Pashtun woman, a challenge to the conscience of the Humanity and human rights groups.

[Mellish]

I was listening to a TED lecture on the impact of education on a nation's average IQ - the subject focus was on America, a comparison of IQ between now and a couple of generations ago or so.

James Flynn: Why our IQ levels are higher than our grandparents' | Video on TED.com

However, the lecturer uses, as an example of non-abstract thinking, a sharia ruling on rape i.e. it is bound by what is in the book and doesn't consider more widely (though the regular law can be just as guilty of that at times). I was interested to know whether the example - where the woman is punished rather than the men involved - is the usual outcome of Sharia law on rape, or was such an example non-representative?

Would the Taliban legal process on rape, for example, result in punishment for the woman - or instead are they fairly harsh on the perpetrators, which I seem to recall?

(btw it's a very good lecture with strong evidence about the impact of education on a whole population.)

[Badlun]

I was listening to a TED lecture on the impact of education on a nation's average IQ - the subject focus was on America, a comparison of IQ between now and a couple of generations ago or so.

James Flynn: Why our IQ levels are higher than our grandparents' | Video on TED.com

However, the lecturer uses, as an example of non-abstract thinking, a sharia ruling on rape i.e. it is bound by what is in the book and doesn't consider more widely (though the regular law can be just as guilty of that at times). I was interested to know whether the example - where the woman is punished rather than the men involved - is the usual outcome of Sharia law on rape, or was such an example non-representative?

Would the Taliban legal process on rape, for example, result in punishment for the woman - or instead are they fairly harsh on the perpetrators, which I seem to recall?

(btw it's a very good lecture with strong evidence about the impact of education on a whole population.)

The lecture is really very good. The issue is dynamism versus stagnancy, lateral thinking versus vertical thinking, conformation versus non conformation, religious texts as final unchangeable truth or reinterpretation of some religious rulings, islam as a religion or also a legal system.

The hadood penal laws are not at all laws. These are just moral injunctions misunderstood as Sharia. As in Quran it is clealry mentioned that a man can have only 4 ORPHAN women but Muslims marry any 4 women whether orphan or not. Similarly the moral pre-emptive injunctions on adultery, theft, drinking etc are taken as a legal code.

But this legal code is never applied as it is practically unimplementable. How can a raped woman will bring 4 witnesses who will testify that she was raped and they saw the male organ going inside like a thread in needle! This is pure dogmatism and nothing to do with the religion of Islam.

Another misnomer is that zina is adultery or fornication but not rape because rape is not mentioned in Quran. Actually sex with mutual consent is like marriage and thus un-punishable. The only punishable crime is rape which is forced sex.

Taliban due to legal lacunae in Islamic so called legal codes, usually punish more women as they cannot produce the required number of witnesses. Other evidence like medical reports etc are not considered ebcause these are not mentioned in Quran. Again stupidity and bigotry nothing else.

When a man will rape a woman, he will make it sure to do it in a secure, isolated place not in presence of 4 persons who will be witnessing the process calmly to see the penetration with full surety. If this is a group sex then the witnesses will never speak against each other.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

The lecture is really very good. The issue is dynamism versus stagnancy, lateral thinking versus vertical thinking, conformation versus non conformation, religious texts as final unchangeable truth or reinterpretation of some religious rulings, islam as a religion or also a legal system.

The hadood penal laws are not at all laws. These are just moral injunctions misunderstood as Sharia. As in Quran it is clealry mentioned that a man can have only 4 ORPHAN women but Muslims marry any 4 women whether orphan or not. Similarly the moral pre-emptive injunctions on adultery, theft, drinking etc are taken as a legal code.

But this legal code is never applied as it is practically unimplementable. How can a raped woman will bring 4 witnesses who will testify that she was raped and they saw the male organ going inside like a thread in needle! This is pure dogmatism and nothing to do with the religion of Islam.

