy one, to a more realistic one, enough? Why must there be a presumption that to shift our perceptions requires going contrary to what *is* established in the Qur’an and Sunnah?
Why must there be an assumption that countering one extreme means encouraging another? Why isn’t the point that we need to change our attitudes from an unhealthy one, to a more realistic one, enough? Why must there be a presumption that to shift our perceptions requires going contrary to what *is* established in the Qur’an and Sunnah?
Why must there be an assumption that countering one extreme means encouraging another? Why isn’t the point that we need to change our attitudes from an unhealthy one, to a more realistic one, enough? Why must there be a presumption that to shift our perceptions requires going contrary to what *is* established in the Qur’an and Sunnah?
Why must there be an assumption that countering one extreme means encouraging another? Why isn’t the point that we need to change our attitudes from an unhealthy one, to a more realistic one, enough? Why must there be a presumption that to shift our perceptions requires going contrary to what *is* established in the Qur’an and Sunnah?
Why must there be an assumption that countering one extreme means encouraging another? Why isn’t the point that we need to change our attitudes from an unhealthy one, to a more realistic one, enough? Why must there be a presumption that to shift our perceptions requires going contrary to what *is* established in the Qur’an and Sunnah?
Why must there be an assumption that countering one extreme means encouraging another? Why isn’t the point that we need to change our attitudes from an unhealthy one, to a more realistic one, enough? Why must there be a presumption that to shift our perceptions requires going contrary to what *is* established in the Qur’an and Sunnah?
It doesn’t have to, but when you present one extreme and demonstrate another as some type of virtue, you automatically perpetuate the other extreme.
As I said earlier, if we did this for men, I could choose az-Zubayr ibn-alAwwaam and say, “Why do modern feminists act as though men should be kind and emasculated? Look at az-Zubayr, he was harsh and yet Abu Bakr married his daughter to him. Women should not have this ideal of a romantic gentleman in mind, they should be willing to put up with his harshness if he’s “religious” enough.”
The counter response would be that isn’t ideal behavior, we should look to the Prophet (saw) and see what he said. Likewise, the same is true of women. If there are extremes in the ideal perpetuated, then lets talk about what the ideal should look like, not make what isn’t ideal look as though it’s OK – its not ok, and it should be mentioned that it isn’t.
It doesn’t have to, but when you present one extreme and demonstrate another as some type of virtue, you automatically perpetuate the other extreme.
As I said earlier, if we did this for men, I could choose az-Zubayr ibn-alAwwaam and say, “Why do modern feminists act as though men should be kind and emasculated? Look at az-Zubayr, he was harsh and yet Abu Bakr married his daughter to him. Women should not have this ideal of a romantic gentleman in mind, they should be willing to put up with his harshness if he’s “religious” enough.”
The counter response would be that isn’t ideal behavior, we should look to the Prophet (saw) and see what he said. Likewise, the same is true of women. If there are extremes in the ideal perpetuated, then lets talk about what the ideal should look like, not make what isn’t ideal look as though it’s OK – its not ok, and it should be mentioned that it isn’t.
It doesn’t have to, but when you present one extreme and demonstrate another as some type of virtue, you automatically perpetuate the other extreme.
As I said earlier, if we did this for men, I could choose az-Zubayr ibn-alAwwaam and say, “Why do modern feminists act as though men should be kind and emasculated? Look at az-Zubayr, he was harsh and yet Abu Bakr married his daughter to him. Women should not have this ideal of a romantic gentleman in mind, they should be willing to put up with his harshness if he’s “religious” enough.”
The counter response would be that isn’t ideal behavior, we should look to the Prophet (saw) and see what he said. Likewise, the same is true of women. If there are extremes in the ideal perpetuated, then lets talk about what the ideal should look like, not make what isn’t ideal look as though it’s OK – its not ok, and it should be mentioned that it isn’t.
It doesn’t have to, but when you present one extreme and demonstrate another as some type of virtue, you automatically perpetuate the other extreme.
As I said earlier, if we did this for men, I could choose az-Zubayr ibn-alAwwaam and say, “Why do modern feminists act as though men should be kind and emasculated? Look at az-Zubayr, he was harsh and yet Abu Bakr married his daughter to him. Women should not have this ideal of a romantic gentleman in mind, they should be willing to put up with his harshness if he’s “religious” enough.”
The counter response would be that isn’t ideal behavior, we should look to the Prophet (saw) and see what he said. Likewise, the same is true of women. If there are extremes in the ideal perpetuated, then lets talk about what the ideal should look like, not make what isn’t ideal look as though it’s OK – its not ok, and it should be mentioned that it isn’t.
It doesn’t have to, but when you present one extreme and demonstrate another as some type of virtue, you automatically perpetuate the other extreme.
As I said earlier, if we did this for men, I could choose az-Zubayr ibn-alAwwaam and say, “Why do modern feminists act as though men should be kind and emasculated? Look at az-Zubayr, he was harsh and yet Abu Bakr married his daughter to him. Women should not have this ideal of a romantic gentleman in mind, they should be willing to put up with his harshness if he’s “religious” enough.”
The counter response would be that isn’t ideal behavior, we should look to the Prophet (saw) and see what he said. Likewise, the same is true of women. If there are extremes in the ideal perpetuated, then lets talk about what the ideal should look like, not make what isn’t ideal look as though it’s OK – its not ok, and it should be mentioned that it isn’t.
It doesn’t have to, but when you present one extreme and demonstrate another as some type of virtue, you automatically perpetuate the other extreme.
As I said earlier, if we did this for men, I could choose az-Zubayr ibn-alAwwaam and say, “Why do modern feminists act as though men should be kind and emasculated? Look at az-Zubayr, he was harsh and yet Abu Bakr married his daughter to him. Women should not have this ideal of a romantic gentleman in mind, they should be willing to put up with his harshness if he’s “religious” enough.”
The counter response would be that isn’t ideal behavior, we should look to the Prophet (saw) and see what he said. Likewise, the same is true of women. If there are extremes in the ideal perpetuated, then lets talk about what the ideal should look like, not make what isn’t ideal look as though it’s OK – its not ok, and it should be mentioned that it isn’t.
It doesn’t have to, but when you present one extreme and demonstrate another as some type of virtue, you automatically perpetuate the other extreme.
As I said earlier, if we did this for men, I could choose az-Zubayr ibn-alAwwaam and say, “Why do modern feminists act as though men should be kind and emasculated? Look at az-Zubayr, he was harsh and yet Abu Bakr married his daughter to him. Women should not have this ideal of a romantic gentleman in mind, they should be willing to put up with his harshness if he’s “religious” enough.”
The counter response would be that isn’t ideal behavior, we should look to the Prophet (saw) and see what he said. Likewise, the same is true of women. If there are extremes in the ideal perpetuated, then lets talk about what the ideal should look like, not make what isn’t ideal look as though it’s OK – its not ok, and it should be mentioned that it isn’t.
It doesn’t have to, but when you present one extreme and demonstrate another as some type of virtue, you automatically perpetuate the other extreme.
As I said earlier, if we did this for men, I could choose az-Zubayr ibn-alAwwaam and say, “Why do modern feminists act as though men should be kind and emasculated? Look at az-Zubayr, he was harsh and yet Abu Bakr married his daughter to him. Women should not have this ideal of a romantic gentleman in mind, they should be willing to put up with his harshness if he’s “religious” enough.”
The counter response would be that isn’t ideal behavior, we should look to the Prophet (saw) and see what he said. Likewise, the same is true of women. If there are extremes in the ideal perpetuated, then lets talk about what the ideal should look like, not make what isn’t ideal look as though it’s OK – its not ok, and it should be mentioned that it isn’t.
It doesn’t have to, but when you present one extreme and demonstrate another as some type of virtue, you automatically perpetuate the other extreme.
