Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Muslim Leaders Speak out Against Forced Marriage

By Deepali Gaur Singh, RH Reality Check. Posted March 28, 2008.


The opposition of prominent Islamic scholars to forced marriage is an important step in the fight for gender equality in the Muslim world.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Deepali Gaur Singh

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

In traditional societies like India, arranged marriage is as inherent to the social fabric of the nation as is the institution of marriage itself. This is why, often, choosing one's own partner constitutes the worst form of rebellion against a parent, and, for women, the urn-bearers of the family reputation, a choice that crosses the line from rebellion to dishonor upon the family.

Even celluloid love stories of the past decade have shown a shift from the rebellious love stories of the eighties to more accommodating, docile renditions where instead of challenging the system -- the parents and the arranged marriage -- you go along with the system, embracing 'tradition' in all its splendor. But unfortunately, reel life has not aped real, or vice versa, which is evident in the numerous violent incidents against couples who chose to challenge the traditional shackles of marriage and the unwritten code for 'acceptable' alliances. These unacceptable alliances have been met with violence against the couple, whether it is the forceful confinement of the girl by her own family, threats of (and actual) violence against the couple, panchayat decrees ordering the stripping of the woman or female relatives of the ostracized couple, murders and suicides, or murder in the garb of suicide. And this is a trend that appears to be as common in urban as in rural India -- and even overseas, as evidenced in kidnappings and killings linked to marriages amongst the expatriate Asian community.

In the Indian context (and the larger South Asian context of countries that are similarly traditional), with women in general and girls in particular hardly enjoying the space to make life changing decisions themselves, it is hardly surprising that curbs on a woman's right to choose whom to marry manifest themselves in a multitude of ways, irrespective of the religion they conform to. So while child marriages are brazenly practiced, marriages to pay off family debts do exist, forced marriages are employed to prevent girls from marrying the men of their choice, widows are coerced in to marriages with the brother-in-law (or other male relatives) or into polyandrous marriages and such seemingly endless situations, women -- viewed as either the husband's or father's property -- do not have the choice to make decisions about their own marriage.

Religion, culture, value systems, and the abundant use of prevailing customs in many parts of the country thwart the protection of this right of marriage by choice. And the noise is not always only about inter-religious marriages but even over marriages that violate caste or sub-caste distinctions and specific cultural, regional sanctions. Additionally, those wanting to get out of a bad marriage through divorce invite further violence not only from the marital home but often from the paternal side too. And even as 'honor' crimes occur against women, honor killings themselves are not listed as a crime against women and hence continue unabated in various forms and disguises as an inherent part of patriarchal structures.

It is in this context that Muslim bodies and Islamic scholars at a meeting in the national capital of New Delhi unanimously decided that "in Islam, the girl has every right to marry the boy of her choice and her parents cannot impose their decision on her since the Sharia (Muslim law) gives the girl right to choose her future husband." This meeting, attended, amongst others, by members of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), and Dar-ul-Uloom Deoband under the banner of Islamic Fiqh Academy (IFA) made truly a landmark decision -- even if it remains to be tested.

It was further reiterated that Islam does not condone forced marriages and if a girl is forced in to such an alliance she has every right to declare her marriage null and void "because such a marriage will also be against Sharia."

While the Sharia law decision is not legally binding, and Sharia is open to interpretation, the decision is an important and progressive way of looking at women's rights within the Muslim context. It has not been disputed as yet -- though that has mostly to do with its non-binding nature and the fact that it was within the context of India.

What makes this particularly important is that not only are girls (irrespective of their religious faiths) married off very early, but they are also often married to men much older than they are. No matter the age of the girl's husband, it's an extremely dangerous situation: the girl's education is aborted (for those who even get an education) and they are thrust in to the adult demands of a marriage when their bodies might not be ready.

With the long-standing, rigid, social demands for women in place, any challenge to them is bound to extract its price. With the denial of choice for women disguised in the elaborate garb of tradition, it is decisions like this -- using the Sharia to actually hand over agency to women especially with regard to choices that impact their bodily autonomy and their life -- that might prove to be the most sustainable and have the deepest impact.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: india, forced marriage, sharia, islam, gender

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Does seem like a very significant move
Posted by: dmaciewski on Mar 29, 2008 4:44 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am speptical as to how much the Abrahamic faiths can actually corrolate with modern, Western progressive values, including feminism. I took a course on Islam several years back at a state college, where the pretty non-traditional Eastern Orthodox professor tried to stretch the argument that Muhammad really supported an enlightened polygamy, saying if a man can't take care of all wives equally, he should have only one. But, this is a greater step forward.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't expect Israel or the US to be happy about it.
Posted by: maxpayne on Mar 29, 2008 6:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They love oppression in the Arab world and without their financial and military aid coming from the US taxpayer money, this kind of oppression would have been harder to sustain in the first place. I know that in India, Pakistan, etc ... marriages may be arranged but arranged marriages are not the same as forced ones. As a matter of fact, eastern values do not say anything about love vs arranged marriage types.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE:the true oppressors Posted by: solomax
» RE: the true oppressors Posted by: maxpayne
not a newsworthy article
Posted by: solomax on Mar 29, 2008 10:20 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This entire article is barely newsworthy , considering that the woman was given the choice of choosing her partner from the inception of Islam. However,I guess the muslim religious body in India,was merely reiterating this ruling, in response, to the cultural practice,of arranged marriages, prevalent in Indian society which includes Hindus, sikhs etc. Thus this declaration,is a reminder to those muslims that follow culture instead of religious guidelines. Furthermore, the assertion that this is a new progress in a presumed gender battle,is just another incorrect sweeping generalisation against muslims in general ,which is so predictable of reporters & editors, considering that the right of choice of a husband by the muslim woman; is over 1400 years old.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: not a newsworthy article Posted by: YogiBear
A Good Start, But...
Posted by: AlexLawyer on Mar 30, 2008 12:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's hope that, along with forced child marriages, they'll disown other Koranic injunctions such as wife-beating, half-inheritance for women, the requirement for four male Muslim witnesses to prove rape, and marital rape if the husband desires sex.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A Good Start, But... Posted by: truthseeker426
» RE: A Good Start, But... Posted by: jennyfox
» RE: A Good Start, But... Posted by: truthseeker426
Arranged marriage as described above is NOT an "Islamic" practice to begin with!
Posted by: Pale_Green_Pants on Apr 5, 2008 5:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The tone of the article suggests that this declaration is something new or a step toward Islamic reform, when in fact it is simply a routine denunciation of a pre-existing cultural custom that is at odds with Islamic law. The phenomenon of "arranged marriage" as practiced in India and Pakistan--in which the couple is married off by their parents without having ever met before and the bride has little or no say in the matter--was never part of Islamic marriage practice in the rest of the world and is condemed by Sharia law. The decision by this group reflects the more conservative (dare I say "fundamentalist") approach to marriage customs among Muslims in South Asia. The general tone of the decision seems (to me, at least) to be "marry your kids off the Muslim way, not the Hindu way."

Please do a bit of research before posting an article like this. A 5-second google search on arranged marriage and Sharia law could have saved a lot of embarassment and probably would have yielded a much more nuanced approach to this subject.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]