Month: February 2022

First and foremost, I was incredibly interested in the conversation surrounding the acceptance of LGBTQ+ individuals in Islamic practice and culture. There was an interesting conflict between professional analyzation and individual judgment on hadith.

I also found myself particularly interested in how contested hadith is. I was especially curious about how the Qu’ran is a hadith but is widely accepted. By the end of the reading however, I figured that it is through isnad criticism and matn criticism that the Qu’ran is rendered an authentic hadith, wheras others are more controversial.

The ways in which people give credibility to sources was reminiscent of the talk I had to attend in elementary school on good sources versus bad. Reflecting on where our information comes from is a useful tool that allows us, as individuals, to make our own engaged judgements.

Earlier this semester I played around with the way my site looks and am satisfied with how it looks thus far. Throughout the semester I may change some of the organization, but overall I am satisfied with the results of my work.

I feel having a place to catalogue my thoughts is constructive and hopefully this continues to help and refine my thoughts on readings.

First and foremost, the most prevalent point emphasized throughout this reading was the author’s attention to why passivity is not inherently anti-feminist. Or in other words, why Islamic women can still interact with feminism.

The westernized views of feminism (and it’s colonialist roots,) continue to complicate feminism for women throughout the world. The conversation we had in class on the broad meanings of feminism and how we interact with the ideology despite it’s controversy are particularly relevant in this reading.

One thing that stuck out to me was about the quote on page 221. “Self esteem makes you independent of what other people think of you…Instead of helping to improve your situation, it leads you to accept it as fate…passively.” I found this quote very captivating as it made me think about the complexities of human nature. In psychology there’s the concept of fight or flight.

How someone reacts to pressure in society, in this instance the pressure is marriage, can be dependent on a multitude of factors. Here it seems to be religion and values that stem from that. Where one person may feel the need to dispute things they disagree with, there may be another person that know’s that the circumstances they are facing don’t define them. The differences in culture and circumstance and experience all lead up to a reaction, and the authors attention to the mysterious “why” makes this reading all the more fascinating for that reason.

From this reading, I found myself the most concerned with the quote “patriarchy is not bigotry, hatred or oppression but rather the natural social order.”

How can rendering women as less than men justifiable?

I want to consider the different perspectives described in this writing while integrating other readings I am familiar with. Is it based on cultural differences that this statement was made? Is it based in time period?

I know this reading was pondering this same question of where hierarchy comes from, however, I am curious about how thought processes like these come about in society, and ultimately Islam as a religion.

In this reflection I want to discuss the first argument. Very early on in this reading the author brings up the issue of gendered language and how the interpretations of gendered language play in to the attention of Islam to men.

Right off the bat, I started reflecting on the languages I have taken strides in learning and the languages my friends have taken strides in learning. Spanish is gendered, Russian is gendered, Italian and French are both gendered. My inattention to the gendering of language is just one symptom of my privilege. Further, the gendering of language is just incredibly interesting.

I am curious about how gender non-conforming individuals and etc reflect on the languages they are subjected to. How do they interact with religion that plays with this language? Are they supported?

Feminism is incredibly important to me and my studies and identity. I identify as a sapphic woman and believe wholeheartedly that the movements toward gender equality are important. I do consider myself a feminist, however, I do acknowledge that the term has a loaded history.

Exclusionary non-inclusive feminism is not feminism. Inclusivity, understanding: those are the true traits of feminism. It is that, that allows for change. And I believe in inclusion and understanding and passion.

A vital point made in this reading was that feminism in it’s roots is not inclusive of all women. In it’s development, feminism was concerned with white women’s suffrage. Only relatively recently has there been a surge in concern for WOC and queer women.

The most enjoyable part of this reading for me was the descriptions of different activist’s views of Islamic Feminism. There was a range in arguments going from “Islam and Feminism being complimentary to each other” and “feminism flattening out important differences between women.” Each argument was equally formulated and made a lot of sense and ultimately contextualized the colonial attitudes and conversations surrounding Islam to this day.

Violence is justified by the white savior complex. And it is incredibly interesting/ironic when you consider that the European missionaries believed they were liberating Muslim women, when down the line there was a a rise of Islam in the seventies that mourned the loss of “an indigenous self” lost to colonial violence and resulted in an “incorporated vision of women’s roles that insisted on the return to a purer domestic life.”

At the forefront of my mind is all of the vocabulary included in the last half of this chapter. I feel that the more I read Wadud, the better I will get at remembering and applying the vocabulary. As of now, I am still adjusting.

One consistency throughout this reading so far is the author’s attention to misconception’s around Islam. The upholding of “women as deviants” or being “less than man” is frequently discussed by Wadud and disputed that it is not essential to Islam. As quoted from this chapter, “the famous hadith, ‘all actions are judged in accordance with their intentions…’ In the Qu’ran, ‘whoever does good, whether male or female and is a believer’ shall be rewarded.”

Wadud’s clarifications on Islam are always incredibly well supported and explained. Wadud clarifies repeatedly, especially in this first chapter, that Islam is not anti-woman, rather it is people engaging with double talk that makes Islam less accessible.