On the face of it, the recent brochure (.pdf) about women's rights in the mosque has caused much excitement, particularly among those who have been pushing for years for increased equity in mosque operations and facilities. The call for women to be in the main prayer hall along with men, backed by major Muslim organizations, seems to be a difficult pill for many conservative mosques to swallow. However, a closer read of the document shows that there is a great deal of wiggle room that allows male-run mosques to obey the letter of the law without ceding much control or significantly improving the situation of women in North American mosques today.

Women's speech at the mosque?

The document addresses the near-total absence of women's voices in the mosque by calling for the inviting of women scholars to hold seminars, which on the face of it seems to be a good thing. But the intention of this document becomes clearer with the subsequent call for women to "introduce speakers, offer opening and closing dua or prayer during educational programs, moderate panels, and direct question and answer sessions" - in short, do everything but address the combined body of the mosque in an authoritative manner. But what about the call for women scholars to hold seminars in the mosque? Seminars, by definition, are optional affairs that are attended only by those who wish to participate. In a more conservative mosque, this means that women scholars will come and give a seminar to the women of the mosque - hardly a dramatic change from the situation today. And in a collective, "non-seminar" setting, the best that Muslim women can hope for is to introduce the main (male) speaker.

Appointed or elected?

A Response To Comments On The "Women-Friendly Mosques" Brochure - I very much appreciate your positive responses to the mosque access brochure, and for highlighting its positive potential to play a transformative role, insha Allah. Also, I am grateful for your support on this issue of women's inclusion. Below is some additional background information about brochure that I think important for you to know. (Read more...)

A discussion of mosque governance that does not use the word "elect" and "women" in the same sentence cannot be taken seriously. Sure, the document calls for women to be "represented on governing boards" with "at least two seats... designated to be held for women." But which women? Is it for people to be elected fairly by the mosque population, even if it makes the men of the Board uncomfortable? Or - as this document suggests - it is for the men to appoint those women who agree with their style of leadership and will preserve the status quo? The situation at conservative mosques suggests that this is the path that will be taken, absolving the board of any accusation of bias because they are following the letter of the "women-friendly mosques" declaration. Where does this leave women? Free to use "suggestion boxes" and "bulletin boards" to appeal to the mosque leadership, with no guarantee of change.

Separate and unequal?

The issue of women's space in the mosque is probably the most sensitive point for pro-women activists, and has most visibly illustrated the problem of gender inequity. This document, while allowing for women to co-exist in the main hall with men, leaves many unanswered questions. Can women enter through the main entrance? It appears not, as the document calls for a safe (presumably separate, not necessarily equal) entrance exclusively for women. It allows for women to be in the same musalla as men, yet says nothing about barriers that can be erected between the genders. Of course, conservative mosques will erect a floor-to-wall barrier within the main room, and declare with great satisfaction that they have complied with the "women-friendly mosques" document, when in fact they have created yet another separate space, only this one isn't in the basement anymore.

This document is worded in such a careful way as to allow current ultraconservative mosques to operate as-is, with only minor changes. Unless our institutions are willing to come clean, with clear, unambigious language that leaves no room for opponents of change to wiggle free, documents such as this will only serve to clear the conscience of those troubled by accusations of inequity, without changing anything on the ground.

The mosque is not a place for one upmanship. It is a place for prayer as guided by the Prophet and his sunnah. Prayer for a male is farz in a masjid and not so for a woman who is encouraged to pray at home. We as muslims are not in the business of fighting over space in the masjid. We cannot allow women to disrupt our most holy sanctuaries with slogans and activism. Please leave Allah's houses alone from the profane power grabbing so common in this Dunya.

>>It is a place for prayer as guided by the Prophet and his sunnah.<<

Well bud, pro-regressive Muslim dont believe in the sunnah, or the Quran for that matter. This whole nonsense was created by a charlatan called Asra Nomani.
The number one problem at masjids is lack of security. Everyday you read about some masjids/Islamic centers the targets of hate crimes. Now we have burnt Qurans smeared with feces being left at masjids by hatemongers (may they burn in hell for all eternity). Yet you'll NEVER see these issues being addressed by the pro-regressives. Why ? Because it takes real guts to address a real problem...something they clearly dont have. Its very easy to attack fellow Muslims rather than demand some answers from the authorities. The RAND corporation would definetly not be pleased with that.