As I said earlier, if we did this for men, I could choose az-Zubayr ibn-alAwwaam and say, “Why do modern feminists act as though men should be kind and emasculated? Look at az-Zubayr, he was harsh and yet Abu Bakr married his daughter to him. Women should not have this ideal of a romantic gentleman in mind, they should be willing to put up with his harshness if he’s “religious” enough.”
The counter response would be that isn’t ideal behavior, we should look to the Prophet (saw) and see what he said. Likewise, the same is true of women. If there are extremes in the ideal perpetuated, then lets talk about what the ideal should look like, not make what isn’t ideal look as though it’s OK – its not ok, and it should be mentioned that it isn’t.
It doesn’t have to, but when you present one extreme and demonstrate another as some type of virtue, you automatically perpetuate the other extreme.
As I said earlier, if we did this for men, I could choose az-Zubayr ibn-alAwwaam and say, “Why do modern feminists act as though men should be kind and emasculated? Look at az-Zubayr, he was harsh and yet Abu Bakr married his daughter to him. Women should not have this ideal of a romantic gentleman in mind, they should be willing to put up with his harshness if he’s “religious” enough.”
The counter response would be that isn’t ideal behavior, we should look to the Prophet (saw) and see what he said. Likewise, the same is true of women. If there are extremes in the ideal perpetuated, then lets talk about what the ideal should look like, not make what isn’t ideal look as though it’s OK – its not ok, and it should be mentioned that it isn’t.
It doesn’t have to, but when you present one extreme and demonstrate another as some type of virtue, you automatically perpetuate the other extreme.
As I said earlier, if we did this for men, I could choose az-Zubayr ibn-alAwwaam and say, “Why do modern feminists act as though men should be kind and emasculated? Look at az-Zubayr, he was harsh and yet Abu Bakr married his daughter to him. Women should not have this ideal of a romantic gentleman in mind, they should be willing to put up with his harshness if he’s “religious” enough.”
The counter response would be that isn’t ideal behavior, we should look to the Prophet (saw) and see what he said. Likewise, the same is true of women. If there are extremes in the ideal perpetuated, then lets talk about what the ideal should look like, not make what isn’t ideal look as though it’s OK – its not ok, and it should be mentioned that it isn’t.
It doesn’t have to, but when you present one extreme and demonstrate another as some type of virtue, you automatically perpetuate the other extreme.
As I said earlier, if we did this for men, I could choose az-Zubayr ibn-alAwwaam and say, “Why do modern feminists act as though men should be kind and emasculated? Look at az-Zubayr, he was harsh and yet Abu Bakr married his daughter to him. Women should not have this ideal of a romantic gentleman in mind, they should be willing to put up with his harshness if he’s “religious” enough.”
The counter response would be that isn’t ideal behavior, we should look to the Prophet (saw) and see what he said. Likewise, the same is true of women. If there are extremes in the ideal perpetuated, then lets talk about what the ideal should look like, not make what isn’t ideal look as though it’s OK – its not ok, and it should be mentioned that it isn’t.
It doesn’t have to, but when you present one extreme and demonstrate another as some type of virtue, you automatically perpetuate the other extreme.
As I said earlier, if we did this for men, I could choose az-Zubayr ibn-alAwwaam and say, “Why do modern feminists act as though men should be kind and emasculated? Look at az-Zubayr, he was harsh and yet Abu Bakr married his daughter to him. Women should not have this ideal of a romantic gentleman in mind, they should be willing to put up with his harshness if he’s “religious” enough.”
The counter response would be that isn’t ideal behavior, we should look to the Prophet (saw) and see what he said. Likewise, the same is true of women. If there are extremes in the ideal perpetuated, then lets talk about what the ideal should look like, not make what isn’t ideal look as though it’s OK – its not ok, and it should be mentioned that it isn’t.
It doesn’t have to, but when you present one extreme and demonstrate another as some type of virtue, you automatically perpetuate the other extreme.
As I said earlier, if we did this for men, I could choose az-Zubayr ibn-alAwwaam and say, “Why do modern feminists act as though men should be kind and emasculated? Look at az-Zubayr, he was harsh and yet Abu Bakr married his daughter to him. Women should not have this ideal of a romantic gentleman in mind, they should be willing to put up with his harshness if he’s “religious” enough.”
The counter response would be that isn’t ideal behavior, we should look to the Prophet (saw) and see what he said. Likewise, the same is true of women. If there are extremes in the ideal perpetuated, then lets talk about what the ideal should look like, not make what isn’t ideal look as though it’s OK – its not ok, and it should be mentioned that it isn’t.
People *do* use azZubayr ibn alAwwam as the epitome of great gheerah and ‘strength’, that’s the irony. His harshness is rarely spoken of as a shortcoming, but as something excusable and to some extent, commendable.
Mentioning A’ishah bint Tal’ha’s stories aren’t about her being ‘virtuous’ in those circumstances, but pointing out that she was considered an extremely respectable woman of her time *despite* those incidents. Today, few if any Muslim women would be considered anywhere near respectable, let alone worthy of being teachers or scholars, if such things were known about them.
It all goes back to having a realistic understanding of what the people of the past were *actually* like, not the mythical idea that they all conformed to a certain standard of behaviour at all times.
Zainab Bint Younus so are you saying that since he was harsh and yet still considered to be respectable, we should challenge notions that men can’t be harsh to their wives and still be considered respectable? If yes, then at least you’d be consistent between both genders.
But if not, then you should again be consistent and agree that because someone was considered respectable doesn’t mean that everything about them was respectable, and that we should not look at that as acceptable for ourselves, but rather, something to remove from our character.
I suspect she was able to get away with much because of her beauty, very similar to how ‘Umar reminded Hafsa not to backtalk to the Prophet (SAW) like ‘Aisha because the former didn’t have what the latter had.
Zainab Bint Younus so are you saying that since he was harsh and yet still considered to be respectable, we should challenge notions that men can’t be harsh to their wives and still be considered respectable? If yes, then at least you’d be consistent between both genders.
But if not, then you should again be consistent and agree that because someone was considered respectable doesn’t mean that everything about them was respectable, and that we should not look at that as acceptable for ourselves, but rather, something to remove from our character.
I suspect she was able to get away with much because of her beauty, very similar to how ‘Umar reminded Hafsa not to backtalk to the Prophet (SAW) like ‘Aisha because the former didn’t have what the latter had.
Zainab Bint Younus so are you saying that since he was harsh and yet still considered to be respectable, we should challenge notions that men can’t be harsh to their wives and still be considered respectable? If yes, then at least you’d be consistent between both genders.
But if not, then you should again be consistent and agree that because someone was considered respectable doesn’t mean that everything about them was respectable, and that we should not look at that as acceptable for ourselves, but rather, something to remove from our character.
I suspect she was able to get away with much because of her beauty, very similar to how ‘Umar reminded Hafsa not to backtalk to the Prophet (SAW) like ‘Aisha because the former didn’t have what the latter had.
Zainab Bint Younus so are you saying that since he was harsh and yet still considered to be respectable, we should challenge notions that men can’t be harsh to their wives and still be considered respectable? If yes, then at least you’d be consistent between both genders.
But if not, then you should again be consistent and agree that because someone was considered respectable doesn’t mean that everything about them was respectable, and that we should not look at that as acceptable for ourselves, but rather, something to remove from our character.
I suspect she was able to get away with much because of her beauty, very similar to how ‘Umar reminded Hafsa not to backtalk to the Prophet (SAW) like ‘Aisha because the former didn’t have what the latter had.
Zainab Bint Younus so are you saying that since he was harsh and yet still considered to be respectable, we should challenge notions that men can’t be harsh to their wives and still be considered respectable? If yes, then at least you’d be consistent between both genders.