Another misnomer is that zina is adultery or fornication but not rape because rape is not mentioned in Quran. Actually sex with mutual consent is like marriage and thus un-punishable. The only punishable crime is rape which is forced sex.

Taliban due to legal lacunae in Islamic so called legal codes, usually punish more women as they cannot produce the required number of witnesses. Other evidence like medical reports etc are not considered ebcause these are not mentioned in Quran. Again stupidity and bigotry nothing else.

When a man will rape a woman, he will make it sure to do it in a secure, isolated place not in presence of 4 persons who will be witnessing the process calmly to see the penetration with full surety. If this is a group sex then the witnesses will never speak against each other.

Disingenuous posturing with a poorly informed view point. There are a number of historical flaws and orthodoxy (e.g. Ibn Masud based on Prophetic example) and various Quranic injunctions themselves describe physical punishments.

Regarding the rape issue:

I think its grossly unfair and uninformed to claim the Quran demands 4 witnesses for rape and just brush it off as if there are no complexities. The verse is rather specific regarding the matter of infidelity. The application of this standard to rape cases is an extension of logic and evolved in the hanafi school of thought to as to go as far as possible to avoid implementing the hadd punishment unnecessarily (i.e. both the hadith and the Quran appear to advocate a position such that an innocent being punished is viewed as a greater egregious act then a criminal potentially escaping the punishment).

Competing Approaches to Rape in Islamic Law (forthcoming) | Hina Azam - Academia.edu

This link above is to one of the best theses I have read to date by a female regarding the evolution of rape laws and contrasts the early maliki jurisprudence versus the Hanafi jurisprudence. The author comes to a similar conclusion as I stated above when discussing the hanafi thought process:

"The most notable aspect of Ḥanaf ī evidentiary standards pertaining to zinā is the impossibility of their fulfillment. This impossibility reflects the overarching juristic objective in zinā cases, which is to avoid imposing the ḥadd punishment as much aspossible, in accordance with the Prophetic directive.

The Maliki school of thought incorporated or extended upon its own view of the evidence to differentiate rape into ightisaab and implement a more modernist interpretation of how rape ought to be viewed - and this often resulted in punishment being meted out to the accused.

As I recall, and I may be wrong but Malik preceded Abu Hanifah and the same Malik also took issue with things he saw as not grounded in evidence like ibn Ishaq's sirah.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

"This is where their unity ended, however, for Mālikī jurists contended that rapewas more than just zinā . In other words, they held that zinā was a necessary but not asufficient designation for an act of rape. The rapist, they argued, had done more than only commit an act of zinā, which denotes a transgression against the moral boundaries(
ḥudūd) of God, and therefore a violation of God’s rights (ḥuqūq Allāh). In addition to committing a sex crime, they held that the sexual violator of a free woman had also
taken something from her – something of monetary value. He had illegitimately utilized her body and sexuality, for which utilization she, as a wife, would normally receive monetary compensation in the form of her marital dower. To define rape as zinā
alone addressed the relationship between the sinner and God, but entirely ignored the victim. While it was true that rape was a type of zinā , it had to be recognized that coercive zinā was substantively different from consensual zinā . In an act of coercive
zinā , it was not only God whose rights were violated, but also those of the ravished woman or girl herself. Her interpersonal rights (ḥuqūqā damīya) had to be considered and satisfied. In the vision of the Mālikī s, then, an act of rape was both an act of fornication (zinā ) and also an act of sexual usurpation, or ightiṣāb. Not only should a sexual violator receive the above-mentioned ḥadd zinā , which was conceived as being in satisfaction of God’s right; he should also compensate his victim in the amount that she would normally receive for licit use of her sexuality on the marriage market – that is, a fair dower amount (ṣadā q al-mithl) appropriate to women of her status."

Per Dr. Azam of Univ of Texas at Austin regarding the Maliki Jurists view of rape.

[Badlun]

It means the difference between fornication and rape is that the perpetrator of rape will receive the punishment of zina plus he has to compensate the victim in monetary terms according to her status!

