Jura GentiumRivista di filosofia del diritto internazionale e della politica globale
Jura Gentium
|
2005 Gender Inequalities in The Arab World
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Country | Adult Literacy Rate % age 15+ | Combined primary, secondary, and tertiary gross enrolment ratio | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F | M | F | M | |
| Bahrain | 82.2 | 90.5 | 83 | 77 |
| Kuwait | 79.4 | 84.0 | 61 | 57 |
| Qatar | 82.6 | 80.1 | 75 | 75 |
| Libyan Arab Jamahiriya | 66.9 | 90.2 | 92 | 92 |
| Lebanon | 79.8 | 91.8 | 81 | 76 |
| Saudi Arabia | 65.9 | 83.5 | 60 | 62 |
| Oman | 59.6 | 79.1 | 56 | 59 |
| Tunisia | 59.3 | 80.4 | 72 | 75 |
| Jordan | 83.4 | 94.5 | 57 | 53 |
| Syrian Arab Republic | 59.3 | 87.7 | 61 | 65 |
| Algeria | 55.7 | 77.4 | 69 | 75 |
| Egypt | 42.8 | 66.1 | 72 | 80 |
| Morocco | 35.1 | 61.1 | 46 | 58 |
| Yemen | 23.9 | 66.6 | 29 | 72 |
| Sudan | 44.9 | 68.9 | 31 | 36 |
Source: UNDP Human Development Report 2001
In the above table, male literacy is seen higher than female literacy. The gap appears smaller in those Gulf countries like Bahrain and Kuwait. In Qatar, it is interesting to note, that the literacy rate is higher among females than it is among males, as represented by 82.6 and 80.1 respectively----an exceptional situation difficult to explain. Gross enrolment in education does not reflect any variation between the sexes in Qatar and the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, as represented by75 and 92 respectively for both sexes. In addition, the gap in this respect is not wide between the two sexes in most other countries, except in Yemen where it is represented by 29 for females and72 for males.
It is interesting to note that school enrolment for females appears higher in some countries than that of males-e.g., Bahrain, seen in83 for females as opposed to 77 for males; Kuwait, as represented by 61 and 57 respectively; Lebanon, with figures 81 and 76 respectively; and Jordan, with57 and 53 respectively. This situation can be explained by the fact that a significant number of males from these countries study abroad, hence their absence from the national registered data. Females do not always enjoy this privilege, again for cultural reasons.
The following table gives another dimension of gender inequality in education, as seen from another given perspective----namely, adult literacy and net enrolment in the primary and secondary levels, as well as gross tertiary enrolment, given separately.
| Country | Adult Literacy | Net Primary Enrolment | Net Secondary Enrolment | Gross Tertiary Enrolment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F% | F% as of M | F% | F% as of M | F | F% as of M | F ratio | M ratio | |
| Bahrain | 82.2 | 91 | 98 | 103 | 88 | 108 | - | - |
| Kuwait | 79.4 | 95 | 67 | 98 | 58 | 100 | 24 | 15 |
| Qatar | 82.6 | 103 | 82 | 90 | 70 | 102 | 41 | 14 |
| Libyan Arab Jamahiriyah | 66.9 | 74 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Lebanon | 79.8 | 87 | - | - | 71 | 115 | 27 | 27 |
| Saudi Arabia | 65.9 | 79 | 58 | 94 | 41 | 76 | 15 | 17 |
| Oman | 59.6 | 75 | 66 | 98 | 57 | 99 | 7 | 9 |
| Jordan | 83.4 | 88 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Tunisia | 59.3 | 74 | 98 | 98 | 54 | 101 | 12 | 15 |
| Syrian Arab Republic | 59.3 | 68 | 87 | 93 | 36 | 90 | 13 | 18 |
| Algeria | 55.7 | 72 | 91 | 93 | 54 | 94 | 10 | 14 |
| Egypt | 42.8 | 65 | 88 | 89 | 64 | 90 | 16 | 24 |
| Morocco | 35.1 | 57 | 67 | 80 | - | - | 9 | 13 |
| Sudan | 44.9 | 65 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Source: UNDP Human Development Report 2001
The above table confirms what is already presented in Table (1), also raising a number of relevant points in this respect:
Any attempt at understanding the gender inequality as above given necessitates a close look at the socialization process in the Arab culture. Since earlier childhood, gender roles are clearly delineated. A female is socialized first and foremost in preparation for her role as housewife and mother. The male, on the other hand, is prepared to be the breadwinner. It follows, therefore, that a male's education is favored over that of the female. A degree in education is necessary for him to get a job; whereas in most cases, the degree for the female is an additional matter, and not a necessary one.
In addition, there is a strong correlation between female education and poverty in those Arab countries with economic problems. Families living under conditions of poverty may, in many cases, have to make a choice when, and if, they want to send their children to school. In most, if not all, cases preference goes to the male child. Such an attitude clearly conforms with cultural norms.
