Womens right

In the history of political thought , the denial of civil and political rights for women
and their exclusion from the political realm were justified by arguments and assumptions
about the natural differences between the two sexes. For example , the thinkers were
believed that these natural differences were reflected in men and womens social role
and function. Women , by nature , were unsuited to political and economic activities.
Their natural place was in the home , their natural role was reproductive and domestic.
The liberal emphasize the sameness and formal equality to guarantee equal
rights for women has been criticized in much contemporary feminist debate because
this position ignores the biological and social differences between men and women
which are significant if equal rights is to be equal worth. Some feminist claim that legal
rights and social policies which are blind to gender differences tend to reinforce and
perpetuate rather than undermine gender inequalities. Feminist who believed that it is
the differences between the sexes rather than their similarities which are important ,
focus more on womens reproductive function and their associated nurturing , cooperating , caring qualities and responsibilities. For some feminist gender differences
are innate. Because of these differences , the equal treatment of men that is
safeguarded by non-discriminatory policies can actually disadvantage women. This
means that the equal treatment of gender-biased in that it is advantageous of men. In
effect , it results in positive discrimination in favor of men.
The claim that women have equal rights to jobs ignores the fact that paid
employment itself is structured in such a way that it favors male norms , behavior ,
lifestyle and career patterns. Women have to be like men to be succeed. Many feminist
claim that equal rights is not enough to ensure that women play an equal role in society.
They argue that women should have special rights because of their special needs. This
implies that instead of formulating rights and rules in universal terms that are blind to
difference , some group sometimes deserve special rights. For example , women
childbearing capacities give them special needs and special rights rights to pregnant
and maternity leave , special treatment for nursing mothers and childcare assistance.

The same / difference debate continues. Many feminist opposed to emphasizing

differences and claiming special rights because of them. First , by acknowledging
womens differences from men , feminists run the risk of these differences being used
against them. Instead of providing a foundation of special rights , womens differences
can inadvertently justify exclusion and discrimination. Second , because difference
approaches reinforce assumptions about the appropriateness and naturalness of
traditional gender roles and responsibilities. Special rights for women in relation to
childcare provision draws attention away from mens joint responsibility for their
childrens welfare. Third , because focusing on womens differences from men implies
that all women are the same and this obscures the different needs women have as
members of different races or classes.
The feminist should challenge the social conditions and social relations which
disadvantage and oppress women rather than on claiming either equal or special rights
between them. To this end , the demand for sex-specific rights will sometimes be
necessary. Arguments for special rights are not based on differences , but on whether
different treatment which results from them will reduce or reinforce sex-based
inequalities.
Most history discriminations have been wrong not because they distinguished
people according to group but because they aimed in formally and explicitly restricting
the actions and opportunities of group members. Drawing attention to sexual difference
in the context of gender oppression can be used to challenge rather than entrench
traditional views of the appropriateness and naturalness of gender roles by questioning
the male roles and standards that women are meant to conform to if they are to
compete on an equal footing with men.
Assertion that Islam is sexist or values the male more the female could not be
further from the truth. Gender, race, ethnicity, wealth and status are not what distinguish
people in the sight of God; rather, what distinguishes people is only their piety and
consciousness of God in their everyday lives. The Koran declares such in unequivocal
terms:

O people! Indeed we have created you from male and female and made you peoples
and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of
God is the most righteous of you. [Koran, 49:13]
As for the reason why male children inherit double the share of female children,
this has nothing to do with the worth ascribed to either gender. Indeed, only those who
see the world through the lens of wealth and materialism would infer the worth of people
from the material gains they receive. Rather, the law has a context and is part of a
larger coherent framework.
An assessment of the Islamic laws of inheritance reveals that out of the over 30
cases which govern the different possible scenarios of inheritance amongst relatives, in
only four cases does the female receive half the share of the male. In the rest, the vast
majority, of the cases the female's share is either equal to that of the male or higher.
The consideration, which accounts for the differences, is not for who is valued
more, but is based on factors such as the degree of kinship between the heir and
testator (closer heirs getting more), the placement of the heir in the sequence of
generations (younger heirs getting more), and degree of financial responsibility towards
others (those with greater responsibility getting more).
We were to apply the atomistic view of liberalism, we may now argue that men
are discriminated against! Of course, this would miss the point entirely, which is that the
problem is not with Islam, but with the premises of liberalism which divorce the
individual from the community and, in an abstract appeal to an intrinsic equality, neglect
the circumstances of the real world, taking as a focal point the imagined, apolitical and
ahistorical, free individual.