How to prove the punishment of Zina? Again with 4 witnesses and its impossibility to be produced.

Who will determine the status for compensation? What is status in this regard? Again something queer and discrimination that a daughter of a king will receive more money while the daughter of a poor man will receive less money! All absurdities and nothing to do with this modern era.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

It means the difference between fornication and rape is that the perpetrator of rape will receive the punishment of zina plus he has to compensate the victim in monetary terms according to her status!

How to prove the punishment of Zina? Again with 4 witnesses and its impossibility to be produced.

Who will determine the status for compensation? What is status in this regard? Again something queer and discrimination that a daughter of a king will receive more money while the daughter of a poor man will receive less money! All absurdities and nothing to do with this modern era.

Lets educate you Badlun. I am astounded, since Secular Militants claim to be the prophets of education to their homelands, that you cannot abide by a simple educated standard... namely the standard of proof and investigation.

You completely glossed over this high caliber reference and decided to ignore the following. This is primarily because you have no interest in truth, but rather your motive is to hoist ideologies by force onto others. Even if you are purposefully trying to do so, please, in the future read references and utilize your God given brain when making important legalistic arguments.

If secular militants preach education, then please abide by an educated approach in the future that relies on evidences and standards as well as careful reading.:

POINT 1: STANDARDS OF EVIDENCE AND CLASSICAL JURISTS

"Mālik ī jurisprudence, by contrast, defined rape as a composite crime – as both an act of zinā and a usurpation of sexual property, or ightiṣāb. The court, in Mālik ī theory,was to make an independent determination about each of these crimes, each of which had distinct evidentiary standards. If the standards for zinā were met, then the defendant was to receive the ḥadd punishment, and if the standards for ightiṣāb were met, then the defendant was to compensate his victim for violating her. Furthermore, Mālik ī jurisprudencetreated the two components of rape in tandem, linking them through the nuanced use of the discretionary punishment (ta`zī r): If the evidentiary requirements for zinā were not met, but those for ightiṣāb were, then the jurists advocated imposing a discretionary punishment on the defendant, on the rationale that a sexual violation had most likely occurred. Mālik ī jurisprudence thus allowed two avenues through which to pursue sexual violence, as opposed to only one, as in Ḥanafī fiqh. Furthermore, their discussions on substantiating rape were far more subtle, intergrating evidentiary principles related both to zinā and to property usurpation. Inwhat follows, we will summarize these methods of establishing rape – coercive zinā and ightiṣāb, respectively – from the perspective of each school.

This is to show that Islamic jurisprudence, historically, is rich and diverse with a strong literary tradition of debate. The fact that the shafi inheritors of the Malikites were able to debate the Hanafis shows cross fertilization of thought and an intellectual approach to the law.

Note that the author addresses your concern and indicates that the primary source evidence goes EVEN BEYOND MALIK:

POINT 2: MONETARY REWARDS AND THE LIKE; EVOLUTION OF PUNISHMENT

Note that this academic author (and I stress academic since your sources usually emanate from missionary critics of Islam like answeringislam.org) provides a PRE-jurist Islamic narrative back to the Prophet and Khilafath-e-Rashideen:

Already during the formative period, instances of rape are reported to have occurred. Judgments and opinions regarding coercive zinā are found throughout the early Sunnī legal literature, and these reports give us insight into the way early authorities thought about the crime. What one finds is that although consensual acts of fornication are unproblematically categorized and penalized asḥadd crimes, authorities were divided over how to categorize and penalize men who committed
zinā with a woman against her will. All camps seem to have concurred that the male coercers should receive theḥadd zinā and that the female victims be relieved of that. However ,disagreement appears over precisely the same issue that later exercised jurists of the classical Mālikī andḤanafī schools. Although judgments attributed to the Prophet and companions such as Abū Bakr and `Umar b. al-Khaṭṭāb do not generally signal monetary awards to victims of coercion, the dominant position among juristic authorities of the slightly later “Successor” generations was that violators of free women should pay their victims a fair dower amount. The minority position among these. Successor jurists was that there should be no monetary compensation, dower or otherwise, to a rape victim. In other words, that which would become the Mālikī position seems to have been more widely held than that which became theḤanafī position

She evidences a temporal flux wherein the early khilafaath period rendered justice without monetary compensation that evolved into the juristic debate period and then she goes on to show that for a period of time the Malikites dominated the procedures.