But if not, then you should again be consistent and agree that because someone was considered respectable doesn’t mean that everything about them was respectable, and that we should not look at that as acceptable for ourselves, but rather, something to remove from our character.
I suspect she was able to get away with much because of her beauty, very similar to how ‘Umar reminded Hafsa not to backtalk to the Prophet (SAW) like ‘Aisha because the former didn’t have what the latter had.
Zainab Bint Younus so are you saying that since he was harsh and yet still considered to be respectable, we should challenge notions that men can’t be harsh to their wives and still be considered respectable? If yes, then at least you’d be consistent between both genders.
But if not, then you should again be consistent and agree that because someone was considered respectable doesn’t mean that everything about them was respectable, and that we should not look at that as acceptable for ourselves, but rather, something to remove from our character.
I suspect she was able to get away with much because of her beauty, very similar to how ‘Umar reminded Hafsa not to backtalk to the Prophet (SAW) like ‘Aisha because the former didn’t have what the latter had.
Zainab Bint Younus so are you saying that since he was harsh and yet still considered to be respectable, we should challenge notions that men can’t be harsh to their wives and still be considered respectable? If yes, then at least you’d be consistent between both genders.
But if not, then you should again be consistent and agree that because someone was considered respectable doesn’t mean that everything about them was respectable, and that we should not look at that as acceptable for ourselves, but rather, something to remove from our character.
I suspect she was able to get away with much because of her beauty, very similar to how ‘Umar reminded Hafsa not to backtalk to the Prophet (SAW) like ‘Aisha because the former didn’t have what the latter had.
Zainab Bint Younus so are you saying that since he was harsh and yet still considered to be respectable, we should challenge notions that men can’t be harsh to their wives and still be considered respectable? If yes, then at least you’d be consistent between both genders.
But if not, then you should again be consistent and agree that because someone was considered respectable doesn’t mean that everything about them was respectable, and that we should not look at that as acceptable for ourselves, but rather, something to remove from our character.
I suspect she was able to get away with much because of her beauty, very similar to how ‘Umar reminded Hafsa not to backtalk to the Prophet (SAW) like ‘Aisha because the former didn’t have what the latter had.
Zainab Bint Younus so are you saying that since he was harsh and yet still considered to be respectable, we should challenge notions that men can’t be harsh to their wives and still be considered respectable? If yes, then at least you’d be consistent between both genders.
But if not, then you should again be consistent and agree that because someone was considered respectable doesn’t mean that everything about them was respectable, and that we should not look at that as acceptable for ourselves, but rather, something to remove from our character.
I suspect she was able to get away with much because of her beauty, very similar to how ‘Umar reminded Hafsa not to backtalk to the Prophet (SAW) like ‘Aisha because the former didn’t have what the latter had.
Zainab Bint Younus so are you saying that since he was harsh and yet still considered to be respectable, we should challenge notions that men can’t be harsh to their wives and still be considered respectable? If yes, then at least you’d be consistent between both genders.
But if not, then you should again be consistent and agree that because someone was considered respectable doesn’t mean that everything about them was respectable, and that we should not look at that as acceptable for ourselves, but rather, something to remove from our character.
I suspect she was able to get away with much because of her beauty, very similar to how ‘Umar reminded Hafsa not to backtalk to the Prophet (SAW) like ‘Aisha because the former didn’t have what the latter had.
Zainab Bint Younus so are you saying that since he was harsh and yet still considered to be respectable, we should challenge notions that men can’t be harsh to their wives and still be considered respectable? If yes, then at least you’d be consistent between both genders.
But if not, then you should again be consistent and agree that because someone was considered respectable doesn’t mean that everything about them was respectable, and that we should not look at that as acceptable for ourselves, but rather, something to remove from our character.
I suspect she was able to get away with much because of her beauty, very similar to how ‘Umar reminded Hafsa not to backtalk to the Prophet (SAW) like ‘Aisha because the former didn’t have what the latter had.
Zainab Bint Younus so are you saying that since he was harsh and yet still considered to be respectable, we should challenge notions that men can’t be harsh to their wives and still be considered respectable? If yes, then at least you’d be consistent between both genders.
But if not, then you should again be consistent and agree that because someone was considered respectable doesn’t mean that everything about them was respectable, and that we should not look at that as acceptable for ourselves, but rather, something to remove from our character.
I suspect she was able to get away with much because of her beauty, very similar to how ‘Umar reminded Hafsa not to backtalk to the Prophet (SAW) like ‘Aisha because the former didn’t have what the latter had.
Zainab Bint Younus so are you saying that since he was harsh and yet still considered to be respectable, we should challenge notions that men can’t be harsh to their wives and still be considered respectable? If yes, then at least you’d be consistent between both genders.
But if not, then you should again be consistent and agree that because someone was considered respectable doesn’t mean that everything about them was respectable, and that we should not look at that as acceptable for ourselves, but rather, something to remove from our character.
I suspect she was able to get away with much because of her beauty, very similar to how ‘Umar reminded Hafsa not to backtalk to the Prophet (SAW) like ‘Aisha because the former didn’t have what the latter had.
Zainab Bint Younus so are you saying that since he was harsh and yet still considered to be respectable, we should challenge notions that men can’t be harsh to their wives and still be considered respectable? If yes, then at least you’d be consistent between both genders.
But if not, then you should again be consistent and agree that because someone was considered respectable doesn’t mean that everything about them was respectable, and that we should not look at that as acceptable for ourselves, but rather, something to remove from our character.
I suspect she was able to get away with much because of her beauty, very similar to how ‘Umar reminded Hafsa not to backtalk to the Prophet (SAW) like ‘Aisha because the former didn’t have what the latter had.
No, we shouldn’t, that’s my point – we shouldn’t recognize excuse-making of negative characteristics of anyone to scapegoat personal or social failures.
If an man is guilty of harshness in contradiction to Prophetic advice that the best of us are best to our families, we need to call it out, not look for excuses buried in the mistakes of the Companions like it’s an implicit sunnah.
Take the serial marriage / divorce imams – you’ll find this behavior among the Companions – we respect them still, do we respect those shuyookh and imams who do this, taking into account their full body of work, or does it leave a permanent mark on our opinion of them once we know who they are? I’m all for equality here, treating men and women with the same standard of acceptance or rejection.
No, we shouldn’t, that’s my point – we shouldn’t recognize excuse-making of negative characteristics of anyone to scapegoat personal or social failures.
If an man is guilty of harshness in contradiction to Prophetic advice that the best of us are best to our families, we need to call it out, not look for excuses buried in the mistakes of the Companions like it’s an implicit sunnah.
Take the serial marriage / divorce imams – you’ll find this behavior among the Companions – we respect them still, do we respect those shuyookh and imams who do this, taking into account their full body of work, or does it leave a permanent mark on our opinion of them once we know who they are? I’m all for equality here, treating men and women with the same standard of acceptance or rejection.
No, we shouldn’t, that’s my point – we shouldn’t recognize excuse-making of negative characteristics of anyone to scapegoat personal or social failures.
If an man is guilty of harshness in contradiction to Prophetic advice that the best of us are best to our families, we need to call it out, not look for excuses buried in the mistakes of the Companions like it’s an implicit sunnah.
Take the serial marriage / divorce imams – you’ll find this behavior among the Companions – we respect them still, do we respect those shuyookh and imams who do this, taking into account their full body of work, or does it leave a permanent mark on our opinion of them once we know who they are? I’m all for equality here, treating men and women with the same standard of acceptance or rejection.
No, we shouldn’t, that’s my point – we shouldn’t recognize excuse-making of negative characteristics of anyone to scapegoat personal or social failures.
If an man is guilty of harshness in contradiction to Prophetic advice that the best of us are best to our families, we need to call it out, not look for excuses buried in the mistakes of the Companions like it’s an implicit sunnah.
