Matrimonial Rights

Equality of the Sexes

Among the various heresies that invaded the East was the idea of the complete equality of man and woman in political, economical, and social fields. The naïve Muslims, having been deceived by this fallacy, went on calling to it, ignoring its being in vio lation of the principles of nature and conscience, because of the great differences between the two sexes and the dissimilarity of their qualifications in this life. By proving the great differences between man and woman, it becomes easy to realize the f alsity of this idea that is full of negligence and waste of the characteristics of both sexes.

Generally, man is huger, stronger, and more steadfast against ordeals than woman is. He is also more broad-minded, sagacious, and experienced.

Woman, on the other hand, is, generally, more handsome, less physically powerful, more sensitive, and more delicate than man is, since she is prepared for her maternal tasks.

Symptoms of menstruation, pregnancy, and suckling that occur to women and influence effectively their lives and physical states are factors that increase the difference between the two sexes. During their monthlies, women suffer symptoms that cause them to be unfamiliar.

Dr. Jebb Hard says that it is infrequent to find a woman who does not suffer a disorder during her menstrual period. Most women, however, suffer headache, exhaustion, pain under navels, and anorexia. They also become aggressive and sleepers. Because of t hese symptoms, it is possible to say that women become ill during their monthlies and that they have to suffer such illness once a month. Hence, such physical changes naturally affect women’s intellectual faculties and bodily processes.

Thus, many researchers have proved the impossibility of the equality of the sexes.

In his book that proved the inequality of the sexes through natural experiments and observations, Antoine Namilav; the Russian physician, records that ‘we must not deceive ourselves by claiming that it is easy to equalize between man and woman in the pra ctical life. In fact, none in this world exerted the efforts that we, the Soviet, had exerted for making the equality of the sexes practical, and none enacted such innocent, but fanatical, laws that we have enacted in this field. Nevertheless, woman’s fa milial position has hardly ever changed. Moreover, woman’s social position has also hardly ever changed. The conception of the impossibility of the equality of the sexes is still deep-rooted in the minds of all the classes of the Soviet society.’ ( 39 )

Dr. Alexis Carrel, who received the 1912 Nobel Prize for Physiology, says that it is essential for educationists to pay a great deal of attention to the mental and organic characteristics as well as natural functions of both male and female since there a re innumerable differences between the sexes. Hence, it is necessary, for constructing a civilized world, to take in consideration these differences.

As a matter of fact, we cannot consider man’s surpassing woman in the scientific and theoretical fields as a standard that is applied to all men. It happens that woman surpasses man in such fields. This, however, cannot deny the fact that woman, in most cases, falls behind man. Some people claim that woman’s falling behind man has been the reason of social traditions and educational systems that prevailed on her life. This is not accurate because most of such traditions and systems have ceased to exist in most of the dissolute nations where the difference between the sexes faded away and woman have enjoyed all opportunities that are gained by men. Yet, woman, in these societies, has still occupied the second position after man. This is another evidence on the impossibility of the equality of the sexes, which is, such being the case, considered as a sort of idiocy and silliness.

As the propagandists of equality of the sexes are completely incapable of developing man’s qualifications so as to make him fit to do the female tasks, they cannot make women assume masculine manners and do the jobs that are purely men’s.

The Divine Wisdom has prepared each sex for definite function and tasks in this life. Hence, it is unavoidable to distribute jobs among them according to each one’s qualifications and abilities. It is said that ‘everything is prepared for doing its job.’

Man’s task is to practice the arduous works and the out-of-house affairs, work hard for securing means of livelihood for the family members, and guarantee material and moral protection and pleasure for them. Women, however, are unqualified enough to do s uch tasks so expertly.

Woman’s task, on the other hand, is to be good housewife and bring up well-qualified men. None but woman can change her house and society into a paradise where man can find release of the life difficulties and children can feel the warm affection and fac tors of growth and prosperity. To insert women in men’s fields and encourage her competing with him in his own tasks is regarded as forfeiture of their qualifications. It also plays the role of immobilizing men’s right to practice their vital activities that, nobody except him, can do, as well as his right to create a family.

The results of modern women’s competition with men in the fields of their specialization have been dangerous moral, social, and mental evils whose disadvantages have surpassed greatly their advantages.

Because women have failed to do their genuine tasks and joined the mixed society, the family structure has become the victim of loss, immorality, and misery, and has suffered the commonness of moral deviation and collapse.

On another page of his aforementioned book, the Russian researcher records that ‘symptoms of sexual disorder have disappeared on all the workers. This is in fact serious danger that threatens termination to socialism. Hence, we must fight with every weap on such symptoms. However, fighting at this front has many problems and difficulties. I can refer to thousands of events that demonstrate the fact that the infection of sexual libertinism spread into the educated individuals of the proletariat in additio n to the ignorant ones.’ ( 40 )

It is however acceptable for women to practice certain jobs pertaining to and befitting their sex, such as teaching girls or treating women. In case a woman does not have a family provider or when the breadwinner is incapable of securing her essential re quirements, it becomes acceptable for her to practice a job that saves her from the charms of the mixed association and saves others from her charms.

Islam, having protected her dignity, has saved the earnings of the needy women without letting them need for such suffering. If Muslims defray the zakat, poverty will find no place in the Islamic society. Thus, what do the propagandists of the equality o f the sexes want? If they intend to dignify and free women from social wronging, Islam has certainly freed women, raised their ranks, and granted them their moral and material rights. They in fact intend to deceive and humiliate women so as to approximat e them from the eyes and flirts of the wolves. What do the liberalist women want? Do they seek the absolute equality with man, or do they seek the freedom of dissoluteness and indecorum?

Because they all are immoral purposes, Islam has forbidden both man and woman to respond to such calls so as to save them from the slips of charms and the tragedies of the mixing of the sexes.