In the wake of the Women of Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia Facebook video describing the “light beating” Muslim husbands are allowed in bringing wives into line, ABC News tasks two female staff journalists – feminists – with investigating Muslim domestic violence.
Rather than get straight into their findings, the two leftist ladies remind readers, in a lengthy, diversionary preamble, that:
Until recently assaulting women was the Australian national sport:
Refraining from beating up women is now, we’re told, a core Australian value.
Rosie Batty* is a hero:
It has taken many decades to ensure Australians recognise intimate partner violence as a crime that must be exposed, not endured. In no small part thanks to former Australian of the Year Rosie Batty, large swathes of the country are now conscious of the prevalence and myriad destructive forms domestic violence takes.
The Hizb ut Tahrir video advocates nothing more than the quaint Islamic custom whereby a husband hits a “disobedient” wife “gently, using small sticks or piece of fabric”:
“He [the husband] is permitted — not obliged, not encouraged — but permitted, to hit her [his wife],” one of the women says. “That is what everyone is talking about. It should not cause pain. Not harsh.”
Domestic violence isn’t unique to Islam:
… Christianity and other religions are being forced to confront the darkness in their own midst, the fact that some of their followers at times condone or tolerate domestic violence, and to grapple with how best to combat it.
Muslims are unfairly stereotyped:
[Adel Salman, the vice-president of the Islamic Council of Victoria] worried, he said, that [the Hizb ut-Tahrir video] would lead to “further stereotyping of the Muslim community”.
The Koran, believed by Muslims to be literally the word of the almighty, must be taken with a grain of salt:
The verse should not be read literally, they say, but in context with other Koranic verses, as well as the example of the Prophet Muhammad, who — as has been well-established in hadiths, which document his words and actions — never hit his wives, and encouraged men to treat women with respect.
Mrs Waleed Aly’s opinion is important:
But Susan Carland, who teaches gender studies, politics, and sociology at Monash University, said Hizb ut-Tahrir was a “minority opinion within Islam” in Australia.
“In this kind of situation, we only want to be hearing from people who actually know what they’re talking about, we want to be hearing from imams and those sort of people,” Dr Carland said.
Patriarchy, not Islam, is to blame for violence against women:
For centuries male scholars have argued that it gives husbands financial and or fundamental superiority over women, as well as the right to physically discipline — or “beat lightly” — their wives.
Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband’s) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).
“New” and “interpretation” are the operative words, the article pointing out:
Since the revelation of this verse, there have been opposing views in under-standing its content. Historically, most Quran exegesis and interpretation of the verse did not question the husbands’ right to physically discipline their wives. Rather, the argument focused on the cause, procedure and the extent of permissible beating. It was against these patriarchal views that a new egalitarian, woman-centred interpretation has recently been developed.
A religion dominated by males for 1,400 years will, of course, immediately adopt this “new interpretation”.
In a long list of translations to English, “beat them” appears 26 times, eight of which are qualified as “lightly”. “Scourge them” appears twice, “strike them” five times and “punish them” four times. Out of 54 Koran translations, 37 directly mention or imply physical correction, the remainder advising “chastising” or a “pushing away”.
As far as I know, however, there are no Koranic mentions of measures allowed to be undertaking by females wishing to correct males, and certainly no mention of any requirement that males must obey females.
This mostly apologetic ABC feminist-fluff cost taxpayers plenty yet came up with nothing:
ABC News has interviewed dozens of scholars, imams, social workers and women’s advocates over the past several weeks with three major findings.
First, there is a strong consensus that Islam abhors all violence, including domestic abuse.
Second, there are serious, legitimate concerns that some in the community do still believe Koranic texts support husbands abusing their wives, as revealed in the Facebook video above.
And third, crucially, that Australia’s all-male imams are often encouraging women to stay in violent situations.
Lefties aren’t about to say anything overtly negative about Islam because they’re allied in undermining western civilisation.
* Rosie Batty rose to national fame through a deadly error in judgement:
Batty should be Responsibility Avoider of The Year rather than Australian of The Year. Her book recounts the “emotional and physical abuse” inflicted by Greg Anderson, the eventual killer of their son. She asked Anderson to absent himself from her life, which he did. Eight years later Batty sought out Anderson, rekindled their relationship and allowed him to impregnate her. She should have known better.
She is not a “hero”.