What does the Quran say about the rights and status of women? | The Conversation

The Quran recognises women’s right to own property: a woman, like a man, may keep a share of what she earns. Amidst the complex rules of inheritance, the Quran affirms that a female inherits half the share of a male.

Women and men are equally required to live in submission to Allah and will both be rewarded in paradise. Still, the promise of access to amorous heavenly virgins seems designed to appeal primarily to men.

The Quran often addresses men rather than women. At the Final Judgement, the righteous will be told, “Enter paradise, you and your wives”. There the “companions of paradise” will recline on couches in the shade with their wives.

Women are not equal to men in worldly affairs. If two men are not available to witness a financial contract, one man and two women will suffice since, if one of the women makes a mistake, the other can remind her.

This advice has often been generalised to other legal matters so that two female witnesses are considered equivalent to one male.

The Quran describes men as the supervisors or protectors of women, apparently because men spend their wealth supporting them.

Wives are to obey their husbands, and those who seem rebellious are to be admonished. If necessary, their husbands may send them to their beds or even strike them.

Men are told their women are like a field in which they sow, so they should go to their field when they wish and send forth something for themselves, evidently progeny. However, they should not have sexual relations with menstruating women, who are ritually unclean.

If being restricted to four wives at a time, let alone one, is understood as constraining men’s exploitation of women, such a view is undermined by men’s sexual access to female slaves (those their right hand possesses) – without having to marry them.

According to the Quran, if a man cannot afford a free wife, he can, to avoid sin, marry a slave woman, doubtless owned by someone else (she would have fewer rights than a free woman).

Any (male) believers who had occasion to visit the apartment of one of Muhammad’s wives was to speak to her through a screen – a hijab. This word came to be applied to a Muslim woman’s head covering.

While the Quran does not require women to wear veils, the Prophet’s wives, called the “Mothers of the Believers”, naturally serve as role models. Both men and women are told to dress and behave modestly.

Detailed regulations in the Quran concerning divorce assume it is a male prerogative. A woman can, however, return some or all of her marriage gift to ransom herself; if her husband resists, he may be overruled by a judge.

Unless guilty of some moral offence, wives being divorced should remain with their husbands until they have menstruated three times to demonstrate they are not pregnant and to provide an opportunity for reconciliation.

If a wife is pregnant, the divorce is not completed until she has delivered her baby. Men are warned to provide suitable maintenance and not to make life difficult for wives they are divorcing.

Source: What does the Quran say about the rights and status of women?

ONLINE BOOK LAUNCH Reminder | Shattered Motherhood

Join us as mother, poet, historian, author and activist, Janet Fraser launches Donna F. Johnson‘s new book Shattered Motherhood: Surviving the Guilt of a Child’s Suicide.

FRIDAY 14 MARCH
11:00am Sydney/Melbourne | 10:00am Brisbane/Queensland
which is
THURSDAY 13 MARCH
8:00pm Ottawa/New York | 5:00pm Vancouver/Los Angeles

Source: ONLINE BOOK LAUNCH Reminder | Shattered Motherhood

Prisoners forced to give birth while handcuffed to male officers – LBC | UK

At least two women were made to give birth while handcuffed between 2021 and 2023.

According to an investigation by The Times, both incidents occurred at HMP Bronzefield in Surrey.

The women allege they were handcuffed sometimes during antenatal appointments, vaginal examinations, and during labour.

One female prisoner said she was restrained during antenatal appointments, and for 48 hours while in labour – sometimes handcuffed to male staff.

“Being handcuffed and without any privacy, including being chained to a male prison officer, made me feel humiliated and degraded.

“Yes, I had broken the law, but I was still a pregnant woman. I feel I was treated as less than an animal,” she told The Times.

One woman in HMP Brozefield, speaking to Channel 4, said that she was “doubled over” having contractions, “sobbing” to be released from the handcuffs.

She said she was handcuffed to an officer while showering, sleeping, and using the toilet.

Source: Prisoners forced to give birth while handcuffed to male officers – LBC

Australia fertility rates: Women delay families when mothers keep working | The Age

Raising the pension age has kept more women in the workforce for longer, but a study reveals that it may have contributed to Australia’s plunging fertility rates because their daughters know there’s no retired grandmother to help care for the children.
Economist Pelin Akyol from e61 said raising the age pension eligibility threshold from 60 to 67 between 1995 and 2023 in Australia had reduced the country’s birth rate by tying more older women up in work.
In 2023, Australia’s fertility rate hit a historic low of 1.5 births per woman, down from a rate of 1.6 the year before and short of the 2.1 required to maintain a stable population without migration.
The research found that only one in four grandmothers was still working when they qualified for the pension, compared to more than a third of grandmothers who had not reached pension age.
While the government has pledged to give families three days a week of subsidised childcare regardless of circumstances, Akyol said the high cost of formal childcare in Australia meant the availability of family members to babysit was important.

