The women of a religion distorted by their men.

Samia Sarwar fled her parents’ home in Peshawar that considered divorce from her abusive husband to be an insult to the family and threatened to kill her. 6th April in front of her lawyer, Hina Jilani, Ms. Sarwar was shot in the head to save the family’s honor.
(Surah An-Nisa) Verse 19: “But consort with them in kindness, for if ye hate them it may happen that ye hate a thing wherein Allah hath placed much good.”
Nabeela’s husband sprinkled kerosene all over her, set her on fire and left the house. Saved by her neighbors she lodged a complaint. Although the evidence against him was overwhelming, her husband was acquitted by a magistrate's court that gave him the benefit of doubt. Nabeela's face and the upper part of her body remain permanently disfigured.
(Surah An-Nisa) Verse 34: “Men shall take full care of women with the bounties with which Allah has favored some of them.”
Saima Wahid’s father filed a case against her, had her summoned to court to have her marriage declared illegal because she had married without his consent.
(Surah Al-Baqarah) Verse 228: “And they (women) have rights similar to those (of men) over them.”
The sine qua non is that we need to underscore the universality of human rights as a fundamental first step in the recognition of human rights as women's rights. Their rights are undeniable, vital and an indissoluble part of universal human rights; and it is ironic that in an Islamic state they are still denied.
Scholars from the third world nations argue that the human rights dialogue is not universal but a product of the so-called European Enlightenment and its particular cultural development. The third world governments underscore this view, if not openly, their laws and decisions reflect their attitudes.
This is the paradox faced as the international standards of women's rights, collide with cultural movements at our national level in human rights terms. Women in most Muslim states symbolize cultural purity that must not be soiled and will be if ground is given to their rights. Critics argue that to grant universality to a strong set of women's rights might destabilize the cultural composition of a particular society. We can keep our fingers crossed that the values of dignity and liberty will coup over narrow-minded forces attempting to confine women to their homes.
Abuse and aggression against women as any act of gender-based violence that results in physical or psychological damage whether in public or private life, violates all the laws of humanity and those that were laid down to protect the women of Islam. They include cruelty, sexual abuse of female children, trafficking, dowry-related hostility, marital rape, female genital mutilation, rape, sexual harassment and intimidation whether at work or at home.
This extends to gridlock issues like the Shari'a-type punishment. Gridlock, because the Mullah community opposes the women rights movements in Pakistan. The authorities pay heed to the mullahs because they do not want to antagonize them and other extremist minorities. Consequently, the applicable personal law differs for women depending on their community. Education, inheritance, marriage, divorce, personal decisions, custody of children, safeguarding etc are determined by her community, not the national status.
A glaring example is that a Pakistani rape victim can easily fall prey to the counter-charge of zina, crime of adultery and sex-out-of-wedlock under the new laws, to be sentenced to spend the rest of her life as a criminal; and that’s satirical since she came forth to seek justice.
It is the so-called custodians of Islam have turned our religion into a plethora of beliefs and rituals and have made it complicated and intricate so that it is only appropriate for them to understand and explain, hence bloating their personal egos. What they can't find in the Quran they brazenly come up with it as the Prophet’s sayings in hadias. What is overlooked is that years after the caliphs’ epoch the interpretation of the text has remained exclusively male dominated and perceived under the influence of the Arab culture that suppresses its women still.
The founding theorists of Muslim law disregarded the unequal distribution of authority in family life and the political nature of family relations. Why? Because they were men and it suited them. The discourse and machinery of human rights are therefore callous to the demands of women that are stemmed at the earliest stage possible.
It is these men of religion, the mullanas, who are basically unqualified and still occupy political spaces to formulate and manipulate the mechanisms of implementation of laws. They preach and deduce what they have been taught or what they understand, whether right or wrong. Even if right, what technical education or degrees in Islamic Law do they have that gives them the right to give political or social advise that will affect countless lives? They consider their opinions imperative and closing because they speak of religion, a sensitive issue. No one dares questions them because they fear blame of blasphemy against Islam. No one probes the matter further when they declare women as the malevolence gender and they don’t dare to criticize when they recite ‘naats and humds’ in tunes taken from popular Indian and Pakistani songs.