Take the serial marriage / divorce imams – you’ll find this behavior among the Companions – we respect them still, do we respect those shuyookh and imams who do this, taking into account their full body of work, or does it leave a permanent mark on our opinion of them once we know who they are? I’m all for equality here, treating men and women with the same standard of acceptance or rejection.
No, we shouldn’t, that’s my point – we shouldn’t recognize excuse-making of negative characteristics of anyone to scapegoat personal or social failures.
If an man is guilty of harshness in contradiction to Prophetic advice that the best of us are best to our families, we need to call it out, not look for excuses buried in the mistakes of the Companions like it’s an implicit sunnah.
Take the serial marriage / divorce imams – you’ll find this behavior among the Companions – we respect them still, do we respect those shuyookh and imams who do this, taking into account their full body of work, or does it leave a permanent mark on our opinion of them once we know who they are? I’m all for equality here, treating men and women with the same standard of acceptance or rejection.
No, we shouldn’t, that’s my point – we shouldn’t recognize excuse-making of negative characteristics of anyone to scapegoat personal or social failures.
If an man is guilty of harshness in contradiction to Prophetic advice that the best of us are best to our families, we need to call it out, not look for excuses buried in the mistakes of the Companions like it’s an implicit sunnah.
Take the serial marriage / divorce imams – you’ll find this behavior among the Companions – we respect them still, do we respect those shuyookh and imams who do this, taking into account their full body of work, or does it leave a permanent mark on our opinion of them once we know who they are? I’m all for equality here, treating men and women with the same standard of acceptance or rejection.
No, we shouldn’t, that’s my point – we shouldn’t recognize excuse-making of negative characteristics of anyone to scapegoat personal or social failures.
If an man is guilty of harshness in contradiction to Prophetic advice that the best of us are best to our families, we need to call it out, not look for excuses buried in the mistakes of the Companions like it’s an implicit sunnah.
Take the serial marriage / divorce imams – you’ll find this behavior among the Companions – we respect them still, do we respect those shuyookh and imams who do this, taking into account their full body of work, or does it leave a permanent mark on our opinion of them once we know who they are? I’m all for equality here, treating men and women with the same standard of acceptance or rejection.
No, we shouldn’t, that’s my point – we shouldn’t recognize excuse-making of negative characteristics of anyone to scapegoat personal or social failures.
If an man is guilty of harshness in contradiction to Prophetic advice that the best of us are best to our families, we need to call it out, not look for excuses buried in the mistakes of the Companions like it’s an implicit sunnah.
Take the serial marriage / divorce imams – you’ll find this behavior among the Companions – we respect them still, do we respect those shuyookh and imams who do this, taking into account their full body of work, or does it leave a permanent mark on our opinion of them once we know who they are? I’m all for equality here, treating men and women with the same standard of acceptance or rejection.
No, we shouldn’t, that’s my point – we shouldn’t recognize excuse-making of negative characteristics of anyone to scapegoat personal or social failures.
If an man is guilty of harshness in contradiction to Prophetic advice that the best of us are best to our families, we need to call it out, not look for excuses buried in the mistakes of the Companions like it’s an implicit sunnah.
Take the serial marriage / divorce imams – you’ll find this behavior among the Companions – we respect them still, do we respect those shuyookh and imams who do this, taking into account their full body of work, or does it leave a permanent mark on our opinion of them once we know who they are? I’m all for equality here, treating men and women with the same standard of acceptance or rejection.
No, we shouldn’t, that’s my point – we shouldn’t recognize excuse-making of negative characteristics of anyone to scapegoat personal or social failures.
If an man is guilty of harshness in contradiction to Prophetic advice that the best of us are best to our families, we need to call it out, not look for excuses buried in the mistakes of the Companions like it’s an implicit sunnah.
Take the serial marriage / divorce imams – you’ll find this behavior among the Companions – we respect them still, do we respect those shuyookh and imams who do this, taking into account their full body of work, or does it leave a permanent mark on our opinion of them once we know who they are? I’m all for equality here, treating men and women with the same standard of acceptance or rejection.
No, we shouldn’t, that’s my point – we shouldn’t recognize excuse-making of negative characteristics of anyone to scapegoat personal or social failures.
If an man is guilty of harshness in contradiction to Prophetic advice that the best of us are best to our families, we need to call it out, not look for excuses buried in the mistakes of the Companions like it’s an implicit sunnah.
Take the serial marriage / divorce imams – you’ll find this behavior among the Companions – we respect them still, do we respect those shuyookh and imams who do this, taking into account their full body of work, or does it leave a permanent mark on our opinion of them once we know who they are? I’m all for equality here, treating men and women with the same standard of acceptance or rejection.
No, we shouldn’t, that’s my point – we shouldn’t recognize excuse-making of negative characteristics of anyone to scapegoat personal or social failures.
If an man is guilty of harshness in contradiction to Prophetic advice that the best of us are best to our families, we need to call it out, not look for excuses buried in the mistakes of the Companions like it’s an implicit sunnah.
Take the serial marriage / divorce imams – you’ll find this behavior among the Companions – we respect them still, do we respect those shuyookh and imams who do this, taking into account their full body of work, or does it leave a permanent mark on our opinion of them once we know who they are? I’m all for equality here, treating men and women with the same standard of acceptance or rejection.
No, we shouldn’t, that’s my point – we shouldn’t recognize excuse-making of negative characteristics of anyone to scapegoat personal or social failures.
If an man is guilty of harshness in contradiction to Prophetic advice that the best of us are best to our families, we need to call it out, not look for excuses buried in the mistakes of the Companions like it’s an implicit sunnah.
Take the serial marriage / divorce imams – you’ll find this behavior among the Companions – we respect them still, do we respect those shuyookh and imams who do this, taking into account their full body of work, or does it leave a permanent mark on our opinion of them once we know who they are? I’m all for equality here, treating men and women with the same standard of acceptance or rejection.
No, we shouldn’t, that’s my point – we shouldn’t recognize excuse-making of negative characteristics of anyone to scapegoat personal or social failures.
If an man is guilty of harshness in contradiction to Prophetic advice that the best of us are best to our families, we need to call it out, not look for excuses buried in the mistakes of the Companions like it’s an implicit sunnah.
Take the serial marriage / divorce imams – you’ll find this behavior among the Companions – we respect them still, do we respect those shuyookh and imams who do this, taking into account their full body of work, or does it leave a permanent mark on our opinion of them once we know who they are? I’m all for equality here, treating men and women with the same standard of acceptance or rejection.
THAT IS MY POINT DAMMIT HOLD WOMEN TO THE SAME FLIPPING STANDARDS AND NOT A TOTALLY SEPARATE SET OF UNREALISTIC ONES.
THAT IS MY POINT DAMMIT HOLD WOMEN TO THE SAME FLIPPING STANDARDS AND NOT A TOTALLY SEPARATE SET OF UNREALISTIC ONES.
THAT IS MY POINT DAMMIT HOLD WOMEN TO THE SAME FLIPPING STANDARDS AND NOT A TOTALLY SEPARATE SET OF UNREALISTIC ONES.
THAT IS MY POINT DAMMIT HOLD WOMEN TO THE SAME FLIPPING STANDARDS AND NOT A TOTALLY SEPARATE SET OF UNREALISTIC ONES.
THAT IS MY POINT DAMMIT HOLD WOMEN TO THE SAME FLIPPING STANDARDS AND NOT A TOTALLY SEPARATE SET OF UNREALISTIC ONES.
THAT IS MY POINT DAMMIT HOLD WOMEN TO THE SAME FLIPPING STANDARDS AND NOT A TOTALLY SEPARATE SET OF UNREALISTIC ONES.
THAT IS MY POINT DAMMIT HOLD WOMEN TO THE SAME FLIPPING STANDARDS AND NOT A TOTALLY SEPARATE SET OF UNREALISTIC ONES.
