Sexual Ethics in Islam and in the Western World
Chapther 3: Proposed New Sexual Freedom
A critical analysis of the basic principles of the proposed new sexual
freedom has been indicated in the preceding chapter. In this chapter, we
concentrate on examination of the salient features of the proposed new
sexual liberation, especially on its reformatory content in relation to
conventional morality. This will be conducive to a detailed analysis,
which is not likely to be thorough otherwise.
That there are people who are already convinced about the reformatory
content of the proposed new sexual conduct is to be recognized. At the
same time, it is worthwhile - even necessary - that social problems,
including those of sexual morality, are discussed from various angles.
For, the question of sexual ethics has received the attention of famous
thinkers of our age.
Above all, it is notable that the proposed new, approach to human
sexuality has tended to be readily accepted by young people, without
evidencing any skepticism. Views of well - known personalities of our
modern times are apparently taken to be infallible.
In our considered opinion, it is necessary that the esteemed readers
are made aware of all the implications of even any rudimentary
assimilation on the part of our impressionable young people of the novel
ideas from the West, including some with innocuous labels, such as
freedom, and equality. This is because we must know in which
direction we are applying our minds, to what purpose and towards what
end. If whatever we think and do is believed to be correct without
verification, does it necessarily enable mankind to continue
progressing?
Or else, does the Western intellectual and cultural penetration of our
society represent too ill - informed and too ill-conceived a propaganda
strategy that, if allowed to spread, is bound to lead mankind towards
self -destruction?
The above questions are intended to be discussed herein, in a
necessarily brief manner.[^1]
With regard to the modernistic reform of the traditional sexual morals,
the speculative reformers claim that the very basis of the latter no
longer exists, or is in the process of vanishing. Since the reasons, the
causative factors and the original conditions have changed, or are
changing, they say that we have no longer any justification to continue
practicing the old morality, the severity of which has occasionally been
evidenced.
Furthermore, they point out that, aside from the changed or changing
conditions, there have been in the historical past events involving the
old morality in an ignorant and cruel manner. They believe that the past
experiences were inconsistent with the concepts of freedom, justice and
human dignity. So, even for the sake of humanity and justice, they
appeal that we must oppose all moral restraints on sex.
Opponents of the traditional sexual morals say that the old concepts
gave rise to the following:
• Male sense of possession of his female,
• Male jealousy,
• Male concern for establishing his paternity of a child,
• Asceticism and monasticism based on the assumed sinfulness and wickedness of human sexual relations,
• Female sense of impurity arising from her menstruating nature,
• Male abstinence from sexual relations with a menstruating female,
• Severe punishments at the hands of men undergone by women throughout recorded history; and
• Causing women to remain economically dependent on men.
They claim that the above state of affairs is attributable to the
conventional sexual morality, indicative of the cruel and superstitious
individual and social restraints applied under primitive conditions.
They seek to replace the old values by modernistic permissiveness. For
one thing, they point out, modern wives are not to be treated as
chattels.
In the same vein, they proclaim that today contraceptives preempt any
need to ensure paternity of a child in a forcible manner such as
implicit in the old moral prescription of the female chastity!
The supporters of the proposed new sexual freedom further affirm that
old ascetic and monastic orders and beliefs are dying out. Knowledge and
sanitary means of personal hygiene are said to have freed women from
harboring any sense of pollution while menstruating. They are convinced
that the days when men could manage to be cruel and oppressive are gone
for ever.
They conclude that enslaving or ill-treatment of women and making them
utterly dependent on men are now things of the past. For, women are
regaining socioeconomic freedom. Moreover, modern governments are
gradually taking upon themselves major socioeconomic responsibilities of
a husband and father, including mothercare and childcare. On the other
hand, human jealousy is on the decline with the spread of modern sexual
attitudes and behavioral norms. Accordingly, they suggest that we should
no longer cling to the old moral system.
The foregoing criticism of old morality is offered by sexual
liberationists as the basis of their proposed new morals. Of course,
this is to be expected of those who oppose conventional morals.
Now, let us examine the reformatory content of the proposed new morals.
At the: outset, we recognize the fact that their intended casting away
of the traditional moral constraints on human sexuality constitutes the
axis around which the proposed new morals revolve. Accordingly, the very
first thing that is likely to receive their attention is what they
consider to be a need to ensure freedom of individual action towards
fulfilling one's sexuality, or towards bringing about conditions of free
sexual love.
In pursuit of sexual liberty, they affirm the unrestrained joys of not
only premarital but post marital experimentation with one's sexuality.
They point out that, through the least expensive and rather safe means
of contraception, sexual enjoyment can be diversified without
necessarily involving any risk of pregnancy, legitimate or otherwise.
Thus, they claim that any spouse can safely pursue his or her love
affair to her heart's content, by taking lovers or becoming a love
object without necessarily undermining their marriage. Moreover, they
imply that not only illegitimate pregnancies can be avoided, but a wife
can chose to have a legitimate child, without any moral concern about
her extramarital affairs.
Any communism in sexual matters is obviously undesirable. Also, it is
impracticable if the genetic need to ensure paternity of a child is to
be ensured. Even those who propose the new sexual freedom seek to retain
legitimacy of a child, or to safeguard the paternity as something not to
be eliminated. After all, a father's blood relationship with his son and
the latter's filial obligation and affinity towards the former are
always recognizable.
