Polygamy, “evolution” and mistreatment of women

The last week or so I’ve seen two articles about Muslim men who don’t respect women, one of them on Achelois’ blog, the other by Mariella Frostrup in last Sunday’s Observer, which Fareena Alam linked on Facebook. The first used a couple of ugly incidents involving men in polygamous marriages in a Gulf state and attacked polygamy itself on the basis of it; the second is about a woman who supposedly converted to Islam, fell in love with a married man (with a young Yemeni wife) who for some reason wrote to this woman for advice. Somehow I don’t quite believe that aspect of it, but let’s examine both stories.

I’ll do the Frostrup one first. This is a British woman who met a Yemeni Muslim man who’s 29; his wife is 23, he married her when he was 15, and they have four children. Yet, this man doesn’t love his wife and they no longer have sex, because she’s smelled her perfume and knows he’s cheating on her. He can’t get rid of her because she’s his cousin and the mother of his children, and because his father would chuck him out and leave him without a place in the family business, and penniless.

Frostrup tells her that this man has already had “sexual relations with a child” which is illegal in this country regardless of whether it’s their culture or not. Well, if the relations took place outside the country, such as in Yemen, the law of this country does not matter. She was only a year younger than the age of consent in the UK anyway, and it’s lower in much of Europe, never mind Yemen. She also assumes that her correspondent converted to Islam only for the sake of her lover, giving her a lecture on how their behaviour makes bad Muslims of both of them:

In Yemen, women are stoned to death for such “licentious” behaviour, so thank your lucky stars your “crime” is being committed over here. I’m certainly not condoning such Stone Age punishment but trying to make you understand the enormity of your actions.

Unfortunately, I can’t get access to the Facebook debate which started when Fareena shared it, because my account is suspended due to an upgrade, but despite someone saying that it was traumatising to see that it was a non-Muslim woman talking sense to a Muslim one, I’m not wholly convinced that the story is genuine. It is too much one of those daytime TV programmes in which stupid people try to get stupid problems resolved by a TV presenter. All too often it’s a woman who has some piece of dead wood she, for some inexplicable reason, can’t seem to dump. This woman, religious or not, is a married man’s bit on the side. Islam has nothing to do with it other than that he is Muslim and that she has converted (if either of them exist), probably in the hope that he will take her on.

However, one thing Frostrup didn’t see fit to point out is that, if this man’s wife really has had four children in eight years, then she probably has her hands full and is unlikely to be the same girl she was when he married her in her early teens. The couple are still young and it is unlikely that he would have married someone he had absolutely no feelings for or attraction to. It is just wrong for a second woman to interfere in a vulnerable, but still viable, marriage in this way.

Onto Achelois’s post. This was flagged up by a tweet from Organica last Friday and I replied that polygamy was part of the Sunnah and that you couldn’t blame it for the fact that some polygamists were bad. I’ve personally seen Muslim men in monogamous marriages in the west who treat their wives with as much contempt as described in that post. Some are cynical, making promises to their wives before marriage knowing that, legally, they cannot be held to them. I’ve told the story before of how I was approached by a Kenyan family in east London whose daughter supposedly wanted to get married, but decided otherwise because her elder sister, who had married a “salafi” white convert, was told she could continue at college before marriage but was expected to drop out afterwards. The woman suggested to me did not trust that I would allow her to continue her studies, whatever I promised. I’ve also heard of sisters who were members of a Sufi tariqa being told by their non-tariqa fiancés that they could attend the big national gatherings, but their husbands “changed their minds” later.

Achelois’s post consists of a number of stories of polygamist husbands in some unnamed Gulf country treating their wives and daughters badly, among them one who refused to let his daughter go to college because he wouldn’t let anyone but himself drive her there, and he was out of town visiting his other wife. Another was a wife who was accused of adultery and divorced because she bore a child when the husband believed he had a “low sperm count” due to a medical condition, so the baby could not be his.

Neither of these stories need be directly related to polygamy, of course. The first husband could have done the same when he was away on business. The actions of the second, however, are clearly very much contrary to Islamic law as a husband is only allowed to accuse his wife of adultery if he actually catches her doing it, or if she bears a child when he has not had sex with her or he knows for sure that he is infertile, such as having lost his testicles years ago and functioning on HRT since. “Low sperm count” does not mean certain infertility; it just meant he was unlikely to have children. This is even true if a white couple have a dark-skinned baby, as testified to in a hadeeth; this could be caused by there being black ancestry in the family, much as happens when a light-coloured camel bears a dark-haired foal. This is, of course, very likely in Arabia which is right next to Africa and a lot of people are mixed-race, but it has even happened among white Afrikaners in South Africa.