THAT IS MY POINT DAMMIT HOLD WOMEN TO THE SAME FLIPPING STANDARDS AND NOT A TOTALLY SEPARATE SET OF UNREALISTIC ONES.
THAT IS MY POINT DAMMIT HOLD WOMEN TO THE SAME FLIPPING STANDARDS AND NOT A TOTALLY SEPARATE SET OF UNREALISTIC ONES.
THAT IS MY POINT DAMMIT HOLD WOMEN TO THE SAME FLIPPING STANDARDS AND NOT A TOTALLY SEPARATE SET OF UNREALISTIC ONES.
THAT IS MY POINT DAMMIT HOLD WOMEN TO THE SAME FLIPPING STANDARDS AND NOT A TOTALLY SEPARATE SET OF UNREALISTIC ONES.
THAT IS MY POINT DAMMIT HOLD WOMEN TO THE SAME FLIPPING STANDARDS AND NOT A TOTALLY SEPARATE SET OF UNREALISTIC ONES.
THAT IS MY POINT DAMMIT HOLD WOMEN TO THE SAME FLIPPING STANDARDS AND NOT A TOTALLY SEPARATE SET OF UNREALISTIC ONES.
Bloody mansplainers.
Bloody mansplainers.
Bloody mansplainers.
Bloody mansplainers.
Bloody mansplainers.
Bloody mansplainers.
Bloody mansplainers.
Bloody mansplainers.
Bloody mansplainers.
Bloody mansplainers.
Bloody mansplainers.
Bloody mansplainers.
Bloody mansplainers.
http://bitchbuzz.com/library/babe/4591-4913-medium.jpg
http://bitchbuzz.com/library/babe/4591-4913-medium.jpg
http://bitchbuzz.com/library/babe/4591-4913-medium.jpg
http://bitchbuzz.com/library/babe/4591-4913-medium.jpg
http://bitchbuzz.com/library/babe/4591-4913-medium.jpg
http://bitchbuzz.com/library/babe/4591-4913-medium.jpg
http://bitchbuzz.com/library/babe/4591-4913-medium.jpg
http://bitchbuzz.com/library/babe/4591-4913-medium.jpg
http://bitchbuzz.com/library/babe/4591-4913-medium.jpg
http://bitchbuzz.com/library/babe/4591-4913-medium.jpg
http://bitchbuzz.com/library/babe/4591-4913-medium.jpg
http://bitchbuzz.com/library/babe/4591-4913-medium.jpg
http://bitchbuzz.com/library/babe/4591-4913-medium.jpg
http://nancyfriedman.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4f9453ef0133f426db7c970b-pi
http://nancyfriedman.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4f9453ef0133f426db7c970b-pi
http://nancyfriedman.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4f9453ef0133f426db7c970b-pi
http://nancyfriedman.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4f9453ef0133f426db7c970b-pi
http://nancyfriedman.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4f9453ef0133f426db7c970b-pi
http://nancyfriedman.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4f9453ef0133f426db7c970b-pi
http://nancyfriedman.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4f9453ef0133f426db7c970b-pi
http://nancyfriedman.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4f9453ef0133f426db7c970b-pi
http://nancyfriedman.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4f9453ef0133f426db7c970b-pi
http://nancyfriedman.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4f9453ef0133f426db7c970b-pi
http://nancyfriedman.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4f9453ef0133f426db7c970b-pi
http://nancyfriedman.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4f9453ef0133f426db7c970b-pi
http://nancyfriedman.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4f9453ef0133f426db7c970b-pi
Heh, you almost made it through that without femspazzing ;)
Yes, you do want to hold us to the same standards, the problem is you’re moving in the wrong direction – instead of saying that men should be held to the same high standards as women, you’re saying women should be held to the same low standards as men.
Both are equality, but both are not correct.
Heh, you almost made it through that without femspazzing ;)
Yes, you do want to hold us to the same standards, the problem is you’re moving in the wrong direction – instead of saying that men should be held to the same high standards as women, you’re saying women should be held to the same low standards as men.
Both are equality, but both are not correct.
Heh, you almost made it through that without femspazzing ;)
Yes, you do want to hold us to the same standards, the problem is you’re moving in the wrong direction – instead of saying that men should be held to the same high standards as women, you’re saying women should be held to the same low standards as men.
Both are equality, but both are not correct.
Heh, you almost made it through that without femspazzing ;)
Yes, you do want to hold us to the same standards, the problem is you’re moving in the wrong direction – instead of saying that men should be held to the same high standards as women, you’re saying women should be held to the same low standards as men.
Both are equality, but both are not correct.
Heh, you almost made it through that without femspazzing ;)
Yes, you do want to hold us to the same standards, the problem is you’re moving in the wrong direction – instead of saying that men should be held to the same high standards as women, you’re saying women should be held to the same low standards as men.
Both are equality, but both are not correct.
Heh, you almost made it through that without femspazzing ;)
Yes, you do want to hold us to the same standards, the problem is you’re moving in the wrong direction – instead of saying that men should be held to the same high standards as women, you’re saying women should be held to the same low standards as men.
Both are equality, but both are not correct.
Heh, you almost made it through that without femspazzing ;)
Yes, you do want to hold us to the same standards, the problem is you’re moving in the wrong direction – instead of saying that men should be held to the same high standards as women, you’re saying women should be held to the same low standards as men.
Both are equality, but both are not correct.
Heh, you almost made it through that without femspazzing ;)
Yes, you do want to hold us to the same standards, the problem is you’re moving in the wrong direction – instead of saying that men should be held to the same high standards as women, you’re saying women should be held to the same low standards as men.
Both are equality, but both are not correct.
Heh, you almost made it through that without femspazzing ;)
Yes, you do want to hold us to the same standards, the problem is you’re moving in the wrong direction – instead of saying that men should be held to the same high standards as women, you’re saying women should be held to the same low standards as men.
Both are equality, but both are not correct.
Heh, you almost made it through that without femspazzing ;)
Yes, you do want to hold us to the same standards, the problem is you’re moving in the wrong direction – instead of saying that men should be held to the same high standards as women, you’re saying women should be held to the same low standards as men.
Both are equality, but both are not correct.
Heh, you almost made it through that without femspazzing ;)
Yes, you do want to hold us to the same standards, the problem is you’re moving in the wrong direction – instead of saying that men should be held to the same high standards as women, you’re saying women should be held to the same low standards as men.
Both are equality, but both are not correct.
Heh, you almost made it through that without femspazzing ;)
Yes, you do want to hold us to the same standards, the problem is you’re moving in the wrong direction – instead of saying that men should be held to the same high standards as women, you’re saying women should be held to the same low standards as men.
Both are equality, but both are not correct.
Heh, you almost made it through that without femspazzing ;)
Yes, you do want to hold us to the same standards, the problem is you’re moving in the wrong direction – instead of saying that men should be held to the same high standards as women, you’re saying women should be held to the same low standards as men.
Both are equality, but both are not correct.
Heh, you almost made it through that without femspazzing ;)
Yes, you do want to hold us to the same standards, the problem is you’re moving in the wrong direction – instead of saying that men should be held to the same high standards as women, you’re saying women should be held to the same low standards as men.
Both are equality, but both are not correct.
Or maybe we can all just go about the business of being normal human beings encouraged to better human beings while not expecting one gender to be some bizarre Stepford ideal?!
Or maybe we can all just go about the business of being normal human beings encouraged to better human beings while not expecting one gender to be some bizarre Stepford ideal?!
Or maybe we can all just go about the business of being normal human beings encouraged to better human beings while not expecting one gender to be some bizarre Stepford ideal?!
Or maybe we can all just go about the business of being normal human beings encouraged to better human beings while not expecting one gender to be some bizarre Stepford ideal?!