I am surprised that you, a lawyer, cannot read for comprehension when criticizing or scrutinizing any particular law system.

POINT 3: Differential treatments and outcomes according to class structure.

Every law system evolves, as we can see above, the same went for the Islamic jurisprudence debates. Discordant justice has been scientifically documented within the US legal system:


"a] common pattern of error is when a white woman is raped by an African American or Hispanic man and unintentionally identifies an innocent person as the perpetrator.” "


http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...act_id=1616359

"But when the victim is white and the perpetrator is black, the risk of a wrongful conviction rises dramatically."

http://thecrimereport.s3.amazonaws.c...inks__2013.pdf

Your predictable response will be that at least this fact is not codified and can be remedied. Please re-read the above reference and note quiet clearly that codification and evolutionary standards of law are completely separate issues. American law in the 1700s also has a differential standard for rape for people of different socioeconomic backgrounds and it evolved. What we can see clearly is from the PhD document from Texas is that Islamic law underwent its own evolution to some degree. Perhaps a retrogression occurred, as most devout Muslims will admit to, from the Prophet and Khilafath e Rashideen period to the subsequent era... yet the point is the structures, historical basis, and evidences show that the basis for evolution of the law towards a better standard exists both in Quranic law and in the associated root source history that Muslims hearken back to.

POINT 4: Evidences for burden of proof also steers clear of the high standard even in the West:

http://www.newsweek.com/needed-revol...-justice-64085

Most reported rapes are perpetrated by someone the victim knows, and law enforcement operate on the misguided assumption that these so-called acquaintance-rape cases are too hard to prove or are false reports by victims motivated to harm the accused. Consequently, these “non-stranger” rape cases often languish after they are reported, and, even when they do move forward, law-enforcement officers see no need to test a rape kit in the case, since they already know who the suspect is.

I look forward to your criticism of how western cops and justice operate based on "false report" assumptions

Britainia suffers from a similar lack of prosecution and justice:

"

an annual average of 15 670 reports results in an average of 2 910 prosecutions. That’s about 19%. So even if 63% of those 2910 cases result in convictions, that is a mere 11% of the original reported total. In other words, 89% of reported rapes do not result in any sort of conviction. Bear in mind that the Crown Prosecution Service recently

released a report

which establishes pretty comprehensively that false allegations of rape are extremely rare."

http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/r...march_2013.pdf

POINT 5: Evolution of socioeconomic class and conviction in the American paradigm EVEN WITHIN RACE CLASS just in the last 100 years. Meaning, yes even in the West up until fairly recently a "King's" daughter was treated differently than a pauper's daughter. And in some regards based on the above references, this continues into today.:

http://books.google.com/books?id=QoK...0class&f=false

"Nevertheless poor white women did not receive the same consideration that elite women received. Virginia courts and officials did not go so far as to say explicitly that lower class women could not be raped, but they did concede that raping lower class women was as serious as assaulting more elite women related to "prominent" men. Most black men accused of assaulting poor women were convicted, but the class of the women was a factor in determining the length of sentence and whether the convicted assailant was an appropriate candidate for pardon."

page 128 from
White Women, Rape, and the Power of Race in Virginia, 1900-1960



So in summary your prejudicial argument was foolish to begin with, uninformed to continue with, and is now relegated to the trash bin.

[jankhan]

It means the difference between fornication and rape is that the perpetrator of rape will receive the punishment of zina plus he has to compensate the victim in monetary terms according to her status!