Achelois has made her distaste for polygamy known in the past, based on matters of her family history, but polygamy does not in itself mean that a man will be a pig to his wife; it just means that a pig has two, three or four wives to oppress rather than just one. Monogamy is not a new thing in the west. Achelois calls polygamy a “pre-evolution” relic, “an archaic practice from when societies and human beings didn’t know and hadn’t learnt the value of human life and feelings”. The fact is that monogamy was the enforced norm in the west long before feminism or other modern ideas like representative democracy or the rule of law had been heard of. Marriages were notoriously difficult to get out of in most western countries until quite recently; some countries, particularly in the Latin-speaking Catholic world, still prohibit divorce. Churches told women who were in abusive marriages that marriage was for life — for better or worse, richer or poorer, etc.

Evolution is a modern, western concept and “evolved” always seems to mean being more like middle-class urban white westerners. Does anyone really suppose that there aren’t a fair number of such people carrying on relationships on the side, or maintaining multiple relationsihps without marrying any of them? There are entire social movements these days which embrace “polyamory”, meaning multiple relationships, with or without marriage, for both men and women. (Why does Islam permit polygyny but not multiple husbands? One good reason is that a child has a right to know who his or her father is, which would not be possible if a woman had two or more husbands, particularly if they were the same colour.) I do not doubt that there are men who abuse polygamy, but these sorts would abuse single wives or even other people generally, and there are sometimes very good reasons for having it (such as after a war), and some women for whom sharing a husband means more time to themselves. I have always said that Muslim men should recognise that most women do not like it and respect that, but we cannot blame it for men not treating their wives decently. It is just a separate issue.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Possibly Related Posts:


FacebookTwitterIdenti.caDeliciousDiggStumbleUponWordPressShare
Muslim world, WomenPermalink
  • LeedsLad

    Looks like a case of aspiring fiction writers. So do not allow them to add to your internet stress. Too many Ayan Hersis’ occupy the blogs these days.

    The lower the IQ of people, the more they are likely to naturalise polygamy or play around and that is a fact. So any person marrying third worlders better prepare himself/herself for these issues.

    In Saudi Bedouin tradition, when the man suspect himself to be the cause of not bearing any children. They order other close relatives to do the dirty deed with his wife/wives. And they will tell you that Islam as usual.

  • Leila

    Yes you are right most women do not like polygamy; not because men abuse it but because we do not want to share a man. You would understand that since you would not also like to share your wife.

  • mohammad

    The fact of the matter is most men in polygamous relationships treat their wives just fine. In the vast majority that I know of and from what I see of these brothers they treat them better than most men Muslim or otherwise (no, especially otherwise)treat their woman. True women might not like it but its not an issue of what the woman likes or dislikes. And in the Muslim society never have men been so deprived of the hallal relationships they are allowed to have with women as they have been in this time of ours. Sometimes the man might wait 30-40 years to collect enough money to marry one woman, for the rest of his life. Before when Muslims did not run after the dunnya the dunnya came to them, wives, an abundance of right hand possessions, justice was prevalent and giving a crap about what other “societies” or “civilizations” thought about how the Muslims lived their life was not even a concern, and for many of us it still isn’t wal hamdulillah. Wassalam

  • africana

    “the more they are likely to naturalise polygamy or play around and that is a fact. So any person marrying third worlders better prepare himself/herself for these issues.”

    cheating is common in all sectors of society, unfortunately. think sarkozy and chirac.

    “In Saudi Bedouin tradition, when the man suspect himself to be the cause of not bearing any children. They order other close relatives to do the dirty deed with his wife/wives. And they will tell you that Islam as usual”

    i have NEVER heard this. i suspect it’s just a vicious rumour.

  • Osman

    Salaam

    Thank you for this. It’s nice to read Muslim bloggers like you who are not ashamed of what Islam teaches!

