Inside the Gender Jihad: Women's Reform in Islam (46 page)

Second International Muslim Leaders’ Consultation on H.I.V./A.I.D.S., Malaysia, 2003

The Second International Muslim Leaders’ Consultation on H.I.V./

A.I.D.S. was held in Malaysia. Some of the conclusions drawn from the First Consultation in Uganda, one year before, indicated a more conservative approach to H.I.V./A.I.D.S. and to “Islam” than the ap- proach taken by the organizers in Malysia. For example, the word “leaders” was given a broader meaning (previously exclusive to neo- traditionalist authorities) to include community activists working on H.I.V./A.I.D.S. issues and Muslims who are H.I.V.-positive or have A.I.D.S. themselves.

The conference format was meticulously organized by the Malaysian hosts, divided between plenary sessions, with a panel of speakers, and breakout workshops inviting in-depth discussion by all attendees. The invited speakers would circulate through each of the workshops after their presentations, ostensibly to answer questions and address comments raised

Stories from the Trenches

231

by the attendees. The secretariat provided rapporteurs at both the plenary sessions and the workshops, with scheduled sessions to report back to all conference attendees. This format was not only carefully thought out and orchestrated, it was more inclusive than running five days with “talking heads” lecturing a passive audience, who may or may not ask questions during a Q&A session, unduly extending the plenary and often intimidating the more reticent attendees from speaking. The first indication that the Malaysian hosts were not respected in the meticulous and inclusive planning started the second day when certain participants didn’t attend the breakout workshop sessions. Instead, a few started shouting after the presentations of invited speakers during plenary sessions. This shouting rose to the level of total disruption during the plenary on “How Can Islamic Teachings Reduce Vulnerability?” My presentation was the spark igniting a fire.

Under the pretence of the demand for a Q&A session to follow all presentations, a group of eight people not only disrespected the careful organization of the hosting committee for the three hundred international attendees and participants, but also used the opportunity to directly insult me: “devil in
hijab
!” and cries of “heresy” followed. I had never experi- enced such an extreme lack of decorum, and remained silent under the assault. The detractors walked out of the conference room. When a trans- gendered victim of H.I.V./A.I.D.S. stepped to the podium after me, other attendees also walked out. Eventually, the secretariat restructured the forum in an attempt to placate these eight visitors, despite their extreme lack of etiquette. More than fifty supporters organized a petition to have the disrupters removed from the conference and read several statements at other sessions. In light of the situation, the secretariat allowed me to make a statement announcing my decision to withdraw my paper. Although I had hoped to help demonstrate my respect for the organizers who attempted to placate the detractors without challenging their rude behavior, I had also hoped it could help bring the forum back on track and help regain the momentum of the consultation. But the damage was done, and it would therefore be clear that inclusive discourse on H.I.V./A.I.D.S. was impossible for those intolerant of difference.

The version of my presentation that follows has only been edited for minimal structural repair. All of the contentious statements are retained, some with endnotes or elaborations when deemed beneficial.

232 inside the gender jihad

Vulnerabilities: H.I.V. and A.I.D.S.

Introduction

The spread of H.I.V./A.I.D.S. within families brings up an inter- esting concern with addressing inconsistencies between intent and experience within the family: how do certain family structures create greater vulnerability? The first part of this presentation will look at an interesting paradox: the family, that institution through which human beings expect and receive their greatest nurturing, is the same institution that can create the greatest vulnerabilities in the spread of H.I.V./A.I.D.S. for women and children. When the struc- ture of family itself causes vulnerability, critical examination is even more in order to construct ways that civil society can empower family members to challenge the abuses that occur within families. However, some some see the very idea of challenging “family” as a disruption in social well-being. Ultimately my question is: How can families empower all members equally despite vulnerability due to age or gender?

