Sunni leader Kanthapuram AP Aboobacker Musalyar (head of one of the traditionalist Sunni Muslims in Kerala, India) has reportedly confirmed that worst expectations of women and civil liberties advocates in India with recent comments calling the concept of gender equality “un-Islamic” and saying that women could never equal men as “they are fit only to deliver children.” It is a chilling reminder of the intense prejudices and oppression faced by women in many traditional Islamic areas.
Musalyar, 76, the chief of All India Sunni Jamiyyathul Ulama, insisted at a camp of Muslim Students Federation (MSF) in Kozhikode that women lack the mental strength and power to control the universe, “which lies in the hands of men.” Ignoring the advances in civilized countries, he predicted that “Gender equality is something which is never going to be a reality. It is against Islam, humanity and was intellectually wrong.”
He further added “Women can never equal men. They are fit only to deliver children. Women cannot withstand crisis situations.” He further denounced plans to allow girls and boys to share seats in colleges as “part of a calculated move to destroy Islam and culture.”
Musalyar is obviously an extremist and many Muslim women have made tremendous achievements in science, education, and politics. However, Musalyar’s leadership position shows that his views are shared and replicated in this area. It is a glimpse into the lives of women in the area and the religious and cultural barriers that they face.
47 thoughts on “Sunni Leader: Gender Equality Is “Un-Islamic” and Women Are “Fit Only To Deliver Children””
In your response to Pernicious Pacifist, you conveniently omitted the verse that begins the stuff about ‘submission,’ which is verse 21: Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.
I agree with PP that the emphasis on women’s obedience is garbage; fundies love spouting those verses yet they ALMOST ALWAYS leave out line 21 because it (gasp!) tells husbands to submit, as well. I’m not very religious, but I’m hopeful your exclusion was an oversight and not intentional.
Speaking of Sunnis… On second thought do not under any circumstances watch this video. It’s from Infowars…you know ALEX JONES. So don’t even bother.
“Talmud Minor Tractates. Soferim 15, Rule 10. This is the saying of Rabbi Simon ben Yohai: Tob shebe goyyim harog (“Even the best of the Gentiles should all be killed”).”
The rabbis have a good explanation for that Talmudic hate Mr Jones, and indeed, the Imam may have a justification for his views as well. I don’t claim to be a scholar of religion so I am not sure what that Talmudic injunction really means.
But let’s get serious. Official state neutrality is impossible. It is a fiction. the first amendment cases of late prove this. Atheism is itself a religious viewpoint and the one that is the official religion of the US and the philosophical context of the First amendment. If you understand this, the 1st amendment makes more sense than the twisted view of conservatives that it is equally tolerant of all religions. It can’t be! All religions claim a normative viewpoint and so all religions inherently wish for state sanction. Religions that don’t do so, probably are in a degenerate state of self denial like Methodists. Sorry if that offends any methodists here but I think you see what I mean.
The laws of the state should not conflict with Divine revelation. That is at the core of all the Abrahamic religions and it probabably is in Hinduism and any other truly systemic faith. The ancient Greeks and Romans certainly claimed divine sanction for the state and the Pharoahs too. Moses and King David, you name it. Even secular atheist israel claims to be a Jewish state. The only fools who don’t understand the necessity for this are materialist and tolerant American Christians who have been brought up drinking the Enlightenment koolaid of indifferentist delusion.
Catholics used to understand this but are deluded about it and are on the freedom bandwagon now so dont expect them to state their own doctrine properly anymore.
Let the Christians wake up and see that the 1st amendment is a tool to disempower them. It was intended to be that in its origins in England in the conflict between nonconformists and dissenters and the Church of England and the Crown. As most Americans are pitifully ignorant of English history of their ancestors most of us cant tell our you know what from a hole in the ground.
Like I said, I’ve thrown all this tolerance and freedom stuff overboard and declare myself the Royalist candidate for president. We have a single party issue, that is reunion with the United Kingdom. God save the queen! We wont win anyhow so we might as well quit ascribing to bunch of stuff that just puts us deeper into the gutter, and give the system the finger as we are shown the door.
“Islam is evil,” “kill them all,” etc, etc. How do you pathetically stupid goyim react to this Judaic vs. from their holiest of all holy books, The Talmud?
“Even the best of the gentiles deserve only death.” A religion of love and peace?