Or maybe we can all just go about the business of being normal human beings encouraged to better human beings while not expecting one gender to be some bizarre Stepford ideal?!
Or maybe we can all just go about the business of being normal human beings encouraged to better human beings while not expecting one gender to be some bizarre Stepford ideal?!
Or maybe we can all just go about the business of being normal human beings encouraged to better human beings while not expecting one gender to be some bizarre Stepford ideal?!
Or maybe we can all just go about the business of being normal human beings encouraged to better human beings while not expecting one gender to be some bizarre Stepford ideal?!
Or maybe we can all just go about the business of being normal human beings encouraged to better human beings while not expecting one gender to be some bizarre Stepford ideal?!
Or maybe we can all just go about the business of being normal human beings encouraged to better human beings while not expecting one gender to be some bizarre Stepford ideal?!
Or maybe we can all just go about the business of being normal human beings encouraged to better human beings while not expecting one gender to be some bizarre Stepford ideal?!
Or maybe we can all just go about the business of being normal human beings encouraged to better human beings while not expecting one gender to be some bizarre Stepford ideal?!
Or maybe we can all just go about the business of being normal human beings encouraged to better human beings while not expecting one gender to be some bizarre Stepford ideal?!
Or maybe we can all just go about the business of being normal human beings encouraged to better human beings while not expecting one gender to be some bizarre Stepford ideal?!
She found out about Aisha bt. Talha :o
Sh. Akram giving away all the trade secrets
Sh Akram is pretty much the only shaykh I trust right now. #endtheillusion
And who is this Safadi modernist???
Oh, just one of the major huffaz and student of the great imams of his time.
nvm
Does anyone really think Zainab is saying let’s scapegoat to excuse our negative characteristics? I mean, I dont even know her in person and I’m not taking that rather dim view of her words.
Forest for the trees, males….
Does anyone really think Zainab is saying let’s scapegoat to excuse our negative characteristics? I mean, I dont even know her in person and I’m not taking that rather dim view of her words.
Forest for the trees, males….
Does anyone really think Zainab is saying let’s scapegoat to excuse our negative characteristics? I mean, I dont even know her in person and I’m not taking that rather dim view of her words.
Forest for the trees, males….
Does anyone really think Zainab is saying let’s scapegoat to excuse our negative characteristics? I mean, I dont even know her in person and I’m not taking that rather dim view of her words.
Forest for the trees, males….
Does anyone really think Zainab is saying let’s scapegoat to excuse our negative characteristics? I mean, I dont even know her in person and I’m not taking that rather dim view of her words.
Forest for the trees, males….
Does anyone really think Zainab is saying let’s scapegoat to excuse our negative characteristics? I mean, I dont even know her in person and I’m not taking that rather dim view of her words.
Forest for the trees, males….
Does anyone really think Zainab is saying let’s scapegoat to excuse our negative characteristics? I mean, I dont even know her in person and I’m not taking that rather dim view of her words.
Forest for the trees, males….
Does anyone really think Zainab is saying let’s scapegoat to excuse our negative characteristics? I mean, I dont even know her in person and I’m not taking that rather dim view of her words.
Forest for the trees, males….
Does anyone really think Zainab is saying let’s scapegoat to excuse our negative characteristics? I mean, I dont even know her in person and I’m not taking that rather dim view of her words.
Forest for the trees, males….
Does anyone really think Zainab is saying let’s scapegoat to excuse our negative characteristics? I mean, I dont even know her in person and I’m not taking that rather dim view of her words.
Forest for the trees, males….
Does anyone really think Zainab is saying let’s scapegoat to excuse our negative characteristics? I mean, I dont even know her in person and I’m not taking that rather dim view of her words.
Forest for the trees, males….
Does anyone really think Zainab is saying let’s scapegoat to excuse our negative characteristics? I mean, I dont even know her in person and I’m not taking that rather dim view of her words.
Forest for the trees, males….
Does anyone really think Zainab is saying let’s scapegoat to excuse our negative characteristics? I mean, I dont even know her in person and I’m not taking that rather dim view of her words.
Forest for the trees, males….
Does anyone really think Zainab is saying let’s scapegoat to excuse our negative characteristics? I mean, I dont even know her in person and I’m not taking that rather dim view of her words.
Forest for the trees, males….
Tricia Veknach, I know that’s not what’s meant, but that’s what it boils down to. I’ve switched out genders to show how the same position looks when we discuss male Companions of the Prophet. We might make excuses for them, but we wouldn’t say, “no one ostracized them, so we should tolerate this behavior and not ostracize or stigmatize others who fall into this.”
I’m perfectly happy stigmatizing contemporary male leaders who engage in technically halal behaviors that occurred in the past rather than calling on acceptance – I hope women can do the same with their own.
Tricia Veknach, I know that’s not what’s meant, but that’s what it boils down to. I’ve switched out genders to show how the same position looks when we discuss male Companions of the Prophet. We might make excuses for them, but we wouldn’t say, “no one ostracized them, so we should tolerate this behavior and not ostracize or stigmatize others who fall into this.”
I’m perfectly happy stigmatizing contemporary male leaders who engage in technically halal behaviors that occurred in the past rather than calling on acceptance – I hope women can do the same with their own.
Tricia Veknach, I know that’s not what’s meant, but that’s what it boils down to. I’ve switched out genders to show how the same position looks when we discuss male Companions of the Prophet. We might make excuses for them, but we wouldn’t say, “no one ostracized them, so we should tolerate this behavior and not ostracize or stigmatize others who fall into this.”
I’m perfectly happy stigmatizing contemporary male leaders who engage in technically halal behaviors that occurred in the past rather than calling on acceptance – I hope women can do the same with their own.
Tricia Veknach, I know that’s not what’s meant, but that’s what it boils down to. I’ve switched out genders to show how the same position looks when we discuss male Companions of the Prophet. We might make excuses for them, but we wouldn’t say, “no one ostracized them, so we should tolerate this behavior and not ostracize or stigmatize others who fall into this.”
I’m perfectly happy stigmatizing contemporary male leaders who engage in technically halal behaviors that occurred in the past rather than calling on acceptance – I hope women can do the same with their own.
Tricia Veknach, I know that’s not what’s meant, but that’s what it boils down to. I’ve switched out genders to show how the same position looks when we discuss male Companions of the Prophet. We might make excuses for them, but we wouldn’t say, “no one ostracized them, so we should tolerate this behavior and not ostracize or stigmatize others who fall into this.”
I’m perfectly happy stigmatizing contemporary male leaders who engage in technically halal behaviors that occurred in the past rather than calling on acceptance – I hope women can do the same with their own.
Tricia Veknach, I know that’s not what’s meant, but that’s what it boils down to. I’ve switched out genders to show how the same position looks when we discuss male Companions of the Prophet. We might make excuses for them, but we wouldn’t say, “no one ostracized them, so we should tolerate this behavior and not ostracize or stigmatize others who fall into this.”
I’m perfectly happy stigmatizing contemporary male leaders who engage in technically halal behaviors that occurred in the past rather than calling on acceptance – I hope women can do the same with their own.
Tricia Veknach, I know that’s not what’s meant, but that’s what it boils down to. I’ve switched out genders to show how the same position looks when we discuss male Companions of the Prophet. We might make excuses for them, but we wouldn’t say, “no one ostracized them, so we should tolerate this behavior and not ostracize or stigmatize others who fall into this.”
I’m perfectly happy stigmatizing contemporary male leaders who engage in technically halal behaviors that occurred in the past rather than calling on acceptance – I hope women can do the same with their own.
Tricia Veknach, I know that’s not what’s meant, but that’s what it boils down to. I’ve switched out genders to show how the same position looks when we discuss male Companions of the Prophet. We might make excuses for them, but we wouldn’t say, “no one ostracized them, so we should tolerate this behavior and not ostracize or stigmatize others who fall into this.”