  • Thersites

    it is unlikely that he would have married someone he had absolutely no feelings for or attraction to. It is just wrong for a second woman to interfere in a vulnerable, but still viable, marriage in this way.
    It was even more true that “He can’t get rid of her because she’s his cousin and the mother of his children, and because his father would chuck him out and leave him without a place in the family business, and penniless.” when the marriage took place, and, given the family dynamic, it’s likely that the wife had even less choice in the marriage. Indeed, having produced four children in eight years, she may well feel she’s done her duty by the family- as well as having “her hands full”. In fact, as the husband is still unemployable and doesn’t seem to want employment except in “the family business”, she may well feel she has five babies on her hands.
    Why does Islam permit polygyny but not multiple husbands? One good reason is that a child has a right to know who his or her father is, which would not be possible if a woman had two or more husbands, particularly if they were the same colour.
    As it is now perfectly easy to identify the biological father of a child, you’d better find another reason.

  • http://www.getoutlines.wordpress.com Safiya Outlines

    Salaam Alaikum,

    “but its not an issue of what the woman likes or dislikes”.

    What a charmer! Sadly that attitude is not uncommon and I am frankly amazed that some Muslim men are able to even get one wife, let alone 4. .-= Safiya Outlines´s last blog ..In Space, No One Can Hear You Clean =-.

  • Belal

    As it is now perfectly easy to identify the biological father of a child, you’d better find another reason.

    For us Islam as it was revealed is what we will have until the end of this life (as opposed to the afterlife), and so the ‘rules’ which have been given to us are supposed to be followed whereas the reasons, while they can be interesting, are not as important. An exaggerated example; If we were to modify our rules because we deemed the reasons irrelevant for our times, and then society as it is now were to collapse, then we would be left without the original rulings, and so would make our own, leading to more divergence. Most Muslims now stick to monogamy because it is suitable for them, but they are aware that polygamy is an option, and should circumstances change and the need for it arise, they can engage in it. [@Webmaster feel free to edit if you agree, I know it’s badly worded]

  • http://oyhabibti.wordpress.com sabiwabi

    Safiyah took the words out of my mouth. I’ll take it one step further: “sometimes it’s a wonder all women aren’t lesbians.”

    And yes, you may quote me. .-= sabiwabi´s last blog ..Totally NOT What I Wanted My Kids to Find on Our Earth Day Hike at the Beach =-.

  • Thersites

    For us Islam as it was revealed is what we will have until the end of this life … and so the ‘rules’ which have been given to us are supposed to be followed
    Precisely. “We are simply obeying orders.”

  • africana

    assalamu alaikum,

    i believe achelois identifies as a unitarian universalist.

  • George Carty

    It can be noted that the 20th century West had a succession of “party towns” which were notable for their loose sexual morals:

    1920-1929: Paris 1930-1941: Hollywood 1942-1949: New York 1950-1964: Rome 1965-1969: London 1970-present: Los Angeles

    All these cities had one thing in common - an excess of females over males. In some cases (such as Paris in the ’20s) the cause was the death of large numbers of young men in a recent war. In others (such as LA, or Swingin’ London) the cause was a flourishing showbiz industry which attracted large numbers of pretty young women.

    I wonder if Islam’s acceptance of polygamy is intended to soak up female surplus such as these in order to preserve the society’s moral values?

  • africana

    thanks for that info, george.

  • Umm Abdullah

    A good, common sense post. JazakAllaah brother. Also if the Yemeni brothers wife was 15 even in this country; what difference is there between that and all the under 15s having underage sex and babies these days, on some occasions with men a good few years older? On the few occasions those cases get to court; they are often thrown out by the judge because the girl ‘looked’ older, including one case involving a ten year old a couple of years back. I don’t see Mariella banging the drum about that. Also trust them to use a case which involves the brother involved clearly committing zina and not the majority of brothers looking for polygyny who are decent and pursue the second marriage in the correct Islamic manner.

    With the blog by the Arab girl; this just sounds like typical gulf cultural nonsense than anything to do with the deen, let alone polygyny. Alhamdulillaah I am a ‘convert’ sister and was happy in polygyny-something which like my marriage to begin with occured many many years after I became Muslim; just in case anyone is making any assumptions. The overall situation had many benefits for me probably more than it did for my husband actually, I found it made my husband more attentive to the needs of me and our children; not less. It didn’t work out as the sister had psychological problems she had not been straight about before the marriage; and my husband was not going to continue to subject those he loved most to her issues as it became clear she had no intention of seeking help for those problems. But had it been a different sister I would have welcomed it.