The Rabbis don’t even deny this verse. Rather, they justify it, w/something like, “we don’t really mean it.”
Psycho-babbling, radical extremist, liberal whack jobs murder unborn babies on an hourly basis.
Liberals proclaim it legal, describing an unborn baby as an “unviable tissue mass.”
Authorities, in the case of the murder of the Indiana pastor’s wife, because her unborn baby was also killed,
recently charged the suspect with double murder.
You cannot murder an “unviable tissue mass.”
You can murder a human being, a soon-to-be-born baby.
If the liberal pro-abortion whackos are correct, there is no God.
If God is correct, the liberal pro-abortion whackos are not only wrong, they are murderers of the Stalin,
Napoleon, Mao, Ottomans, Hitler, etc. ilk.
A zygote is a one-celled human being. Every scientifically known quality that differentiates anyone reading this as a “human being” is the same for a zygote. For the unborn, the difference is that the mother provides the zygote’s food and shelter, two items required by any human for survival. AFAIK, no science contradicts this.
The USA has killed about 60M unborn human beings, because of our “enlightened” female-oriented law Re. women. (We’ll ignore that about 50% of these abortion victims are and/or would have been female.)
Have any of these Muslim fanatics killed 60M innocents since SCOTUS’ Roe v. Wade ruling? I didn’t think so. Funny seeing all these hypocritical self-righteous posters who think the west is so much more enlightened vs. Islam.
The behavior described in the article is not news, it’s about 1500 years old, and older in other religions.
What I find more remarkable is Western ideologues who “preach” that we can, within a few short years, bring Western enlightenment about women to Islam. The fact that it took the West many C for the process to unfold (on it’s own) seems to escape all the PhD’s pontificating to us on this subject.
If you believe Hilary and her cadre of MSM loyalists, if we just spend several $T more money, build a few more schools, wage a little war here and there, bribe them, help them farm, build hospitals, etc, then eventually Islam shall welcome tax payer paid abortion, little imbecilic girl college students shouting to male faculty to “shut up,” women’s lib, women voting, women driving, women taking men’s jobs, divorce, Castro-Street displays of homosexuality (Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence), homosexual nuptials, homosexual child adoption, western central banking, etc, etc….all the glorious things that make western life worth living. (One wonders how and why Americans got out of bed prior to these riches.)
If you think it’s a coincidence that N. Korea, Iran, Ghadafi, and Saddam did not have central banks the west could control, please think again how this just might bear on recent history.
Hilary and anyone selling these lies are infinitely more dangerous than anyone mentioned in this article. It’s infinitely more dangerous because they bring us to the precipice of nuclear winter.
President Wilson sold America on the idea of improving the world condition by spreading American “democracy” around the world, and we have implemented this insane, suicidal philosophy ever since the early 20th C.
G. Washington had it right in his Farewell Address: “all foreign entanglements are temporary.” (I’m looking at you, IZ-RAY-HELL.)
This guy has a point. For Americans it is the birthrate in a “death spiral.” Soon enough, there won’t be an Americans. One could speculate that the liberation of women will lead to extinction.
Globalization and affirmative action stripped American men of the ability to support a large family.
America has paid attention to the welfare state for parasites while its population vanishes.
The only lasting purpose of women and men is procreation and perpetuation. Every other accomplishment of mankind will crumble into dust.
Is it better for women to be liberated, nay, dominant, or to bear and nurture children?
Looks like “women’s liberation” translates to extinction.
The acid-head, Aldous Huxley, predicted baby factories.
Maybe Planned Parenthood will soon issue that IPO.
Maybe modern man outsmarted himself.
Good to see the liberals, who have a twisted love for Muslims, use the “Christians are just as bad” lie. Whenever you point out the blatant problems w/ Islams they always use that lame meme, “What about Christians?” It’s the “Look, Squirrel” liberal playbook. Pitiful.
Southern Indian state of Kerala has 100% literacy and more women( including Muslim) in colleges and corporations. People are less concerned about statements like this from a religious leader. Liberal media did not take this story at all simply because they do not want to hurt minority leaders even when they are wrong. Muslim women are under pressure from the religious leaders that they cannot even respond to such lousy statement coming from an old leader like Kanthapuram. Strangely if this statement was from a Hindu leader there would have been full coverage by print and visual media. His close association with marxist communist party of Kerala helps him get away from more trouble as liberals control nearly 100% media.