I’m perfectly happy stigmatizing contemporary male leaders who engage in technically halal behaviors that occurred in the past rather than calling on acceptance – I hope women can do the same with their own.
Tricia Veknach, I know that’s not what’s meant, but that’s what it boils down to. I’ve switched out genders to show how the same position looks when we discuss male Companions of the Prophet. We might make excuses for them, but we wouldn’t say, “no one ostracized them, so we should tolerate this behavior and not ostracize or stigmatize others who fall into this.”
I’m perfectly happy stigmatizing contemporary male leaders who engage in technically halal behaviors that occurred in the past rather than calling on acceptance – I hope women can do the same with their own.
Tricia Veknach, I know that’s not what’s meant, but that’s what it boils down to. I’ve switched out genders to show how the same position looks when we discuss male Companions of the Prophet. We might make excuses for them, but we wouldn’t say, “no one ostracized them, so we should tolerate this behavior and not ostracize or stigmatize others who fall into this.”
I’m perfectly happy stigmatizing contemporary male leaders who engage in technically halal behaviors that occurred in the past rather than calling on acceptance – I hope women can do the same with their own.
Tricia Veknach, I know that’s not what’s meant, but that’s what it boils down to. I’ve switched out genders to show how the same position looks when we discuss male Companions of the Prophet. We might make excuses for them, but we wouldn’t say, “no one ostracized them, so we should tolerate this behavior and not ostracize or stigmatize others who fall into this.”
I’m perfectly happy stigmatizing contemporary male leaders who engage in technically halal behaviors that occurred in the past rather than calling on acceptance – I hope women can do the same with their own.
Tricia Veknach, I know that’s not what’s meant, but that’s what it boils down to. I’ve switched out genders to show how the same position looks when we discuss male Companions of the Prophet. We might make excuses for them, but we wouldn’t say, “no one ostracized them, so we should tolerate this behavior and not ostracize or stigmatize others who fall into this.”
I’m perfectly happy stigmatizing contemporary male leaders who engage in technically halal behaviors that occurred in the past rather than calling on acceptance – I hope women can do the same with their own.
Tricia Veknach, I know that’s not what’s meant, but that’s what it boils down to. I’ve switched out genders to show how the same position looks when we discuss male Companions of the Prophet. We might make excuses for them, but we wouldn’t say, “no one ostracized them, so we should tolerate this behavior and not ostracize or stigmatize others who fall into this.”
I’m perfectly happy stigmatizing contemporary male leaders who engage in technically halal behaviors that occurred in the past rather than calling on acceptance – I hope women can do the same with their own.
Tricia Veknach, I know that’s not what’s meant, but that’s what it boils down to. I’ve switched out genders to show how the same position looks when we discuss male Companions of the Prophet. We might make excuses for them, but we wouldn’t say, “no one ostracized them, so we should tolerate this behavior and not ostracize or stigmatize others who fall into this.”
I’m perfectly happy stigmatizing contemporary male leaders who engage in technically halal behaviors that occurred in the past rather than calling on acceptance – I hope women can do the same with their own.
Seems to me there is an assumption that the women described in this article were exhibiting bad characteristics, and so we should not use the male sahaba to excuse their bad characteristics. However I question the assumption that theirs were bad characteristics. In any event, how is a woman being outspoken or simply being beautiful and not wearing niqab on par with a man being harsh towards his wife? Not in the same universe, really.
Seems to me there is an assumption that the women described in this article were exhibiting bad characteristics, and so we should not use the male sahaba to excuse their bad characteristics. However I question the assumption that theirs were bad characteristics. In any event, how is a woman being outspoken or simply being beautiful and not wearing niqab on par with a man being harsh towards his wife? Not in the same universe, really.
Seems to me there is an assumption that the women described in this article were exhibiting bad characteristics, and so we should not use the male sahaba to excuse their bad characteristics. However I question the assumption that theirs were bad characteristics. In any event, how is a woman being outspoken or simply being beautiful and not wearing niqab on par with a man being harsh towards his wife? Not in the same universe, really.
Seems to me there is an assumption that the women described in this article were exhibiting bad characteristics, and so we should not use the male sahaba to excuse their bad characteristics. However I question the assumption that theirs were bad characteristics. In any event, how is a woman being outspoken or simply being beautiful and not wearing niqab on par with a man being harsh towards his wife? Not in the same universe, really.
Seems to me there is an assumption that the women described in this article were exhibiting bad characteristics, and so we should not use the male sahaba to excuse their bad characteristics. However I question the assumption that theirs were bad characteristics. In any event, how is a woman being outspoken or simply being beautiful and not wearing niqab on par with a man being harsh towards his wife? Not in the same universe, really.
Seems to me there is an assumption that the women described in this article were exhibiting bad characteristics, and so we should not use the male sahaba to excuse their bad characteristics. However I question the assumption that theirs were bad characteristics. In any event, how is a woman being outspoken or simply being beautiful and not wearing niqab on par with a man being harsh towards his wife? Not in the same universe, really.
Seems to me there is an assumption that the women described in this article were exhibiting bad characteristics, and so we should not use the male sahaba to excuse their bad characteristics. However I question the assumption that theirs were bad characteristics. In any event, how is a woman being outspoken or simply being beautiful and not wearing niqab on par with a man being harsh towards his wife? Not in the same universe, really.
Seems to me there is an assumption that the women described in this article were exhibiting bad characteristics, and so we should not use the male sahaba to excuse their bad characteristics. However I question the assumption that theirs were bad characteristics. In any event, how is a woman being outspoken or simply being beautiful and not wearing niqab on par with a man being harsh towards his wife? Not in the same universe, really.
Seems to me there is an assumption that the women described in this article were exhibiting bad characteristics, and so we should not use the male sahaba to excuse their bad characteristics. However I question the assumption that theirs were bad characteristics. In any event, how is a woman being outspoken or simply being beautiful and not wearing niqab on par with a man being harsh towards his wife? Not in the same universe, really.
Seems to me there is an assumption that the women described in this article were exhibiting bad characteristics, and so we should not use the male sahaba to excuse their bad characteristics. However I question the assumption that theirs were bad characteristics. In any event, how is a woman being outspoken or simply being beautiful and not wearing niqab on par with a man being harsh towards his wife? Not in the same universe, really.
Seems to me there is an assumption that the women described in this article were exhibiting bad characteristics, and so we should not use the male sahaba to excuse their bad characteristics. However I question the assumption that theirs were bad characteristics. In any event, how is a woman being outspoken or simply being beautiful and not wearing niqab on par with a man being harsh towards his wife? Not in the same universe, really.
Seems to me there is an assumption that the women described in this article were exhibiting bad characteristics, and so we should not use the male sahaba to excuse their bad characteristics. However I question the assumption that theirs were bad characteristics. In any event, how is a woman being outspoken or simply being beautiful and not wearing niqab on par with a man being harsh towards his wife? Not in the same universe, really.
Seems to me there is an assumption that the women described in this article were exhibiting bad characteristics, and so we should not use the male sahaba to excuse their bad characteristics. However I question the assumption that theirs were bad characteristics. In any event, how is a woman being outspoken or simply being beautiful and not wearing niqab on par with a man being harsh towards his wife? Not in the same universe, really.
Seems to me there is an assumption that the women described in this article were exhibiting bad characteristics, and so we should not use the male sahaba to excuse their bad characteristics. However I question the assumption that theirs were bad characteristics. In any event, how is a woman being outspoken or simply being beautiful and not wearing niqab on par with a man being harsh towards his wife? Not in the same universe, really.
It was mentioned on multiple occasions she swore mu’sab was like her father’s back and even locked him out. A very harsh thing to do to a spouse. If we heard someone in the modern day doing this, we’d tell them to grow up, act like an adult, and work out their issues. She eventually paid kaffarah for both broken oaths.