Astute analysis, even if it is so pessimistic. I think that conservatives under pressure have always resorted to finding loopholes. Muslims who do not want to do something always find a way out and still deflect pressure, a timeworn political tactic all too common in the "old world". But, at least this is a step forward, even if it is somewhat flawed as Shahid showed (anything is flawed if misused!) ... and i love the counter-arguments which shows that discrimination against women is truly a hot-topic for insecure men, especially those who obsess over RAND!

>>and i love the counter-arguments which shows that discrimination against women is truly a hot-topic for insecure men, especially those who obsess over RAND!<<

Yes ofcourse RAND is a figment of conservative Muslim imagination. If anything your obsession with bringing your extreme leftist politics to the masjid is itself a deflection from the real issues of security etc. A lot of rif raf by the same group of paper tigers who attack their own community while staying dead silent as majids are destroyed and desecrated by war criminals elsewhere. Whats the matter ? Uncle Sam got your tongue ?

The CAIR study counts over 1,000 mosques in the US. how many incidents have thier been? You inflate a little vandalism by punk kids as a serious "security" problem. Well, I think a more serious problem is how women stay away from the mosque as mentioned in the "pamphlet" and something I see all the time in Honolulu. After all, these are peoples' spiritual well being we are talking about here while a mosque is just a building of brick and mortar. Which is more important to you: souls or bricks?! Remember, this is not christianity which has the concept of sacred spaces. The only Haram in Islam is in Makka and maybe Medina, not in your hometown to be sure...

>> You inflate a little vandalism by punk kids as a serious "security" problem. <<

It IS a serious problem in that it has become quite common, every week theres a new hate crime committed against masajid. So yes, thats a security problem. Just this week a domestic terrorist was put away for firebombing a masjid in Texas. Asra Nomani and her crew of lefty extremists are the ones doing the inflating here.

>>Remember, this is not christianity which has the concept of sacred spaces. The only Haram in Islam is in Makka and maybe Medina, not in your hometown to be sure<<

Wrong again. All religions have this concept of respect and reverence for places of worship. You're confusing the qiblah of Islam which is towards Makkah with the sanctity of masajid. Each and every masjid is a house of Allah to be respected. To you it may be a bunch of bricks but to Muslims it is our house of worship and an attack on it is an broad attack on all those in the community. Whats next ? Saying its ok to desecrate the Quran since its just a ink on paper ?

I like having women only areas in the masjid. My concern is that the area is clean, safe, and comfortable, with good acoustics so that I can hear the prayer or lecture. I don't care if the area is in a balcony or up/down stairs from the men. if women are allowed space in a masjid, it is important to me that the women enjoy the same comfort level as the men. What I don't want to see is muslim women in america falling into the trap of making this a "feminist issue" because that would be a waste of time and so, so destructive to our community, especially since we women don't even have to offer our prayers in the masjid in order for them to be accepted!

Thank you Nefertari for injecting some common sense into the discussion.

So, you're comparing Islam with every other religion? Do tell me where in the Quran or Sunnah it says that buildings built by people are sacred... Surely, if they are sacred, Islam has ceremonies to sanctify them? If they are so sacred, why did the Prophet (S) conduct daily life activities there? See, Islam does not have a concept of sacred space except for the Haram (BTW, H-r-m is the one of the roots for this concept, the other is q-d-s if you didn't have a clue...) which is declared by Allah. Also, how do you explain away the fact that Allah declares that "the whole earth is a masjed" in the Quran?

You can worship a building if you want, but I think Islam is much more human centric than you would have people believe. How do I know? Just read the Quran; its there if you want to see it, but not there if you don't want to see what Allah has revealed. Funny how it works like that, huh.

So, you want everyone to drop what they are doing and focus soley on the so-called "security" issue? Indeed, just admit you want women to take a back seat and you mention the "security" issue only to deflect effort away from something *you* don't want. There are HUNDREDS of mosques which have not been vandalized. But, do tell us, do you stand watch outside of a mosque all night long to salve your guilty conscious or what else, then?

>>So, you're comparing Islam with every other religion?<<

No, I said that all religions and their followers respect their houses of worship. Learn to read.