Relevant to the inequality of women in education is the gender "digital divide". Arab women fall in the lowest level of this divide, further distanced from information and communication technology(ICT) than the men, who are already part of the digital divide, when global comparisons are made. In general, the Arab share in ICT is low. The number of internet users in some Arab States can be given as examples in this respect. They are the following in thousands: (from Arab Human Development Report)
United Arab Emirates:167
Qatar:76
Kuwait:53
Bahrain;62
Egypt:7
Available data on the distribution of internet users by gender in the region are scarce. It suffices to say that women constitute six percent of Middle Eastern users.(Hafkin, N. and Taggart, N., Gender, Information Technology, and Developing Countries)This segment is undoubtedly not representative of women as a whole, but, rather, includes the urban, educated elite, which, again, is definitely, a minority. In Jordan, as an example, the percentage of female users of the internet is consistent with the percentage for the whole region-namely, six percent.(Hafkin and Taggart)
It is interesting to note that in the Gulf States the numbers, as above given, tend to be relatively high. However, in the absence of sufficient data for the other Arab states, it is difficult to make comparisons in this respect.
Factors restricting women's access to ICT are no different from those restricting their educational opportunities. Cultural attitudes towards women are relevant in this respect. Furthermore, the prevalence of illiteracy and low educational level/ skills tend to act as additional obstacles.
A natural and logical sequence of the increasing numbers of females in education is the paralleled increase in the labor market. Job opportunities opened up for them, extending to all fields, especially in the presence of a legislative base that guarantees this equality before the law. Islam, in addition, has a strong work ethic, which includes women. The actual situation of the Arab labor force, however, reflects a discrepancy between the numbers of females as compared to those of males, where the latter are higher. The following table presents the labor -force participation of both males and females in the Arab countries:
| Country | Labor-Force Participation Rate in Economic Activity(%) | |
|---|---|---|
| Males | Females | |
| Algeria | 46.9 | 16.7 |
| Bahrain | 62.5 | 20.6 |
| Comoros | 51.4 | 39.1 |
| Egypt | 51.4 | 22.1 |
| Iraq | 43.4 | 10.3 |
| Jordan | 43.8 | 13.4 |
| Kuwait | 49.4 | 24.7 |
| Lebanon | 49.6 | 19.1 |
| Libyan Arab Jamahiriya | 43.0 | 12.9 |
| Mauritania | 52.1 | 39.9 |
| Morocco | 51.0 | 27.1 |
| Oman | 42.9 | 8.6 |
| Qatar | 72.0 | 22.0 |
| Saudi Arabia | 50.3 | 10.4 |
| Somalia | 49.4 | 37.1 |
| Sudan | 55.7 | 22.7 |
| Syrian Arab Republic | 44.5 | 16.2 |
| Tunisia | 52.1 | 23.9 |
| United Arab Emirates | 67.3 | 18.9 |
| Yemen | 45.5 | 17.7 |
Source: Arab Human Development Report 2002
The above table reveals the significantly wide gender gap in the rate of labor-force participation in economic activity. This situation has its roots in the cultural attitude towards female employment, which lies, for the most part, in the traditional heritage emphasizing female seclusion. In addition, the cultural setback, based on a falsely explained religious dogma, is responsible for the refusal of many women to go to work, since the propagated belief is that Islam prohibits female employment.
If the gap between males and females is significantly wide in the labor market, there appears to be a variation among the different countries. What is interesting to note is that the Gulf states-- namely, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and United Arab Emirates, reflect quite a wide gap in this respect, although they include an obviously higher level of education among females, in comparison to the other countries, as seen in tables (1) and (2).This situation can be understood in the light of the prevailing values and norms in these societies. If the impact of the global current has pushed female education forward, the traditional backbone of these societies has not yet kept up with this trend. Female employment is still not fully accepted by the culture.
The most obvious situation of gender inequality in employment opportunities appears in Egypt, where the ongoing controversial debate over the position of a female judge has been occupying a good share of academic as well as feminist circles. The Egyptian constitution guarantees equality to all citizens in employment opportunities. Islam has no constraints against females holding this job. The history of Islam includes women judges, many of them of great eminence. Many Arab countries include women sitting in that chair---e.g., Syria, Sudan, Yemen, Tunisia, Lebanon. The argument against this female right is totally cultural, based on grounds that lack rationality. They center around the stereotype of the female, as being highly emotional, sentimental, delicate in nature, and as such, is unable to cope with the strenuous, stressful responsibility of a judge, because her constitution as above described, interferes with her sound judgment.