How to prove the punishment of Zina? Again with 4 witnesses and its impossibility to be produced.

Who will determine the status for compensation? What is status in this regard? Again something queer and discrimination that a daughter of a king will receive more money while the daughter of a poor man will receive less money! All absurdities and nothing to do with this modern era.

For the rapist {zina biljabar} the punishment is the same as for the fornication {zina bilraza}. But some say that the rapist should be punished more severely as we have punishment for a murderer and for a terrorist.
In Islam this issue has been discouraged to be brought openly that is why there are four evidences required to prove the zina.
for more detailes watch this...
Grand TV Debate on Hadood Ordinence - Mufti Muneeb ur Rahman vs Javed Ahmed Ghamidi - YouTube

[Badlun]

Giving an academic reference telling me that Zina bil jabar and zina bil Raza are the same in Hanafi fiqa and different in Maliki because there is a compensation. This is what your reference says. On discrimination if something wrong happens in the West does not mean we should also follow it.

My concern is not that the issue of rape is discussed by Malik or Abu Hanifa or in your reference. My concern is that how a victim of rape can prove that she has been raped. where from she will produce 4 witnesses? Do not you think it is something impossible or at least very difficult which give edge to rapists to escape freely.

As Jan Khan said islam wants to hide the issue not to highlight it. But law is not religion which must have its own due course.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Giving an academic reference telling me that Zina bil jabar and zina bil Raza are the same in Hanafi fiqa and different in Maliki because there is a compensation. This is what your reference says.

Quit being deceptive. The reference is far more detailed and discusses the fact that prophetic example and that of two important khalifas did not utilize compensation but that Maliki drew on the general principle of separating out rape from zina and the proof of event that is required from zina based on these examples.

On discrimination if something wrong happens in the West does not mean we should also follow it.

No but it evidences criticism should be even handed of each system and that the you are biased in your approach (which is devoid of education and a science/evidence basis assessment).

An educated approach also mandates that a system with a more indigenous acceptance that has EVIDENCE of being able to evolve or be debated does not need to be expunged by secular militants like you that seek to replace that system with the hoisted kharij system.

My concern is not that the issue of rape is discussed by Malik or Abu Hanifa or in your reference. My concern is that how a victim of rape can prove that she has been raped.

I told you to quit asking questions that have been answered. Re-read the post above regarding the evidence standard that Maliki disconnected from standard zina in his juristic enterprise. Repeating your inane question and pretending to be illiterate will get you nowhere.

where from she will produce 4 witnesses? Do not you think it is something impossible or at least very difficult which give edge to rapists to escape freely.

Once again re-read the last post. If you choose to repeat a question that has been answered then the same reference will be given. The reference indicates with the Maliki paradigm the concept of the 4 witness proof was separated out and an even more generous aspect of the jury accepting circumstantial evidences/reasonable evidences to consider the rape being done was codified.

As Jan Khan said islam wants to hide the issue not to highlight it. But law is not religion which must have its own due course.

Ali Jan Khan is referencing the Hanafi tradition but also has not read Hanafi jurist thought processes that did not seek to expunge an injustice but to ensure a grave punishment was not meted out willy nilly so that someone could not just come along and accuse Badlun of adultery or fornication and Badlun or Badluna then gets either his life or physical wellbeing harmed through injustice. Hanafi jurists extended the concept to rape and found vigorous debate from their Maliki counterparts who then answered their approach with their own evidences and further debate.

The author goes on to note that going back even further the rudimentary system under the first two caliphs was the basis but not exactly for either of the two schools. This then opens the way for further debate if it is evidence based.

x

[Badlun]

Maliki Fiqa is followed mostly in Northern Africa not in Asia where we come from. About 70% Muslims follow Hanafi Fiq so what about Hanafis?

If Malikis do not ask for 4 witnesses then they are violating Quran so how jurisprudentially their opinion is stronger. Even Malikis are for 4 witnesses in normal zina so how these 4 witnesses conundrum will be resolved if you have to implement that hadd in Zina bil raza?