The first part of this presentation will examine the terms and experi- ences of vulnerability to H.I.V./A.I.D.S. for women and children as members of existing family structures in the context of Islam and Muslims. My objective is to disentangle or demystify
“
family
” by focus-
ing on both its supportive and destructive aspects. Family as a construct must be subjected to a rigorous analysis as part of any agenda that seeks to fight against the spread of A.I.D.S. As such, combating A.I.D.S. will also contribute to reforms in Muslim Personal Status Laws. One goal of these reforms will be to help the family structure function as a comfort and support for all its members equally. I will review some of the underlying assumptions about family in Islamic law inasmuch as these historically constructed assumptions are still implemented in Muslim societies while allowing undue privilege for men and male desires. This presentation uses the H.I.V./A.I.D.S. epidemic as evidence of dangerous and untenable double standards in the face of modern social change and experience. I will consider structural inconsistencies that often go unchallenged when the word “family” is introduced. While seeking to retain the family ideals of nurturance and support, I will also focus on the way some family structures provide for particular vulnerabilities.

The second part of this presentation will begin to think about theo- logical implications of combating the spread of A.I.D.S., increasing public awareness, and empowering both direct and indirect victims of H.I.V./

A.I.D.S. Some family members have directly contracted the virus through

Stories from the Trenches

233

abuses and misunderstandings of other members while some family members find their lifestyle and future indirectly affected by members with H.I.V./A.I.D.S.

Thinking about H.I.V./A.I.D.S: Gender and Family from an Islamic Perspective

In 2002, I had my first encounter with constructive organizational level efforts to respond to the A.I.D.S. epidemic at a meeting in Nairobi, Kenya. The World Conference on Religion and Peace (W.C.R.P.) convened as part of the H.A.C.I. program (H.I.V./A.I.D.S. Children Initiative) launched specifically to address the needs of increasing numbers of orphans of

A.I.D.S. The Secretary General for W.C.R.P., Dr. Vendley, will give a key- note later in this conference and can no doubt provide details on W.C.R.P.’s particular project related to utilizing community-based religious organiza- tions for information, advocacy, and support.

My experience at this W.C.R.P. meeting was important not only as a context for learning but also as it sparked my interest in the work needed in the context of Islam and Muslims with A.I.D.S. On that occasion, African religious leaders also gathered for a summit. The Muslim participants convened one morning to discuss the initiatives and Islam. One of the
imams
(religious leaders) dominated the first half of that forty-five-minute meeting by giving a
khutbah
(speech or sermon) on the importance of avoiding
zina
(fornication). This
khutbah
was insignificant to our develop- ment of a clearly articulated “Islamic” position on the particular initiative regarding A.I.D.S. orphans. Indeed, the whole tenor of the speech was useless as a framework for developing an Islamic theological response to H.I.V./A.I.D.S. Yet such a response might be useful if developed in the future. During the time since that meeting, I have begun to think about an Islamic theological response and the problems that it might pose.

H.I.V./A.I.D.S. and Vulnerability

In effect, what I present here emphasizes the ways that “Islam” and Muslims exacerbate the spread of A.I.D.S., as well as offering my critique of the neo-conservative traditional Islamic theological response of reducing it to “
zina
.” Such a reduction can never cure A.I.D.S. A.I.D.S. exists as an immune deficiency syndrome. It has spread to epidemic proportions: over forty-two million people are affected, with an estimated three million deaths per year. Of particular interest to my thesis is the consequence and spread of

A.I.D.S. among children under the age of fifteen, with additional infections of over one-half million annually. In addition to its fatality, consequences

234 inside the gender jihad

here include children who become orphaned each year due to the deaths of their primary care-takers from A.I.D.S. The estimates are fourteen million

children orphaned by A.I.D.S. What does a theological premise,

“
la

taqrabuna al-zina
” (Do not approach
zina
) (17:32) avail these children? How has Islam in particular assisted them toward living a life of dignity and how has it excluded them from experiences of dignity and worth, unstigmatized by our ostrich theology and law?

