Colonization by Immigration

Some British Mosques Want to Stop Women from Wearing Trousers, Leaving their Homes–and Using Facebook

Islamists ' disdain for women does not just come from their misogyny; it ultimately comes from the source texts of Islam, texts from which Islamists draw inspiration.

BY Immanuel Al-Manteeqi · @Al_Manteeqi | May 8, 2016

Some mosques in England issued statements that advise or prohibit Muslim women from using Facebook, wearing trousers, and leaving their homes without their husbands’ permission. It is reported that the Green Lane Masjid in Birmingham has issued a statement that women are not allowed to wear trousers—even in front of their husbands. This comes at the heels of the declaration of the Blackburn Muslims’ Association, which states that it is not permissible for a Muslim woman to travel more than forty-eight miles without a male escort. (The Blackburn Muslim’s Association is an affiliate group of the Muslim Council of Britain, an umbrella organization with more than 500 affiliates. It is an organization that is known for outrageously and vilely boycotting the Holocaust Memorial Day). Moreover, it is reported that the Central Masjid of Blackburn declared Facebook ‘evil,’ and its use “sinful.” In addition, a document written by a mufti at the Croydon Mosque entitled ‘Advice for the Husband and Wife’, states that “a woman should seek her husband’s permission when leaving the house and should not do so without his knowledge.”

Those Westerners who are unfamiliar with the underlying motivations of Islamists may cry, “unbelievable!” But unfortunately those who have studied the underlying motives of Islamists are not as surprised—this is but the fruits of adopting the suicidal policy of mass Muslim immigration.

Islamists ‘ disdain for women does not just come from their misogynism. To be sure, it does come from their misogynism, but it ultimately comes from the source texts of Islam, texts from which Islamists draw inspiration. There is much concerning women in the early Islamic source texts that is unpalatable by modern Western standards. But since Islamists are trying to bring the world back to the medieval times in which these texts were written, it is important to understand these sources if we are to truly comprehend Islamists’ underlying motivations.

For example, according to Q 4:34, husbands are allowed to beat their wives if they “fear disobedience.” According to Q 2:282, the testimony of a woman is worth half that of man’s. According to Q 4:11 and Q 4:176, a woman should only inherit half as much as a man does. According to Q 2:223, women can be “plowed” at the whim of their husbands. According to Q 65:4, sexual relations with females who have not yet had their menstrual cycle (i.e., prepubescent girls) are  permissible. According to Q 4:24, having female sex slaves, “those whom your right hand possess” (ما ملكت ايمانكم) is permissible. These verses are all from the Qur’an, the most authoritative source for Islamic doctrine and praxis.

But it is not just the Qur’an that contains such pronouncements; the ahadeeth (sayings of Muhammad), which have orders of magnitude more content than the Qur’an, also contain such edicts. The following hadith from Sahih Al-Bukhari, the most authoritative Sunni collection of ahadeeth, is instructive:

Once Allah’s Messenger [ i.e., Muhammad] went out to the Musalla [place of prayer] (to offer the prayer) of `Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, “O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women).” They asked, “Why is it so, O Allah’s Messenger?” He replied, “You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you.” The women asked, “O Allah’s Messenger! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?” He said, “Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?” They replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?” The women replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her religion.” [emphases are mine].

Given such texts, it is no surprise to see such misogynistic actions on the part of Islamists or so-called “moderate” Muslims. Even though some of what the people mandate vis-a-vis women are extreme, even by the standards of the religious source texts that they draw inspiration from, they are rooted in the same misogynistic ideals found in their texts.

Western liberals are loathe to admit this fact. Indeed, they bend over backwards to try to show that mainstream Islam proclaims ideals as high as that of Christianity. When Muslim groups like the above make such pronouncements, Western liberals dismiss them as representing only a fringe group, those whose ideas are hardly taken seriously by the wider Muslim community. Never mind the fact that most Muslims in Muslim-majority countries believe that wives must always obey their husbands. Never mind the fact that the more you support Sharia law, the less likely that you are to support equal rights for women. Given all this, it is indeed puzzling why Western liberals, under the guise of pluralism and multiculturalism, would seek to grant mass asylum to Islamists who would trod their multicultural ideals underfoot as soon as they are given the chance. The West is playing with a brood of vipers that will come back to bite it when they grow older and more venomous.



6 Reasons Why Donald Trump Should Adjust Immigration and Refugee Policy to Stop Importing Jihadists

The President has clear Constitutional authority to pause immigration from countries and regions known to be incubators for jihadi terrorism in defense of U.S. national interests.


Turkey’s Brain Drain

The Islamist tyranny from the Erdogan regime is stripping Turkey of many of its best minds.


Europe Begins to Take Immigration Seriously

The victory of Donald Trump cements the fear among European elites that was first stoked by Brexit. Can they change quickly enough for their voters?