Theists and Atheists all have the same sinful nature; always have and always will. I can and do respect any individual that will respect our rule of law and its fundamental purpose of securing those rights we have naturally; those that existed prior to the establishment of government. It’s when that sinful nature is allowed to infringe the natural rights of the people that we become polarized. Theists and Atheists should rightly fear the use of the State to infringe the natural rights of the people. Why is it so difficult for the people to align on that fundamental principle? Why do the people allow themselves to be manipulated to a cause that pits one group against the other and that results in less security of rights for all?
Apparently, this particular Muslim cleric has much in common with many Christian fundamentalists, including the Catholic hierarchy, and Orthodox Jews. And, until women fought (and died) for the right to vote, the right to make private medical/health decisions such as abortion, the US patriarchical social/political/economic system reflected similar attitudes. Roe v. Wade is the law but American “taliban” are still trying to overturn, restrict or otherwise prevent women from being other than what this cleric promotes. Perhaps Professor/Lawyer Turley will address these issues in future blogs.
“November 2015 has been the most civil month I have experienced in over 3 years here @ the Turley blog. Kudos.”
“I don’t remember ever reading about our resident Muslim’s view on women. We see him condescend toward women here, but he’s never given his views. Well, I guess the condescension speaks louder than any words he might spew.”
Are we going to try for two months in a row?
John smith, destroy without cause? Hateful, but Satan likes it.
Job 2:3 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God,
and escheweth evil? and still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause.
Job 2:4 And Satan answered the LORD, and said, Skin for skin, yea, all that a man hath will he give for his life.
Job 2:5 But put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face.
Now that we are about to elect the first woman president, Hillary, I wonder if womens’ fates will increase as much as have blacks’ fortunes under the first black president???
I hope the gender-equality feminist dogmatists keep up their antics because in a hundred years if they all simply have focused on their careers, stayed sterile and aborted all their accidental kids out of existence, the population of women radicals will naturally have extincted itself, and then the future will belong to the people (men and women) who could actually “come together” in the natural submission that biology has unfairly imposed on women.
I have come to agree with the first amendment advocates who say that Jefferson and his “Deist” ilk were basically not just for “separation of church and state” but were in fact un-Christian and suspicious of religion as such.
But why? Is it perhaps because they wanted to “liberate” their American wealth from the restraints imposed on them by the priests and kings? Capitalist revolution, plain and simple.
I am not however, a capitalist, which is why I now declare myself a Royalist and reject the “War of Independence” and all its false glamour and ideology. Come to think of it, I would toss the Enlightenment itself and the Reformation on the ash heap of history. Europe, the land of my ancestors, would have been better off without all that ‘freedom.”
Personally, if the King had won the war, we would probably not be sitting around debating each other on the respective demerits of all these barbarians invading the land of our birth.
Freedom, just another word for nothing left to lose.
The doctrinaire atheist-secularist Enlightenment fops infest this comments section like ticks on a junkyard dog. Here is the New Testament text for “pp” who must be ignorant of it by his remarks
“Ephesians 5:22-33King James Version (KJV)
22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
33 Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.”
THAT IS SO AWFUL! THE CHRISTIANS MUST NOT BELIEVE IN “GENDER EQUALITY” EITHER!
100 years ago most Americans would not have found these remarks all that controversial.
That which is the same is equal. That which is not the same is not equal. Men and women are different, hence they are not equal. That is not offensive, and that is generally what most traditional viewpoints really break down to in principle. I can’t speak for any “Imams” but that is a traditional sort of viewpoint shared not just by Musllims but by hundreds of millions of Christians and Buddhists around the world as well. If Americans got around a little more and kept their mouths shut and ears open they might be surprised what they would hear.
“Equality” usually has nothing to do with “equality” it rather has to do with capitalists breaking down barriers to employment for some sector of the labor force with which they would like to flood lower paid scabs into the labor markets and drive down the overall cost of labor. Ie, women, blacks, illegal immigrants, refugees, whatever.
The irony here is that it is not religion but textbook Marxist analysis is the key the picks the lock to the phony slogans of Enlightenment “liberation theology.”
A lot of women actually understand this, which is why they continue to adhere to traditional religious
Good point pernicious pacifist. I was going to say this could be a real opportunity for the Duggars to get their show back!
Comments are closed.