If we forget the Fiqi nuances then what about Quran asking for any kind of Zina?

In the early days Islam we did not have this modern jurisprudential and medico-legal advancements so such illogical punishments might have been implemented in few cases but it does not make it valid for this 21st century.

Please make Quran for religious and spiritual guidance not for such legal provisions which had implementable validity for few years but later on and today remain only in books never in law courts except by barbarians like Taliban to crush Pashtun women.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Maliki Fiqa is followed mostly in Northern Africa not in Asia where we come from. About 70% Muslims follow Hanafi Fiq so what about Hanafis?

Once again, per the document, historical evidence shows vibrant debate that relied in an evidence basis for decision making and strong references - each reaching different conclusions. Projected back, there were also historical differences at the nascent Khilafath-e-Rashidoon phase. The fiqa they restrict themselves to is their business but hanafi and shafi et al all pray alongside eachother with their variations intact.

If Malikis do not ask for 4 witnesses then they are violating Quran so how jurisprudentially their opinion is stronger. Even Malikis are for 4 witnesses in normal zina so how these 4 witnesses conundrum will be resolved if you have to implement that hadd in Zina bil raza?

I told you to quit acting jahel and read the above response which you already were referenced. Maliki separate out rape as an ightisaab and therefore the standard of evidence was modified. Refer to quote above. That set of initially dominant jurists in the early Islamic area debated Hanafites vigorously about this concept of Zina Bil Raza. They centered their argument around consensuality and commodity, with the earlier caliphate not even taking commodity into account.

If we forget the Fiqi nuances then what about Quran asking for any kind of Zina?

Plain and simple, fornication and adultery where the hanafite tradition centers around the concept commonly heard in the mid east and far east... "Zama haqq." To deprive someone of their haqq, whether it be life or property was a massive insult. For that reason due to the fact that traditional mores often would result in bloody consequences for transgressors from a cultural vantage point in so many instances (being a natural deterrent), hanafites assumed a lower rape rate and decided it would be worse to deprive a human being of his or her life or dignity than to let a rape event go unchecked. Malikites took exception to this and the shafi lineage tends to refer to Malik's tradition in this issue. One can see the complexity of this matter for this excellently documented case:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...d-in-pakistan/


In the early days Islam we did not have this modern jurisprudential and medico-legal advancements so such illogical punishments might have been implemented in few cases but it does not make it valid for this 21st century.

And there is nothing that precludes definitive evidence from still being utilized... that's an assumption you make. For instance, if a video camera catches a woman being raped, there is absolutely nothing that would make that evidence impermissible and if one were to try and do that in a jury based case - that person would have to make cogent arguments. If his basis was the verse remands 4 human witnesses, other parts of the Quran that are supplementary that clearly describe God opening up a better way can be referenced. If on the other hand there is a concern the data or video evidence is doctored then the lawyer will have to make his case.

Regarding DNA evidence, even then, sperm in the vaginal vault does not preclude consensual sex. There are other techniques employed to examine for pathological medical signs of forced sex, yet even there if there was vigorous consensual intercourse involved, even in Western courts this has been argued upon.

Please make Quran for religious and spiritual guidance not for such legal provisions which had implementable validity for few years but later on and today remain only in books never in law courts except by barbarians like Taliban to crush Pashtun women.

Wrong again. God makes clear that there are certain punishments to be enacted and please quit being a militant barbaric secularist trying to subvert God at very turn using either feigned ignorance or twisted logic. Repeating yourself will not make your argument stronger, it merely makes your brain look more fatigued

x

[Mellish]

A very interesting debate - hope I haven't caused too much trouble with all my questions! However, there does seem to be a conception within the Islamic community that four witnesses are required - whether they are misguided or not. For example, the first two of the Islamic forums, quoted below, note that there is a misconception within Islam, and amongst some jurists too, but the last reiterates that four witness *are* required:

http://muslimgirl.net/6728/do-women-need-to-provide-four-witnesses-to-prove-rape/

http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?id=12121

http://www.islamhelpline.com/node/732

Of course, you may know the provenance of these forums - far better than I, I am sure. (I like the explanation in the first one!) It would be interesting, though, to get a feel for how widespread the notion of four witness requirement is amongst the Islamic community.