Men already hear this type of talk from Muslim leaders. “When Aisha broke her co-wifes plate, look how the Prophet responded.”
As for her choices you mentioned, it isn’t that she made those choices that’s the issue, but that her attitude was harsh and flippant and that it’s made to look on that the means of expression is OK that would be a problem for me. In both males and females, my ideal is respectful discussion, not ad hominems and name calling.
True enough, he was patient with it, but underlying that is a cut at women – women are jealous irrational creatures that you must be patient with. I’m all for patience in conflict, but I also believe in treating women like full adults and saying that is irresponsible behavior no matter if a male or female does it – how you deal with it in the heat of the moment and how we should think of it are two different things.
It was mentioned on multiple occasions she swore mu’sab was like her father’s back and even locked him out. A very harsh thing to do to a spouse. If we heard someone in the modern day doing this, we’d tell them to grow up, act like an adult, and work out their issues. She eventually paid kaffarah for both broken oaths.
Men already hear this type of talk from Muslim leaders. “When Aisha broke her co-wifes plate, look how the Prophet responded.”
As for her choices you mentioned, it isn’t that she made those choices that’s the issue, but that her attitude was harsh and flippant and that it’s made to look on that the means of expression is OK that would be a problem for me. In both males and females, my ideal is respectful discussion, not ad hominems and name calling.
True enough, he was patient with it, but underlying that is a cut at women – women are jealous irrational creatures that you must be patient with. I’m all for patience in conflict, but I also believe in treating women like full adults and saying that is irresponsible behavior no matter if a male or female does it – how you deal with it in the heat of the moment and how we should think of it are two different things.
It was mentioned on multiple occasions she swore mu’sab was like her father’s back and even locked him out. A very harsh thing to do to a spouse. If we heard someone in the modern day doing this, we’d tell them to grow up, act like an adult, and work out their issues. She eventually paid kaffarah for both broken oaths.
Men already hear this type of talk from Muslim leaders. “When Aisha broke her co-wifes plate, look how the Prophet responded.”
As for her choices you mentioned, it isn’t that she made those choices that’s the issue, but that her attitude was harsh and flippant and that it’s made to look on that the means of expression is OK that would be a problem for me. In both males and females, my ideal is respectful discussion, not ad hominems and name calling.
True enough, he was patient with it, but underlying that is a cut at women – women are jealous irrational creatures that you must be patient with. I’m all for patience in conflict, but I also believe in treating women like full adults and saying that is irresponsible behavior no matter if a male or female does it – how you deal with it in the heat of the moment and how we should think of it are two different things.
It was mentioned on multiple occasions she swore mu’sab was like her father’s back and even locked him out. A very harsh thing to do to a spouse. If we heard someone in the modern day doing this, we’d tell them to grow up, act like an adult, and work out their issues. She eventually paid kaffarah for both broken oaths.
Men already hear this type of talk from Muslim leaders. “When Aisha broke her co-wifes plate, look how the Prophet responded.”
As for her choices you mentioned, it isn’t that she made those choices that’s the issue, but that her attitude was harsh and flippant and that it’s made to look on that the means of expression is OK that would be a problem for me. In both males and females, my ideal is respectful discussion, not ad hominems and name calling.
True enough, he was patient with it, but underlying that is a cut at women – women are jealous irrational creatures that you must be patient with. I’m all for patience in conflict, but I also believe in treating women like full adults and saying that is irresponsible behavior no matter if a male or female does it – how you deal with it in the heat of the moment and how we should think of it are two different things.
It was mentioned on multiple occasions she swore mu’sab was like her father’s back and even locked him out. A very harsh thing to do to a spouse. If we heard someone in the modern day doing this, we’d tell them to grow up, act like an adult, and work out their issues. She eventually paid kaffarah for both broken oaths.
Men already hear this type of talk from Muslim leaders. “When Aisha broke her co-wifes plate, look how the Prophet responded.”
As for her choices you mentioned, it isn’t that she made those choices that’s the issue, but that her attitude was harsh and flippant and that it’s made to look on that the means of expression is OK that would be a problem for me. In both males and females, my ideal is respectful discussion, not ad hominems and name calling.
True enough, he was patient with it, but underlying that is a cut at women – women are jealous irrational creatures that you must be patient with. I’m all for patience in conflict, but I also believe in treating women like full adults and saying that is irresponsible behavior no matter if a male or female does it – how you deal with it in the heat of the moment and how we should think of it are two different things.
It was mentioned on multiple occasions she swore mu’sab was like her father’s back and even locked him out. A very harsh thing to do to a spouse. If we heard someone in the modern day doing this, we’d tell them to grow up, act like an adult, and work out their issues. She eventually paid kaffarah for both broken oaths.
Men already hear this type of talk from Muslim leaders. “When Aisha broke her co-wifes plate, look how the Prophet responded.”
As for her choices you mentioned, it isn’t that she made those choices that’s the issue, but that her attitude was harsh and flippant and that it’s made to look on that the means of expression is OK that would be a problem for me. In both males and females, my ideal is respectful discussion, not ad hominems and name calling.
True enough, he was patient with it, but underlying that is a cut at women – women are jealous irrational creatures that you must be patient with. I’m all for patience in conflict, but I also believe in treating women like full adults and saying that is irresponsible behavior no matter if a male or female does it – how you deal with it in the heat of the moment and how we should think of it are two different things.
It was mentioned on multiple occasions she swore mu’sab was like her father’s back and even locked him out. A very harsh thing to do to a spouse. If we heard someone in the modern day doing this, we’d tell them to grow up, act like an adult, and work out their issues. She eventually paid kaffarah for both broken oaths.
Men already hear this type of talk from Muslim leaders. “When Aisha broke her co-wifes plate, look how the Prophet responded.”
As for her choices you mentioned, it isn’t that she made those choices that’s the issue, but that her attitude was harsh and flippant and that it’s made to look on that the means of expression is OK that would be a problem for me. In both males and females, my ideal is respectful discussion, not ad hominems and name calling.
True enough, he was patient with it, but underlying that is a cut at women – women are jealous irrational creatures that you must be patient with. I’m all for patience in conflict, but I also believe in treating women like full adults and saying that is irresponsible behavior no matter if a male or female does it – how you deal with it in the heat of the moment and how we should think of it are two different things.
It was mentioned on multiple occasions she swore mu’sab was like her father’s back and even locked him out. A very harsh thing to do to a spouse. If we heard someone in the modern day doing this, we’d tell them to grow up, act like an adult, and work out their issues. She eventually paid kaffarah for both broken oaths.
Men already hear this type of talk from Muslim leaders. “When Aisha broke her co-wifes plate, look how the Prophet responded.”
As for her choices you mentioned, it isn’t that she made those choices that’s the issue, but that her attitude was harsh and flippant and that it’s made to look on that the means of expression is OK that would be a problem for me. In both males and females, my ideal is respectful discussion, not ad hominems and name calling.
True enough, he was patient with it, but underlying that is a cut at women – women are jealous irrational creatures that you must be patient with. I’m all for patience in conflict, but I also believe in treating women like full adults and saying that is irresponsible behavior no matter if a male or female does it – how you deal with it in the heat of the moment and how we should think of it are two different things.
I’m kind of confused. If the stories of Aishah bint Talhah mentioned in the post indeed are found to be weak in narration, what else is this article deriving its points from? I’m not trying to be rude or offensive. I’m just wondering if the author could’ve written this piece with the same message without these stories that may or may not be authentic.
Aroub Lahham
That is great! I’ll follow my own perception of what I think an Ideal Mulimah should be !?
THIS! Honestly, this is great. This is what we need. Jzk for articulating so well what many Muslim women have observed and feel.
Ameen
YES!!!!