Islam takes seriously the basic family unit that has existed throughout time, as its
starting point. In doing so, it honors the woman and her distinguished role as mother
and wife. It frees her from the worry of earning a living, allowing her to focus on the
most important task of raising children, the future generations. The male too has a
primary role as breadwinner and caretaker.
These roles are not water-tight compartments. The female can pursue a career if
she wants, and the male can be homemaker if he wants, but the primary roles are
defined, and the relationship is one of cooperation for the benefit of the family, and in
turn, the society.
In contrast, secular liberalism has pushed the modern woman to see herself in
competition with the male and has done away with any clearly defined roles, leading to
family breakdown and social chaos. And still the result has been a rhetoric of equality
juxtaposed with a reality of rampant domestic violence, established glass-ceilings, a
culture of discrimination in institutions such as the army, and the commoditization of the
woman.

The National Organization for Women (NOW) is the largest Liberal Feminist
organization in the United States. Though their primary focus and issue currently is the
Constitutional Equality Amendment, they also deal with reproductive issues and
abortion access as well as ending violence against women, combating racism,
economic justice and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender rights (LGBT).
Various other issues the National Organization for Women also deals with are:
Affirmative action , Disability rights ,EcoFeminism , Family , Opposing right-wing
causes contrary to NOW's interests ,Global feminism ,Women's health , Immigration
, Promotion of nominating judges with feminist viewpoints ,Legislation , recognition
of same-sex marriages , Media activism , Mothers' economic Rights , Working for
peace ; opposition to conflicts such as the Iraq War , Social Security , Supreme
Court , Title IX/Education , Welfare , Workplace discrimination , Women in the
Military , Young feminist programs

Critics of liberal feminism argue that its individualist assumptions make it difficult to
see the ways in which underlying social structures and values disadvantage women.
They argue that even if women are no longer dependent upon individual men, they are
still dependent upon a patriarchal state. These critics believe that institutional changes
like the introduction of women's suffrage are insufficient to emancipate women.[1]
One of the more prevalent critiques of liberal feminism is that it, as a study, allows too
much of its focus to fall on a metamorphosis of women into men, and in doing so,
disregards the significance of the traditional role of women.[2] Additionally, liberal
feminism has been critiqued on the basis of an overemphasis of the rational above the
emotional, while arguably, a human is intrinsically both. Liberal feminism focuses on the
individual, and in doing so, discredits the importance of the community. [3] A historical
critique of liberal feminism focuses on its racist, classist and heterosexist
past.[4] Granted, as a whole, liberal feminists feel that in and of itself, their philosophy
has not only responded to, but has overcome any inherent racism, heterosexism, and in
doing so, has exemplified the strength of liberal feminism and its ability to adapt. One of
the leading scholars who have critiqued Liberal Feminism is Catherine A. MacKinnon.
Catherine A. MacKinnon is an American lawyer, writer and social activist. Specializing in
issues regarding sex equality, she has been intimately involved in the case regarding
the definition of sexual harassment and sex discrimination.[5] She, among other leading
scholars, view liberalism and feminism as incompatible due to the fact that liberalism
offers women a, piece of the pie as currently and poisonously baked.[6]
Other critics such as black feminists and postcolonial feminists assert that mainstream
liberal feminism reflects only the values of middle-class white women and has largely
ignored women of different races, cultures or classes.[7]

References
1. Bryson, V. (1999): Feminist Debates: Issues of Theory and Political
Practice (Basingstoke: Macmillan) pp.14-15

2. Tong, Rosemarie. 1989. Feminist Thought: A Comprehensive Introduction. Oxon,

United Kingdom: Unwin Human Ltd. Chapter 1
3. Tong, Feminist Thought, 38.
4. Tong, Feminist Thought, 40.
5. Catherine A. MacKinnon, Sexuality in Kolmar, Wendy K. and Frances
Barkowski.2005.Feminist Theory:A Reader.2nd Edition. Boston: McGrawHill
6. Morgan, Robin. 1996. Light Bulbs, Radishes and the Politics of the 21st
Century. in Radically Speaking: Feminism Reclaimed, ed. Diane Bell and Renate
Klein. North Melbourne: Spinifex.
7. Mills, S. (1998): "Postcolonial Feminist Theory" in S. Jackson and J. Jones
eds., Contemporary Feminist Theories (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press)
pp.98-112

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Assalamualaikum W.B.T
We take this opportunity to express our profound gratitude and deep regards to
our guide Ustaz AbdulHamid Mohamed Ali Zaroum for his exemplary guidance,
monitoring and constant encouragement throughout the course of this assignment on
Liberalism. The blessing, help and guidance given by him time to time shall carry us a
long way in the journey of life on which we are about to embark.
Lastly, we thank almighty, our parents, brother, sisters and friends for their
constant encouragement without which this assignment would not be possible in a
limited time frame.