The Modernist Menace To Islam by Daniel Haqiqatjou

In 2015, I was asked to participate in a debate on patriarchy and feminism at a local masjid. A month or so after the date was set and announced on social media, the event was abruptly canceled for reasons that were never made clear to me.

I’ll be honest: This was not the first time that something like this had happened and I’m sure it won’t be the last. I am not going to speculate as to why this particular masjid canceled this particular event. I don’t even know who was responsible for canceling the event or exactly why he/she/ they did so.

In preparing for the debate, I put together some brief notes on the basic thrust of my position (below). Obviously, it is a position some find deeply offensive — offensive enough to censor. But I think it is high time we ask these important questions even though, for whatever reason, they are considered politically incorrect. I think we should be able to debate ideas in a respectful and academic fashion, especially ideas that have such a major influence on the Muslim community and the Muslim mind and are the source of much doubt.

Unfortunately, there are those who do not want to see such a conversation happen and will shut down anyone who tries to have it.

In any case, what I had planned to do was defend my position using a wide range of arguments and evidence from historical and philosophical material as well as the work of feminists themselves. I also had arguments lined up in defense of classical scholars that Muslim feminists have viciously attacked over the years.

There is a common perspective that has grown increasingly more influential since the dawn of Second Wave feminism that one of the primary power dynamics within every society — in addition to the dynamics between different socio-economic classes, races, tribal affiliations, etc. — is the power dynamics between the genders. Just like different political factions and classes are vying for power in every society, so are the genders, men against women. All societies experience a power differential in this regard, and universally it has been the case that men dominate women — this is patriarchy. In our times, this domination is not necessarily overt such that men are consciously dominating women, though in some instances, that may be true as well. Rather, we have inherited a patriarchal system with ossified power structures that continue to subjugate women. It is our moral duty, argue feminists, to fight against these patriarchal structures. All of this applies in spades to Islamic history. Here feminists will have some disagreements. The default feminist position as represented by their leading scholars is that all religion is inherently patriarchal and therefore oppressive to women. Muslim feminists take issue with this and claim, to the contrary, that God is not patriarchal and does not desire to subjugate women to men. Rather, God’s revealed religion, Islam, is fully egalitarian and it is only a patriarchal reading of that religion by men which gives us rules and customs that oppress Muslim women. From this point, different Muslim feminists draw the line in different places. Are the rules of polygyny, say, part of true Islam or are they patriarchal accretions? Some say yes, some say no. Are certain hadith on women true Islam or just patriarchal fabrications? Are certain classical scholars opining on women presenting an honest, valid understanding of true Islam, or is it just a patriarchal bias coloring their views? There are over a hundred “controversial” examples of where, from the perspective of your average modern non-Muslim feminist, Islam oppresses, or at least disenfranchises women. And different Muslim feminists will take different strategies in countering that perspective in defending the notion that true Islam is egalitarian.

My view is that the entire feminist project, whether of the secular or Muslim variety, is misguided. In reality, there are major conceptual and evidential problems with the entire notion of societal conflict based on gender. The idea that men have constructed and maintained a universal structure, namely patriarchy, to systematically take advantage of women and prioritize men’s interests over women’s is not substantiated by historical facts or theoretical scrutiny. Yes, patriarchy exists in the sense that men have had authority in every society of history. But that authority was for the benefit of all, not merely the benefit of men at the expense of women.

As far as what is at stake in this conversation, these are some of the main questions that come to my mind. What are the theological implications of understanding 1400 years of the Muslim scholarly tradition as being by and large immersed in and, to at least some extent, guided by patriarchal oppression? What are the ontological implications of claiming that every society past and present suffered from patriarchy, i.e., what does this mean for human nature and, by extension, God Himself, who created that human nature and that human history? Is patriarchy an adequate or accurate explanation of the problems Muslim societies face with regard to gender relations, domestic abuse, etc. (i.e., problems that I do not deny exist)?

As these questions are meant to imply, the idea of patriarchy as a universal system of male oppression against women is extremely damaging to the Muslim mind. This is because the idea effectively renders all of religion and religious authority as an arm of patriarchy, which means that religion, either in its entirety or in large part, is a tool to oppress women for the benefit of men.

Is it any surprise, then, that Muslim feminists accept and espouse increasingly radical and deviant views and many of them ultimately apostatize?

Certainly, it is depressing to see even otherwise religiously devout Muslim women accepting the basic premises of feminism, including the idea of universal oppressive patriarchy extending throughout history.