>>Do tell me where in the Quran or Sunnah it says that buildings built by people are sacred<<

Its common sense my dear grunt. Since when did the sychophants at MuslimScrewUp.com start believing in Quran and Hadith ? Can you tell where woman led prayers are mentioned.

>>You can worship a building if you want, but I think Islam is much more human centric than you would have people believe.<<

Dont twist my words around. You know full well nobody is worshipping bricks. These "bricks" were put together by Muslims through their hard work and labor so others, including the disrespectful and ignorant could have a place to pray. Its easy to scoff at the hard work of others isnt it. Your problem is you keep confusing the qiblah with reverence.

>>There are HUNDREDS of mosques which have not been vandalized.<<

And there have been hundreds which have not just been vandalized but burnt to the ground. I'm sure the sharp spike in hate crimes is also a product of an over active imagination. For you to deny this shows clearly how disingenous you and the extremists are. Instead of tackling real issues you create straw men, because a liar like Nomani makes up rubbish because she couldnt get enough votes to get elected to a masjid commitee. The same applies to who dismiss the desecration of the Quran because its simply "ink on paper."

Liar. Hundreds of mosques have NOT been burned down. Read the CAIR statistics! You, my dear ignoramus, make assertions with absolutely no basis and then claim that people are twisting *your* words around AND YOU DUCK EACH CHALLENGE PLACED IN FRONT OF YOU. Truly, you are someone who only wants to impose upon others and gets upset when your private views are not the basis for the public opinions and behaviors of others. There's a little Saddam in each of us, huh.

>>Liar. Hundreds of mosques have NOT been burned down.<<

As I stated earliar, hundreds of masjids have been vandalized and burned. Learn to read jackball.

>>Read the CAIR statistics!<<

Hmmm I thought CAIR didnt represent Muslim Americans, atleast thats what Mufti Nassef and his minions claim. CAIR admits that their statistics are far from complete...add to the fact the feds dont classify many of the attacks as hate crimes.

>>You, my dear ignoramus, make assertions with absolutely no basis and then claim that people are twisting *your* words around AND YOU DUCK EACH CHALLENGE PLACED IN FRONT OF YOU.<<

Actually grunt, I didnt duck any challenge. I stated thats its COMMON SENSE to respect a house of worship. Your words apply to you and the propoganda you're forcing on the rest of us by ignoring the obvious. Where in the Quran or Sunnah do you derive the right to have charlatans lead salah ? But I'm sure you have your hands full being confused about qiblah, haram sharief etc.

>>Truly, you are someone who only wants to impose upon others and gets upset when your private views are not the basis for the public opinions and behaviors of others.<<

Well isnt that interesting....sounds a lot like a handful of lefty extremists in cyberspace who have decided to redefine what Islam is and what a Muslim is. Yeah buddy, I'm going to take you and the FOX liberals seriously in your claims. War criminal credentials nonwithstanding.

>>There's a little Saddam in each of us, huh.<<

I guess you would know. You and the rest of the "liberators" have killed far more Iraqis than your puppet Saddam ever did. Collateral damage no doubt.

Aha, the last refuge of the intellectually dishonest: bring up a broad variety of topics to try to force a lost focus... The point is: do you support equality for women in our mosques and communities or not. Simple. Instead, you try to make a blanket indictment of everything you don't agree with in a small forum. So, please tell us since you refused to answer: do you, have you ever, will you stand vigil outside of a mosque to guard it from vandalism, since it such a "widespread" problem, huh. Put up or shut up.

>>Aha, the last refuge of the intellectually dishonest: bring up a broad variety of topics to try to force a lost focus<<

No, bring up a real issue in the face of phony theatrics by a group of sycophants in cyberspace who claim to represent Muslims. Liars with a political agenda to the core.

>>The point is: do you support equality for women in our mosques and communities or not. Simple. Instead, you try to make a blanket indictment of everything you don't agree with in a small forum<<

Dont twist words around. This isnt about equality for woman in masjids, its about the likes Wadud and Nomani promoting their own extreme lefty agenda which has nothing to do Islam. Nomani is a proven liar and Wadud, a race baiter who cant answer her critics intelligently. Speaking of which I do not support any practise which has no basis in the Holy Quran and Sunnah of the Prophet (s) eg mixed congregations prayers and those led by a female. So grunt, have found those references in the Quran and Sunnah which support these practices ? Speak up already. Or are you going to dodge this question forever ? I'm not surprised. Typical extremist.

