Some here in the West have reacted with shock in response to the new Afghanistan law that gives Shiite men permission to rape their wives, even though President Hamid Karzai claims that we're simply misinterpreting this law. In other words, we've lost something in the translation. I won't pretend to know if that is the case or not, but I don't think it's too big of a stretch to believe that women's rights are once again being compromised.
by Carol Hoenig
Carol is the author of the multi-award-winning novel, "Without Grace."
Excerpted from The Huffington Post
I was struck by Dexter Filkins' piece in a recent New York Times article, Afghan Women Protest New Law on Home Life. In part, he said,
Women are mostly illiterate in this impoverished country, and they do not, generally speaking, enjoy anything near the freedom accorded to men. But there they were, most of them young, many in jeans, defying a threatening crowd and calling out slogans heavy with meaning.
With the Afghan police keeping the mob at bay, the women walked two miles to Parliament, where they delivered a petition calling for the law's repeal.
"Whenever a man wants sex, we cannot refuse," said Fatima Husseini, 26, one of the marchers. "It means a woman is a kind of property, to be used by the man in any way that he wants."
To imagine that this injustice goes on in today's world is confounding. However, before we are too quick to feel evolved in comparison, in another part of the world, namely here in the United States, there is an isolated society dominated by men who maintain that a woman's purpose is to have babies, lots of babies. Even though there is a marked difference from the women in Afghanistan, since the LDS women were given permission recently to discuss their lifestyle with Oprah, one wonders how guarded they had to be in order not to disobey the higher order.
Both aforementioned societies are extreme in the nature of their beliefs, but one does not have to be a polygamist or live under the Islamic law to be required to live under the authority of one's husband. There are many fundamental Christians who believe in the infallibility of the Bible and the verses are meant to be unchallenged. This is why those following the Bible insist that a woman is to submit to her husband. To justify their stance, they often quote Ephesians 5: 22, 23: "Wives, submit yourselves unto your husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the savior of the body."
Long ago, when I was an active member of a Bible-preaching church, this verse got a lot of discussion, leaving many women in a state of confusion, not to mention frustration. After all, to challenge such a notion meant not only subverting their husband's authority, but the authority of their god. This also meant that they were expected to "put out" whenever the husband demanded, in addition to accepting the rules of his household, even if those rules were irrational.
When women tried to discuss the possibility that perhaps something was missing in the translation, one of the responses from the pastor was to quote Ephesians 5:25: "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her." This was determined to mean that if he was ever required, the husband was to die for his wife.
On first look, it does seem to be quite a big deal and how can a woman complain about her duty of submission after hearing that? However, how many men are actually called upon to die for their wife? In reality, it's the day-to-day living for her that necessitates more sacrifice. These religious texts, supposedly inspired by a higher authority, were written and interpreted by men. And if one questions this thinking, one is considered a heretic or worse and the ramifications can be dire. For instance, the lives of the Afghanistan women protesting the rape law are in danger because it appears that they are challenging the Koran.
Read the full article here.