|
|
|
|
The view changes
This is in response to Muhammad S.K Toori’s letter on November 12. The Christian religion has not been confined to the four walls of the Church. It is a way of life. Many people misinterpret that Christianity preaches separation of the Church and the State because Jesus Christ stood up against the corrupt government of His time. Mr Toori claims that while the Scriptures’ text was written 200 years after the death of Christ and by the hands of Greek philosophers that is not the case in Islam. Yet Muslim scholars state that the earliest copy of the Holy Quran was written no earlier than 150 years after Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) died. Many Muslims have no problem adopting Christian examples and models when it serves them. A case in point is the following excerpt from Mr Hafizur Rahman’s article What’s wrong with two Eids?: “I do not view two, or even three Eids, as a national calamity. Eid is a festive occasion, also meant for thanksgiving, and if it can be regarded as a season (like Christmas) instead of as a day, the worry about more than one Eid becomes insignificant.” Denigrating someone else’s religion is not the way to garner respect for your own. A Christian Reader Karachi A word for women It’s a sad day when in one of Pakistan’s highly revered newspapers an article is written belittling women in the most unprofessional way, with no scientific or literary backing of any kind. The article A word for women by Amar Jaleel on the November 2,reads as the ramblings of a chauvinistic man expressing his personal opinion on a public forum, without a cause or any supporting argument. References are made to the insignificant role of woman in history. The enslavement and exploitation of women is written off as a sign of their inferiority and foolishness. In the whole process of evolution, the writer seems to have forgotten to include any references to the physical and mental developments of woman and her ability to give birth and create life. Even in the day to day life of women in the ancient civilizations, they are portrayed by Amar Jaleel in a trivial manner. As a matter of fact, the ancient Egyptian woman had all her legal rights, property rights and was allowed to conclude contracts such as marriage and divorce settlements. Women even then were doing administrative jobs and bringing home the bread if needed. History is replete with examples of matriarchic societies. Since Mr Jaleel evinces an interest in the gender studies of fauna, the role of the queen bee in her society ought to be proof enough of what importance the female is endowed with even in the animal kingdom. It is the lioness who hunts and provides for the family, and in the elephant family the females hold a high position in the herd. As for the goddesses of the ancient times, Isis being the queen goddess, is a key character in Egyptian mythology. Gaia, a Greek goddess, was one from whom everything else comes. She wasn’t just divinity because the Greeks believed her to be the earth. These are just two examples of the reverence with which ancient civilizations acknowledged their deep respect of womanhood. The article goes on to deduce that “deep down a woman enjoys conceding to a man”. Such a statement which leads men to condone the inhumane actions towards women is utterly unacceptable in a civilized society. In a country where women are still struggling to gain recognition in the workplace and are still fighting for their basic human rights, women need all the support from the major institutions. Instead of publishing the achievements of women in Pakistan in trying to lead the life of a working woman, a single mother, a stay-at-home mother, such articles discredit their mere existence. It ends with three reasons for the “perpetual plight of women” which seems to be the harshest part of the whole article. It makes out a woman to be a narcissistic being only interested in her appearance and its apparent magnetic attraction for men. It is hard to believe how the writer arrives at the conclusion that women are not even aware of their exploitation. His conclusion openly contradicts his very own chauvinistic surmise about the appearance of women and its effect on men. If he were to take a moment and hear the cries of every woman, loud and soft, he would realize that women of all ages, sizes and from all backgrounds have devoted a significant amount of time and effort in being heard, in breaking away the patriarchal system that they were born in and prepare their daughters for a better life than they have had to live. It is to be admitted that Mr Amar Jaleel is objective enough to acknowledge the existence of male chauvinism. Is it not reasonable to concede that chauvinism of any kind is to be obliterated if one aspires for a just and fair society? Can men and women, instead of wrangling over superiority of genders, not join forces to strive for a better and more equitable world for all humankind? Logic decrees that the human race cannot survive without either of the two genders so that makes the two equally important. Maysun Zeb Via email |
|
|
|
|
 Contributions Privacy Policy © DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2006 |