>>do you, have you ever, will you stand vigil outside of a mosque to guard it from vandalism, since it such a "widespread" problem<<

Oh yes, many of us have and continue to do so, unlike pro-regressive pseudo-intellectuals who claim that Muslims are worshipping a bunch of bricks. It may not get camera crews or receive the media attention which MuslimForSale.com does, but atleast its something constructive.
Hell of a lot better than what you "liberators" are doing, WMDs and all. Get back to me when you've got something remotely original to say with proofs. Otherwise stick to that joke of a website where you regressive views are entertained.

The position paper evaluated by Shahid makes no mention of female imams or side-by-side prayer....did you even bother to read it?!

>>Oh yes, many of us have and continue to do so,

I said *you*, not "us". Can't you ever answer a question directly and with some intelligence or must you always resort to childish and intellectualy and morally bankrupt name-calling?

>> remotely original to say with proofs.

And you've done this WHEN? You assert things but bring no ayah or hadith or scientific statistics, but just want readers to accept what you say on the "majesty of your reputation". And almost everything I've heard come out of your sewer I've heard before by some other nutjob that you're probably just copying. When have you offered anything constructive on alt.muslim before, huh?

>>The position paper evaluated by Shahid makes no mention of female imams or side-by-side prayer....did you even bother to read it?!<<

I took a position on some of Mr.Amanullah's asserions. I raised an issue and you attacked me for it. This isnt MWU where dissenting opinions get deleted. Once again, learn to read before getting your panties in a twist.

>>I said *you*, not "us". Can't you ever answer a question directly and with some intelligence or must you always resort to childish and intellectualy and morally bankrupt name-calling?<<

It takes more than one person to do security rounds aroung a masjids perimeter, and yes I have done my rounds with fellow Muslims for your information. You'd think a grunt in the army could grasp such a concept. Speaking of intelligence, you may want to use what little you have before resorting to childish statements about worshipping bricks and projecting your petty insecurities on others.

>>You assert things but bring no ayah or hadith or scientific statistics, but just want readers to accept what you say on the "majesty of your reputation"<<

Dont lie. I've only stated COMMON SENSE in reference to protection and respect for houses of worship. I've asked you politely to show me the religous basis on which you endorse female imams and mixed congregations. You havent been able to because you cant.

>>And almost everything I've heard come out of your sewer I've heard before by some other nutjob that you're probably just copying.<<

Well now, look whos name calling now. What an action figure you are. As you were soldier.

>>When have you offered anything constructive on alt.muslim before, huh?<<

More times than you ever will thats for sure, and I do without justifying mass murder like you on MWU. If my comments are "from a sewer" as you assert, I would have been banned long ago. Perhaps if you did something worth while with your time instead of hurling cheap invective you may do something constructive. You appear so enamored of your ability to provoke that you've lost sight of truth and common sense. This often happens to people who rebel against an orthodoxy: they go in the extreme opposite direction and wind up becoming a caricature of themselves.

Its so very kind of you to make ad hominem attacks, as if my background makes my position for the equality of women in our communities wrong. Your spitefulness and lack of substance have only shown to me and many others how your brand of being Muslim can never serve as a basis for cool, sustainable and livable Muslim communities. Thanks, really...

>>Its so very kind of you to make ad hominem attacks, as if my background makes my position for the equality of women in our communities wrong.<<

Your background has nothing to do with it, rather your words and actions, and inability to provide proof for your position. Its rather inconsistent how you rant and rage about perceived inequality in masjids (at the say so of proven frauds like Asra Nomani), yet seem to dismiss act of terror against masjids. Rather odd.

>>Your spitefulness and lack of substance have only shown to me and many others how your brand of being Muslim can never serve as a basis for cool, sustainable and livable Muslim communities.<<

Stick and stones. Your comments as well as mine are all posted here, and its clearly evident who has engaged in ad hominem attacks, name calling and other pro-regressive Stalinist smear tactics. All without solid proof ofcourse. Malcolm X had an excellent term for folks like you, that of the "house negro." A true cariacture of themselves.

DrDriveBy: 1
OmarG: 0

>>>being Muslim can never serve as a basis for cool, sustainable and livable Muslim communities<<<

why would somebody make a statement something like this?