Source: Australia fertility rates: Women delay families when mothers keep working

1st Case of a Judicially-Alienated Mama: 1800’s

Frances Wright’s remarkable life was destroyed as a result of her not having the power to maintain custody, while her ex had the power to take and alienate her child from her.

Frances would often visit France and became friendly with the Marquis de LaFayette, hero of both the American and French Revolution. It was rumored that she had an affair with him.

When LaFayette later came to the U.S., he introduced her to the founding fathers. Still in her ‘20’s, she got Thomas Jefferson to agree with her plan to end slavery and soon founded her own utopian community, the Nashoba Commune, in Tennessee.

Frances was against organized religion. She believed in an education based on science, free from religious superstition. She supported the rights of working people and advocated for universal education, along with equal rights for women.

Frances was the foremother of the liberated woman and was the first to condemn marriage as a form of slavery. This threatened men’s control over women and earned her a lot of backlash. She was described as a “harlot of infidelity” and “bold blasphemer and voluptuous preacher of licentiousness” and a “female monster” who dared to take the public-lecture platform—unacceptable female behavior.

In 1830, she sailed to France and became pregnant by one of her lovers. This posed a problem because, although she openly believed in sex outside of marriage, she thought she would be ostracized from polite society and it would harm her activism. She was most concerned, though, that her child would bear the stigma of “illegitimacy”, quite damaging to the lives of illegitimate children in those days.

So she went into seclusion in Scotland to hide her pregnancy, and the French father went with her. In December of 1830, Frances gave birth to Sylva, but it was not until six months later that she married the father. She gave birth to another child in 1832, who died shortly after birth.

Problem solved. Frances gave Sylva her deceased child’s birthday so it would appear as if she had been married when she gave birth to Sylva. No issue of illegitimacy. It was a secret they would both keep until their death.

Unsurprisingly, Frances did not like being married. By 1836, when Sylva was just 4 (really 6), they had separated. Thus began a childhood-long battle for custody of Sylva and the father’s attempt to take all of Frances’ money.

The father was given temporary custody of Sylva and began his campaign to alienate her from Frances. Frances’ mental and physical health declined precipitously. She suffered “nervous breakdowns” (as they were called in the day).

Frances never regained custody, though she tried mightily throughout Sylva’s childhood. She had all the money necessary for the best representation in court, but it made no difference. He was the man/father with all the power, and she was the woman/mother with no power.

In 1838, Frances withdrew from public life and activism. She was never again able to be the powerhouse she had been, lecturing and fighting for equality. It is ironic that her own inequality and lack of power led to her inability to maintain custody and protect her own child from being alienated from her. Not to mention being financially devastated.

By her teenage years, Sylva was estranged completely from Frances. As a young adult, Sylva even started a campaign publicly opposing Frances’ work for for women’s equality. That’s how bad the brainwashing had been.

In 1850, after Sylva was an adult and aged out of the system, Frances was finally granted a divorce. Her ex-husband and Sylva were awarded her entire property, including all her earnings from lectures and royalties.

Towards the end of Sylva’s life, she apparently realized the truth—that she had been alienated from her mother by her father. She seemed to have even realized that her mother was right about women being equal to men.

Lest you think this is a rare phenomena, check out the results from one of our surveys. Nearly half of the mothers were completely alienated from their children, with nearly 40% experiencing hostility, after custody was switched to the father.

This power to take and alienate children goes back to the beginnings of Patriarchy circa 12K years ago. Despite women’s progress, women have no more power in the family than they did 200 years later. Only now, men have created a specialized “Family Court” system that makes it even easier for judges to lie about women and switch custody.

Source: 1st Case of a Judicially-Alienated Mama: 1800’s

CALL FOR A GLOBAL ACTION OF SUPPORT FOR UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls, Ms Reem Alsalem

CALL FOR A GLOBAL ACTION OF SUPPORT FOR UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls, Ms Reem Alsalem

We would like to express our deepest gratitude for the excellent and path-breaking work carried out by Ms Reem Alsalem, during her current mandate as a Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls. It is utterly important that the position of the Special Rapporteur on a matter as crucial as male violence against women and girls is held by someone with both merits and bravery, and with the highest possible authority and standards of integrity.

Women’s organisations all over the world follow Ms Alsalem’s work and we are deeply concerned by the smear campaigns and unfounded attacks against her and her work that have recently escalated due to Ms Alsalem’s unwavering commitment to women’s human rights and her independent and objective presentations on all forms of violence against women and girls. These campaigns and attacks are only a proof that Ms. Alsalem has exposed the hard truth of the systems that normalise and justify violence against women.

With this letter we want to express our strong support for Reem Alsalem’s extremely important work. We call for a global support action to Ms Reem Alsalem by joining forces with her and supporting her mandate and independent work, sharing her reports and her coverage of critical issues and her recommendations for stopping the ever growing endemic of violence targeting women.