In reality, all branches and varieties of feminism are anathema to Islam. Muslim feminists might disagree with this, but it does not change the fact. This is proven by a simple argument:

1. One cannot be committed to feminism without accepting the Patriarchal Thesis, i.e., the thesis that there exists a social structure perpetuated by men designed to subjugate and oppress women that has existed since the dawn of civilization.

2. The Patriarchal Thesis is anathema to Islam.

3. Therefore, Feminism is anathema to Islam.

Why is the Patriarchal Thesis (PT) so noxious as far as Islam is concerned?

First of all, PT undermines the very notion of nubuwwa. All anbiya who preached to humanity and stood in front of their people to call to Islam were men. Were all these anbiya part of the patriarchal structure used to dominate women?

PT also undermines the scholarly tradition. The vast majority of ulama in our tradition were men, and the most influential and prolific of them were men. And all of them, literally all of them, espoused a plethora of views that modern feminists consider toxic masculine misogynist drivel of the worst kind. Were all these men part of the patriarchal system used to oppress women?

PT undermines Islamic theology itself. If the patriarchy is this entrenched, destructive force plaguing humanity and inflicting so much pain and suffering, why doesn’t the Quran address it? Why didn’t the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم address it? Can the Quran and Sunnah be considered complete guidance when they do not call out this systematic oppression? Feminists maintain that patriarchy is among the greatest forces of evil in all human history, yet there is not even a word for it in Arabic. Not a single verse or hadith dedicated to sounding the alarm bells, warning humanity of this terrible oppression. Why?

These are the logical entailments feminists make with respect to Islam and that is why Muslim feminists go through phases of disillusion with Islam and many end up leaving. They start by throwing the scholars of our tradition under the bus for having “evil” patriarchal views of women. Then they graduate to attacking the prophets (remember “Muslim reformist” Amina Wadud insulting Prophet Ibrahim?). Then they graduate to criticizing the Quran. Why did Allah use masculine pronouns to refer to Himself? Why did Allah create Adam, a man, first? Why did Allah reveal verse 4:34? etc.

This is the inherent theological tension created by the Patriarchal Thesis. And it leads many Muslim feminists to adopt increasingly deviant views and even apostatize. So those who want to claim that Feminism and Islam are compatible, confront the 1-2-3 argument above. You have limited options. I’ll make it easy and lay it out:

1. You can either argue that one can be a feminist and not accept PT, i.e., the idea of ever-present patriarchy subjugating women since time immemorial.

2. Or you can argue that PT does not undermine Islam.

Which one is it?.

Those who are fine with throwing the male-dominated scholarly tradition under the bus (the “reform,” “progressive” type as well as “Quranists,” et al.) will take Option 2. But normal Muslims with correct aqida recognize that without the male-dominated scholarly tradition, the Quran would not have reached us, the Sunnah would not have reached us, Islam would not have been preserved, etc. If you throw the ulama out, you throw Islam out. The scholars are the inheritors of the prophets. Anyone who wants to claim that the scholars were systematically biased on a global scale and unjust against women is undermining the morality of the ulama and is therefore undermining Islam itself.

In any case, I maintain that this is a logical assessment. Those who disagree are free to provide logical rebuttals. Spare me the emotional appeals, ad hominem whining, and white knight histrionics.

NB: Let me provide some disambiguation. Of course, the patriarchy does exist. Islam is a patriarchal religion. According to Islamic Law, lineage is patrilineal and social and family structures have authority flowing through the patriarch and other males figures. But patriarchy in the feminist sense is different in that it ascribes maliciousness to these structures. The feminist claim is that these patriarchal institutions are designed by men with the evil intention to frustrate the interests of women for the benefit of men. In other words, an evil cabal of men are perpetually conspiring to sabotage poor, innocent, naive women at every turn and the brave feminists have discovered this dastardly plot only in the past few decades and are fighting the good fight to abolish it. Yeah, it sounds crazy because it is.

It has become absolutely critical for Muslim intellectuals and imams to debunk this Patriarchy Thesis before another generation of Muslims falls under the spell. There are many ways to do this. First of all, one should acknowledge that, yes, there are men who abuse women and there are larger institutions, including some religious institutions, that mistreat women and usurp their rights. This cannot be ignored—domestic abuse (physical and emotional), treating women like garbage, preventing women from having any influence on their household and their larger communities, overlooking sexual abuse, etc. These are all problems that need to be addressed in all societies of the world. But do these problems stem from a large, inescapable system of men working to keep women subjugated? Or are these problems that arise due to certain abusive, selfish, ignorant, evil people that happen to be men (or even women)