To rebuke the modern women the mullahs are quick to point out that the pious women during the Prophet Muhammad’s life covered their heads and bosoms, lead private lives and paid heed to their men folk and did as they bid. But they forget to mention that Bibi Khadija was a single successful merchant and she being a woman proposed to the Prophet Mohammad. That Bibi Aysha led the Battle of the Camel and is ranked as the prominent companion of the Prophet who conveyed decisions on religious matters during the days of the first three caliphs. Umm-e-Hakeem (granddaughter of Abu Jahl) and Fatima (the sister of Khalid bin Walid) fought the Battle of Uhad for Islam during the Prophet’s lifetime. Bibi Hafsa, an authority on Islam, was the guardian of the original copy of the Holy Quran that subsequently became the authentic version.
This is what the Muslim women were! They had their rights and were respected! All this propaganda of Islam being against women rights is a plot of the western world to discredit Muslims and the puffed up mullahs here portray the very image for them through their khudbas. They help illustrate the wrong image and hence Islam is faultily perceived.
A disgraceful example is an event that took place at the Asia Society, New York, on 30th May 2000 where Asma Jehangir was the speaker. Following is the question she was asked and her pointed come back.
Question: What you say about Pakistan is very, very true of Libya, Syria, Sudan, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Indonesia and Malaysia. Guess what we have in common denominators, here? Islam. No democracy, never was, never will be. Women will always, always be down at the bottom. That's what the Prophet has said. The husband is allowed to beat the wife. Not the other way around. Remember. And when, as a good Muslim you die, there are 72 virgins waiting for you in the next world.
Asma Jahangir: Sir, I just want to say. That the women's movement now in the world has to progress, it's a social movement. Such social movements are beyond everything else. I am quite certain that despite all the orthodoxy in our country, they cannot stand in the way of this movement. We are going to progress.
Doesn’t that disgust you to no end?
We have to modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women, with an outlook to achieve the eradication of prejudices and other practices that are based on the concept of the inferiority of either of the sexes. This responsibility has always also ignored by the Government of Pakistan.
The authorities blasé attitude towards women rights and the rights of the girl-child act as a triumph victory for the biased so-called religious parties that set the society further back. The governments claim to act in accordance with the popular wish. Whose popular wish? Milli Yakjehti Council, Jamati-e-Islami and Sipa Sahaba’s? Or the extremists’ parties of Mullana Shah Ahmad Durani, Qazi Hussein Ahmad, Fazal-ur-Rehman and the other countless religious parties that actually out number the political ones? Are the bigoted members of these parties going to be this regime's barometer of public opinion? And what public opinion? Certainly not the women’s!
These conservative clerics, concerned less about justice and more about the power the easy operation of the law gives them, exploit their authority to the fullest. We have had several commissions set up on the rights of women. Some of the recommendations have been implemented, but only a few. The ones that have been implemented made no disparity. Women in Pakistan have become so substandard that unless there is a structural revolution there will be no critical changes and the plight of women in Pakistan is not going to improve. But still the Government of Pakistan claims to be committed to human rights. I’m still trying to figure out whose? The children who attend the American School? Or the ladies attending club parties?
Over the last decade in Pakistan, women's rights have been propelled onto the human rights agenda with alacrity and rebellious fortitude. First we had the mullahs to fend off and now the fanatical Taliban act as a threat!
Furthermore the Federal Shariat Court has ruled in some of the provisions of the family law against women and the Government has not gone into appeal because it is banking upon the women to appeal, but they will not go into appeal. When solicited one of the ministers wittily remarked, "Well, "Taliban will never come here. The women of Pakistan will make sure they never come here."
And you know what? I think he at least got that right!!!