My experiences at the Nairobi meeting included a visit to an orphanage run by a women’s church group. To be sure, these women were also con- cerned with the spiritual health and development of the children in this home. What happens when religious groups, Muslim or otherwise, take such afflicted children into their homes and orphanages? Does it matter whether they had Muslim or Christian parents? Do we only take in those children who are members of our own religion? Can we raise any child with true religious choice once we take them in? It presents an interesting case vis-à-vis the concerns for these fourteen million children. If we save an endangered child, is the child then further harmed by loss of religious choice?

The other group, of even greater concern to my work, is monogamous wives, especially in the context of Islam, where a Muslim wife is not only expected to be, but is defined in terms of being unconditionally sexually available to her husband. Properly fulfilling this role of wife is fatal to some women, with estimates as high as 80%. That is, 80% of the heterosexual women with A.I.D.S. are monogamous and have only ever had sex with their husbands. These percentages come from all H.I.V./A.I.D.S.-infected women. My suspicions would be that the percentage would be even higher

for Muslim women. What does a

theological

premise,
la

taqrabuna

al-zina
, avail these women? How has “Islam” in particular assisted them toward living a life of dignity and how has it excluded them from experiences of dignity and worth, unstigmatized by our ostrich theology and law?

Ultimately the solutions to the problems of A.I.D.S. will not be limited to victims in the two particular groups in my examination. However, I am interested in how these two groups demonstrate the emptiness of such religious platitudes, like
la taqrabuna al-zina
, in addressing the problem. Even when those responses are based on the Qur’an and
sunnah
, they are ineffective in resolving the problem of women and children’s vulnerability.

H.I.V./A.I.D.S. and Sexuality in Islam

With regard to the

80%

of H.I.V.-positive heterosexual women

who

Stories from the Trenches
235

contract A.I.D.S. in monogamous relationships, a direct look at Islam and sexuality is called for. According to
shari‘ah
, if a Muslim man desires inter- course with his wife, she must comply. If she does not, she is guilty of
nushuz
(recalcitrance). Such a recalcitrant wife (
nashizah
) is no longer eligible for
nafaqah
(maintenance or financial support). In addition, in various degrees of interpretation and application, verse 4:34 of the Qur’an asserts that the husband of such a woman may beat her. In the face of this, the vast majority of Muslim wives, those with gentle husbands, husbands of polygyny (open or secret), husbands of violence and abuse, upright husbands of moral standing, and husbands of A.I.D.S., open their legs to their men, as they are not only expected but commanded to do by that which is most popularly under- stood as “Islam.” Women turn toward men who have contracted A.I.D.S. and open their legs to their own death and destruction. Since the over-

whelming

majority of

Muslim

women with A.I.D.S. are faithful wives,

the statement
la taqrabuna al-zina
is not applicable to them. Yet they will become the one stigmatized and even shamed, while Muslim authorities continue to support the unbridled sexual license of the male libido. It matters little if the men have contracted A.I.D.S. by either legal and moral or illegal and immoral means. By legal and moral means, I refer to the hus- band who has contracted A.I.D.S. by marrying a younger, more nubile female carrier to confirm his own masculine sexuality, and then spread it to the demure and compliant wife of longer standing. In turn, if she gives birth, their innocent child is also in danger of being infected. What has this woman done to deserve the single theological solution,
la taqrabuna al-zina
? The consequences for the married, virtuous women (
muhsinat
), and the religious and morally devout Muslim women (
qaanitat
), are the same – they will die because they did what they had been taught was “good.” How does the statement
la taqrabuna al-zina
apply to them? How does “Islam” resolve this problem?

Sexuality

One of the underlying concerns for fully addressing H.I.V./A.I.D.S. is a hard look at sexuality in Islam. To do this, I remind us first about sexuality and gender in general. My references here are to research by Western feminists. In particular, I am interested in work done on the tyranny of patriarchal domination through heterosexuality or the sexual politics of domination. For the most part, marriage in
shari‘ah
is premised upon the woman’s subordination. Whatever choice she may have in con- tracting marriage to a particular prospective husband, her choice is then limited within the structures of marriage and family that prevail once the