  • Unimpressed

    Arrogant white westerners(eg-thersites) never tire of exploiting and harping about the faults of others. Sounds hypocritical to me that the most morally depraved society on earth is telling others far way how to manage their own marital problems. I suppose infidelity, and lewdness isn’t news in jolly old England or America since it’s become so common. Polygamy has always been a part of human culture often as a survival mechanism It was only with better health care and the increased lifespan that came with it that polygamy declined. I would never take a second wife, mainly because handling one is more then enough for me. But if all parties agree and can make it work under the framework of marriage, why not? George has a very interesting point about the overpopulation of females in society. What answer does western society have for these women? Probably prostitution or some other form of exploitation masquerading as “freedom.”

  • mohammad

    @safiya I worked you into a poem I had, you might like it.

    http://muslimspoet.blogspot.com/2010/04/polygamy.html

  • mohammad

    Would you like me to live longer?

    Husband - Would you like to me live longer? Wife - Yes of course I would! H - Great, meet Layla!!! W - What??? H - Wait, calm down and read this http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14564-polygamy-is-the-key-to-a-long-life.html H - See, I did it for you. I just knew you would want me to live longer so I had to do what would please you. Now remember I did it for you! I’​ll see you in a week. C’​mon let’​s go Layla.

  • http://www.getoutlines.wordpress.com Safiya Outlines

    Salaam Alaikum ,

    No Mohammed I don’t like it. A women expresses dissent with your point of view and you immediately accuse her of being a bad Muslim. Very poor form. .-= Safiya Outlines´s last blog ..‘Til the end of time, ’til the end of time… =-.

  • mohammad

    I just can’t please you! Take it easy sister I am not accusing you in specific of anything. I’m expressing what has crept into many Muslims views due to the onslaught of the Kuffars attacks on basic Islamic principles. As for the form it freestyle spoken word, it takes on any form I decide it will.

  • Organica

    Mohammad:

    Get a life and brush up on those poetry skills.

    Just saying

  • Pingback: Indigo Jo Blogs — Achelois and polygamy

  • Old Pickler

    Also if the Yemeni brothers wife was 15 even in this country; what difference is there between that and all the under 15s having underage sex and babies these days, on some occasions with men a good few years older?

    Plenty. The latter are consensual, freely chosen by the girl and she can ditch the man later. Not like under Islam. Also in the West there isn’t the grotesque double standard, whereby a man can, under the guise of “marriage”, rape and be promiscuous, and the woman has no choice but to have her childhood stolen from her if her father and brothers wish it, and can be stoned to death for being raped.

    Polygamy is disgusting. It belongs in the desert and the jungle. Its pratitioners have no place in a civilised society.

  • Kamal So.

    Old Pickler, this may sound insulting, but it’s not. It is actually a bit of a favor to you. In the way that people often have to be pointed to things that they are missing. If my tone is harsh it is only because these matters are serious.

    Look, it is not fitting for a man of any maturity to open his mouth on things concerning which he has no clear idea, for this exposes his ignorance and intellectual deficiency to the entire world.

    And a man’s maturity should be evident - a man should veil his defects, such as stupidity, ignorance, and bad taste. This is a matter of honor and decency.

    The double standard you mention doesn’t exist under Islam, you are mixing tribal traditions that pre-dated Islam into the mix. And still at least in the most conservative of such tribal cultures at least the girls are not made into whores to be used and abused by a rotating round table of pseudo alpha male studs who literally use girls like tissue paper.

    That’s what the so called sexual freedom you seem to want amounts to. Not polygny in a family structure in which a community is involved and an actual social matrix, even if imperfect or abusive and wrapped in archaic social structures, what you esteem and seem to want is a mix of whoredom and bastardy. The freedom typically allotted to slaves in old world societies because the morality of slaves wasn’t particularly esteemed.

    You and I both know of which I speak, it happens all around us in England and the USA - you are a sick man with a sick value structure if you would actually prefer promiscuity of 15 year old girls and single motherhood at the hands of the type of irresponsible young men who knock these confused girls up.

    Your whole world view is sick, what you think is right is degraded. Had you actually presented your objections with some decency I’d refrain from pointing out the obvious disease in your worldview.

    I am not going to defend any oppressive tribal practices, but to put down situations in which at least there is legitimacy of birth, children know their lineage, husbands and wives are united in a larger social matrix, however imperfect, and raise literally the bastardy that typified the lowest and most oppressed of Serf, prole, and slave classes in all pre-modern societies, shows your stupidity in spades.