Source: CALL FOR A GLOBAL ACTION OF SUPPORT FOR UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls, Ms Reem Alsalem

Removing babies is still harming First Nations families, almost two decades after the apology to Stolen Generations | The Conversation

Today marks 17 years since the apology to Australia’s Indigenous peoples for the forced removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families between the mid-1800s and 1970s.

Yet, communities and researchers are concerned that child protection systems are creating “another stolen generation” and a “crisis in infant removals”.

Statistics tell us Indigenous children are 11 times more likely to be removed by child protection systems than non-Indigenous children. Indigenous babies aged under one are at greatest risk.

Our recent study reviewed all the studies available about child protection processes in the perinatal period (during pregnancy and the year following birth) in Australia and across the world.

Four themes emerged from these lived experiences.

1. A lack of support before and after removal

Bridget*, an Aboriginal mother, told researchers:

There is no support… I think they should help towards improving family and helping family before taking a child away. It should be the absolute last option.

2. Devastating impact on relationships and wellbeing

Fear of removal also prevented mothers from seeking antenatal care or professional support services, further compromising health and wellbeing.

3. Feeling powerless in the system

Many mothers had been in care themselves. They felt unfairly punished, because it was assumed they would not be capable parents due to past and present trauma.

4. Harmful judgements and stereotypes

Insufficient support for poverty and homelessness before removal made it impossible to meet child protection requirements.

Source: Removing babies is still harming First Nations families, almost two decades after the apology to Stolen Generations

Revealed: More than 1,000 patients sent for NHS trans ‘top surgery’ every year | The Telegraph

More than 1,000 patients a year are sent for transgender “top surgery” on the NHS.
Data obtained by The Telegraph show for the first time the number of referrals for taxpayer-funded “masculinising” mastectomies from specialised gender clinics.
As many as 80 per cent of people using those services are females between the ages of 17 and 25.
The 1,000-plus referrals could be the tip of the iceberg, because many people have transgender surgery privately to bypass long NHS waiting lists.
The NHS faces calls to halt the surgeries. Experts warn there is no evidence that removing healthy breasts is beneficial for those with gender dysphoria – but there is evidence of harm.
A number of detransitioners have spoken publicly about their regret at rushing to have irreversible surgery, and the pain caused.
Over three years, it also sent more than 780 women for “masculinising genital gender reassignment surgery”, also known as “bottom surgery”.

Source: Revealed: More than 1,000 patients sent for NHS trans ‘top surgery’ every year

Not Just a Lawsuit—a Revolution! | Women’s Coalition

“It’s Not Just a Lawsuit—It’s a Revolution!” is the rallying cry of thousands of women joining together to file lawsuits claiming they are being discriminated against in family courts. The legal battle comes within the larger context of making revolutionary change.

But first—Great news: We are filing in New York! If your case is or was in a NY family court, make sure you sign up and tell your NY mama friends.

The filing of each discrimination lawsuit can be seen as a metaphorical Storming of the Bastille.

Family courts everywhere exist as despotic mini-monarchies. Judges rule autocratically, rarely impartially when it comes to a man wanting to take his children, his property, away from the mother. Women have been giving everything they have in the battle for their children but are still losing custody in the dictatorial regime.

This filing of discrimination lawsuits is the first step in this multifaceted Revolution, just as the Bastille uprising, and it is an important one. Women coming together to make the legal and constitutional claim that they are being discriminated against gives credence and power to our cause.

Even if some cases are dismissed, the act of rebelling gives women power. You can dismiss a lawsuit, but you can’t dismiss a Revolution! Further, any dismissals will further fuel women’s outrage and rebellion.

Women have had enough. Women are revolting against the tyranny of family courts. The filing of discrimination lawsuits is just the first instrument of our revolt.

It’s not just a lawsuit—it’s a Revolution.

Join the Women’s Revolution!

Source: (1) Not Just a Lawsuit—a Revolution!

Women kept as slaves on HUMAN egg farm: 100 victims are fed hormones and treated like cattle, with eggs removed and sold each month by gangsters | Daily Mail Online

Around 100 women were kept as slaves on a human egg farm in Georgia where they were fed hormones and treated like cattle.

Their horrifying ordeal has been revealed by three Thai women who were freed from the clutches of the ‘egg mafia’ on January 30 after being exploited for half a year, tabloid Bild reports.

The woman said they were held captive on a ‘human farm’ in the eastern European country of Georgia by a criminal organisation led by Chinese criminals, who sold their eggs on the black market.

One former slave who worked on the egg cell farm bought her freedom and alerted Pavena Hongsakula, founder of a Thai foundation for children and women.

The woman told Ms Pavena that several other Thai women were still held as slaves at the farm as they could not afford to pay for their release.

The eggs collected from the women are understood to have been sold, trafficked in other countries for use in in-vitro fertilisation (IVF), Ms Pavena said at this week’s press conference, according to the Bangkok Post.

Source: Women kept as slaves on HUMAN egg farm: 100 victims are fed hormones and treated like cattle, with eggs removed and sold each month by gangsters | Daily Mail Online