This is the philosophy behind selection of a particular spouse and one's
marital undertaking to voluntarily confine sexual relations to her or
him. In fact, conventional morality highlights no other, or greater,
need than for rendering sexual relations in marriage specific to the
couples themselves.
Bertrand Russell's proposed new morals are cited below:
"... Contraceptives have made parenthood voluntary and no longer a
result of sexual intercourse. For various economic reasons... it seems
likely that the father will have less importance in regard to the
education and maintenance of children in the future than he has had in
the past. There will therefore be no very cogent reason why a woman
should choose as the father of her child the man whom she prefers as a
lover or companion.
It may become quite easily possible for women in the future, without any serious sacrifice of happiness, to select the fathers of their children, by eugenic considerations, while allowing their private feelings free sway as regards ordinary sexual companionship. For men it would be still easier to select the mothers of their children for their desirability as parents.
Those who hold, as I do, that sexual behavior concerns the community
solely in so far as children are involved, must draw from this premise a
twofold conclusion as regards the morality of the future. On the one
hand that love apart from children should be free, but on the other
hand, that the procreation of children should be a matter far more
regulated by moral considerations than it is at present." [^2]
Bertrand Russell elaborates further as follows:
"When science becomes able to pronounce on this question (of eugenics)
with more certainty than is possible at present, the moral sense of the
community may come to be more exacting from an eugenic point of view.
The men with the best heredity may come to be eagerly sought after as
fathers, while other men, though they may be acceptable as lovers, may
find themselves rejected when they aim at paternity ...." [^3]
Bertrand Russell's statements and proposals sometimes evidence a moral
angle, too. For instance, he believes that traditional morality has been
designed to cope with the strong and potentially troublesome human
emotions, such as jealousy, which he advises men and women to
consciously overcome. He says, in effect, as follows:
"According to the moral system that I propose, it is only right that
couples should value mutual faithfulness. Alternatively, however, I,
recommend that they overcome jealousy. A sober way of living is not
possible without self control.
So, it is better to discipline the potentially strong and troublesome
emotion of jealousy, and not to allow it to prevent or impair the growth
of the feelings of love and affection. Any shortcoming of conventional
morality does not lie in its justification of self- control, but in the
manner of exercising it.”
In other words, what Russell indicates is that he recommends the same
self control as prescribed by the ancient moralists. However, he
envisages self-control, not in any conventional terms of ensuring self
respect and rectitude, but in completely overcoming jealousy. He
contends that the ancients sought to unduly limit human sexuality.
In contrast, he advocates jealousy-free attainment of human sexuality.
Conventional morality, providing for personal honor as well as
vindication of individual modesty and self-respect, is considered by him
to be outmoded. Instead, it seems as if he would like to see husbands
who are least jealous of their wives' intimacy with other men and who
are even grateful for the social permissiveness that allows extramarital
relations with third persons.
At the same time, Russell says to the effect that children ought to be
born to married couples only. He would like to ensure this through
adoption of different contraceptive means of sterilizing any premarital,
extramarital or post marital sexual relations. Furthermore, he
recommends that:
"It is also by no means impossible that the jealousy of husbands, by a
new convention, adapt itself to the new situation, and arise only when
wives propose to choose some other man as the father of their children.
In the East, men have always tolerated liberties on the part of eunuchs
which most European husbands would resent. They have tolerated them
because they introduce no doubt as to paternity. The same kind of
toleration might easily be extended to liberties accompanied by the
use of contraceptives..' [^4]
The foregoing typifies a kind of reform of the extant social ethics,
which in all probability would entail a never-ending process. No doubt,
it will mean radical changes in the other ethics, too, including legal
safeguards concerning the female modesty, incest, pornography,
homosexuality, abortion, sexual intercourse during menstruation and
similar others.
Some of these, like protection of female modesty and banning pornography
are sometimes upheld. Other questions like homo- sexuality have been
occasionally treated outside the purview of sexual ethics, and in a
clinical manner, so that medical reasons, and not necessarily moral
restraints, can prevent any deviant behavior!
The modernistic sexual ethics described above require to be thoroughly
examined before any ready acceptance. In the present context, only its
basic elements will be discussed and evaluated. Then, the philosophy
underlying Islamic morals, which are quite distinctive from the
Western - traditional as well as modern - morality, will be explained.
This will highlight the Islamic position to the effect that:
"The only school of thought still capable of guiding humanity, through
the distressingly unwholesome effects and untoward consequences of
Western speculations concerning the dynamic philosophy of human living
and sociological evolution, is that of Islam. It is high time that West
oriented societies, with all their scientific and industrial advantages,
realize their continuing need to turn Eastward in the process of their
assimilating a salutary philosophy of life, as they have indeed done in
their past epochs."
[^1]: A more elaborate discussion of the relevant issues will be found in the author's book: The Rights of Women in Islam also available on line at: http://www.al-islam.org/the-rights-of-women-in-islam-murtadha-mutahhari
[^2]: Marriage and Morals, George Allen & Unwin Ltd., London. Paperbacks Ed. 1976,pp. 173-174
[^3]: Marriage and Morals, George Allen & Unwin Ltd., London. Paperbacks Ed. 1976,pp. 173-174
[^4]: Marriage and Morals, George Allen & Unwin Ltd., London. Paperbacks Ed. 1976, pp. 194-195.