The understanding may - as I think Badlun has suggested - vary dependent on school and region? Or is very much a minority view?

[Badlun]

A very interesting debate - hope I haven't caused too much trouble with all my questions! However, there does seem to be a conception within the Islamic community that four witnesses are required - whether they are misguided or not. For example, the first two of the Islamic forums, quoted below, note that there is a misconception within Islam, and amongst some jurists too, but the last reiterates that four witness *are* required:

http://muslimgirl.net/6728/do-women-...to-prove-rape/
http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?id=12121
http://www.islamhelpline.com/node/732

Of course, you may know the provenance of these forums - far better than I, I am sure. (I like the explanation in the first one!) It would be interesting, though, to get a feel for how widespread the notion of four witness requirement is amongst the Islamic community.

The understanding may - as I think Badlun has suggested - vary dependent on school and region? Or is very much a minority view?

Your points are very important and please do share your feedback and inquiries.

Till the time Muslims do not consider Quran to be a book of religion like Bible , Muslims will be stuck up in the 1400 years old so called legal codes and law of evidence. Practically this 4 witnesses thing is never applicable but it still exists in jurisprudential discussions. I do not any case in history where 4 witnesses came and gave evidence in a rape case.

[Badlun]

Great reading

Then Huriya took out her smart phone and showed Salima a picture of burqa clad women, covered from head-to-toe. One among them had unmasked her face and was smiling at the photographer.

“This is the spirit that the Taliban have failed to subdue. This sweet defiance unsettles most men, even in the West,” she said. “Put away your pens and microphones and enter their world. Share their experience and only then you will understand how powerful this smile is.”

This is the spirit the Taliban failed to subdue - DAWN.COM

[Badlun]

32% of Pakistanis say niqab most appropriate dress for women: survey

University of Michigan Population Studies Center recently published a survey in which it asked respondents from Muslim countries to choose the most appropriate apparel for women.

The survey, which was conducted between 2011 and 2013, covered seven countries: Tunisia, Pakistani, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Turkey.

The section devoted to gender issues included a question on how women should dress in public. Respondents were shown six head shots which showed women wearing a shuttlecock burka, a niqab, different forms of headscarves and one without any head covering.

Of the 3,523 Pakistanis surveyed in the report, 32% favoured a niqab (photo 2). The abaya (photo 3) was the second most popular category with 31% of people voting for it. In comparison, only 3% of respondents voted for the shuttlecock burka and only 2% for the woman shown without a veil or scarf. 51% of the Pakistani respondents were male.

For most countries, the fourth image, which shows a woman wearing a headscarf, was deemed to be the most appropriate but in Lebanon the majority of respondents – nearly 50% – voted for the sixth image which shows a woman without any veil or scarf.
Dress as they please

When asked whether women should be allowed to dress as they please, nearly half the respondents from Tunisia, Lebanon and Turkey – if not more – voted in favour. However only 22% of Pakistanis said women should be able to dress as they wish, followed by Egypt at 14%.

Gender issues
The survey also asked respondents if women should always be expected to obey their husbands. 38% of Lebanese respondents disagreed with the statement whereas only 8% of Pakistani voted against it.
Also, when asked about the importance of love as basis for marriage, only 7% of Pakistanis said it was important.

In most of the surveys on women and gender, Pakistani respondents voted conservatively but when asked whether men make better political leaders than women, 29% of Pakistanis disagreed. In comparison, only 17% of Egyptians, 21% of Saudis and 28% of Iraqis disagreed that men make better political leaders than women.

32% of Pakistanis say niqab most appropriate dress for women: survey – The Express Tribune