    Why insult you? Because it’s not an insult it is a description of fact, stupidity is often not congenital.. It is simply a matter of lazy habitual thinking. And a failure to examine one’s own assumptions.

    In other words I don’t think you are stupid by nature, on the contrary I’m certain you are capable of scratching a neuron together now and then, and with some real work and effort perhaps you may be capable of real insight.

    But this takes practice and work. Time is short, every day you grow older and closer to the grave, what are you doing with your life man? What are you doing with your time? As the Quran says “Fa aina Tadhabun?”

    “And where are you going?”

    Where, indeed, what are you doing with your mind and life with what little time is allotted to you on this earth? Reveling in your moral degeneracy and stupidity is not fitting a man with the potential to develop real intelligence and character.

    I suggest you get started soon.

    Whatever imperfections may exist in Yemeni hill jack customs, Hill jacks everywhere tend to have certain cultural issues that are problematic. Your equating this with Islam - to equate Islam with the worst of tribal ignorance, in which things are done IN SPITE of what Islam speaks against, and then to defend in turn the worst of degeneracy in American society, shows you to be a man of the most detestable character..

    In the name of freedom, of liberality, you

    double standards in which little girls are pimped by their own mothers (it happens and I can cite newspaper cases) or fathers, sexualized, allowed to play with child size stripper poles, dressed up in bikinis, knocked up outside of any sane and stable family structure,

    left to the wolves and the public welfare system which persists stealing other people’s tax dollars to fund the irresponsibility and bad parenting of others,

    all in the name of a sexual freedom that really is more about keeping Western Serf classes occupied with frivolity so they don’t question the absurdity of the system under which they live..

    Well all of this is a little much, don’t you think. Or do you think, I suspect not, and even if you do you are utterly without honor or decency on any level.

    Next, men don’t have the right to rape little girls in marriage, in Islam, you are flagrantly lying through your teeth out of bigotry and gross ignorance without having the faintest clue of what you are actually talking about.

    And next, the very fact that you actually think a situation in which bastardy with underage women outside of a stable family structure with all the attendant problems these many of these births pose on society such as crime and the loss of awareness of a child’s lineage, is somehow better than an imperfect social system in which there is at least a family structure involved

    People expose their stupidity and ignorance and depravity when they speak, for this reason it is a good thing to reflect on what one is saying, what one actually believes, whether or not these beliefs have any grounds in REALITY much less than being socially conditioned delusions, and whether there is any benefit in actually speaking or writing, before doing so.

    I applied these criteria to this response, and deemed that the overall good of pointing these matters out to you outweighed any dangers of posting this. Hopefully, God willing, you will reflect on your degeneracy and lack of honor and realize that the precious things in life you are missing are worth pursuing after all.

    We have little time, you have little time, 24 hours to waste or invest. Be a pal, and do something useful, learn something useful.

    Like the art of thinking.

  • africana

    wow! mashAllah for taking the time to type this response! very good points re: the morality of slaves.

  • http://www.blogistan.co.uk/blog/ Indigo Jo

    Kamal, may I just point out that Old Pickler is female.

  • George Carty

    The West’s hostility to polygamy certainly didn’t start out as something motivated by the desire to protect the freedom of women. After all, polygamy was banned in Ancient Rome: a society where the father of the household (the pater familias) had power of life and death over female family members.

  • africana

    i believe that the notion of romantic live which has bee sold to us over the past few hundeed years is big factor in the west’s abhorrence of polygamy. the Muslim nations are not immune to this influence (the bollywoood factor)either and i think this might explain some muslims’ negative feelings abouut it. you know, this “love” is expressed in the form of candle lit dinners for two,it’s an entirely exclusive relationship which i think almost borders on idolatry, in some cases.

  • Anon

    Yes George- but then again Ancient Rome never considered itself ‘Western’ in any sense of the word.

  • George Carty

    Maybe not (in fact I’d say that “Western civilization” as a concept only really began with the rise of the United States — before then it was “European civilization” and earlier still “Christendom”), but modern Western civilization does view ancient Greece and Rome as its ancestral civilizations.

    On the “Europe” versus “Western civilization” thing, there’s an interesting article here, which by reference to Adam Tooze’s “The Wages of Destruction” suggests that Hitler’s ultimate enemy was not the Soviet Union but the United States, and that genocidal conquest of Russia was just Hitler’s plan to secure for Germany (and by extension Western Europe) sufficient natural resources (chiefly farmland, but also Caucasus oil) to compete with the United States.