It must also be mentioned that the labor market in the Arab countries is characterized by a gender division of labor. The following table shows the distribution of males and females in the different sectors of economic activity in two Arab countries as examples:
| Country | Employment by Economic Activity % | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agriculture | Industry | Services | ||||
| F | M | F | M | F | M | |
| Bahrain | - | 1 | 32 | 57 | 67 | 41 |
| Egypt | 42 | 32 | 9 | 25 | 48 | 43 |
Source: UNDP Human Development Report 2001
The above table shows the prevalence of females over males in services in both countries, and in agriculture in Egypt, since it is predominantly an agricultural country. In Bahrain, both sexes are underrepresented in agriculture, since it does not constitute a major economic activity there. It must be noted, in addition, that data on female employment here raises questions about accuracy/precision. In the first place, the informal labor market is congested with women, especially in those countries with economic problems-Egypt and Morocco as examples. Needless to say, it is their inferior qualifications that are responsible for this situation-a high illiteracy rate, low educational level, and poor skills. Women in this sector are not officially registered---meaning there is no documentation of their numbers.
The informal labor market has no guarantees for the workers. Long working hours, low wages, and an environment which lacks proper sanitation are but examples of their exploitation. Added to that is the absence of any form of security/insurance-social, health, or otherwise.
The gender bias also appears with respect to unpaid female labor. Women's unpaid labor in agriculture, as well as women in household chores constitute fields not documented. In the former case, female labor is seen as part and parcel of family obligations, hence the woman does not receive wages for it. In the latter case, what is interesting, and paradoxical at the same time, is that a woman fully responsible for domestic chores is not paid for her labor, whereas if she hires somebody to do the job, he/she is paid for the task.
It is also feasible to mention, when addressing women's opportunities in employment, to address their generally low representation in the top administrative/managerial jobs. Studies have shown that although legally they are entitled to the same promotion opportunities as men, actually they still lag behind in this respect.(See ElSafty, "Female Employment" for Friderich Ebert Stiftung:1995, and "The Egyptian Woman at Work", a study for ILO and the Netherlands Embassy in Cairo:1996)
This unequal situation can be well understood in the context of socio-cultural factors which emphasize the dual role of women. Married women with children asserted that promotions, in most cases, require training programs and skill requirements that need time, which these women cannot afford, overburdened as they are with family responsibilities. Consequently, men's chances are better. There is no legal barrier to the promotion of women to top managerial positions, yet the barriers lie in the dictates of culture.
The degree of political participation of Arab women is likewise subject to cultural constraints. Many Arab countries have granted women their political rights. There are still those countries that deny them this right, although women in these countries can be considered active as public figures.
The following table gives women's political participation in Arab countries:
| Country | Year Women Received Right | Year First Woman Elected in Parliament | Seats in Parliament Held by Women (% of total) | Women in Government at Ministerial Level (% of total) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bahrain | 1931,1949 | 1951 | ---- | 25.6 |
| Libyan Arab Jamahiriya | 1964 | ----- | ----- | 12.5 |
| Lebanon | 1952 | 1991 | 2.3 | -------- |
| Jordan | 1974 | 1989 | 11.5 | ------- |
| Tunisia | 1957,1959 | 1959 | 3.4 | 10.0 |
| Syrian Arab Republic | 1949,1953 | 1973 | 8.9 | 11.1 |
| Algeria | 1962 | 1962 | 4.0 | ------- |
| Egypt | 1956 | 1957 | 2.4 | 6.2 |
| Morocco | 1963 | 1993 | 0.7 | 4.9 |
| Yemen | 1967 | 1990 | ----- | ----- |
| Djibouti | 1946,1986 | ------ | ------ | 5.0 |
| Sudan | 1964 | 1964 | 9.7 | 5.1 |
| Mauritania | 1961 | 1975 | 22.2 | 13.6 |
Source: UNDP Human Development Report 2001
Other countries that have not yet granted women their right for political participation are the Gulf states like Kuwait, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia. In Kuwait, in particular, the issue of political rights for women has been emerging very strongly, especially as Kuwaiti women have been active in public life, having succeeded in achieving a relatively high level of education. Bahrain has allowed women to vote and run for national office for the first time only in October 2002. However, not one woman has been elected. It may be a bit early to investigate the dynamics in the voting/elections process to understand the situation of female political participation in terms of number of candidates and voters. It is apparent that the cultural constraints are still in action, and women have not yet broken loose.
The above table also reveals the significantly low political participation of Arab women, as apparent in the low percentage of their seats in parliament, as well as in their positions in the government at the ministerial level, even when and where their political rights are guaranteed. Again factors of socializtion are relevant. Public sphere is the male's domain, whereas women are confined to their private sphere----the traditionally female domain.
It is interesting to note that in Egypt, supposedly one of the more liberal states of the Arab World, in the last elections for the current parliament, only seven(7) women won, out of 400+ seats. The president, therefore, appointed another four (4) women, with the objective of raising female representation in parliament.
Probably the most contested female rights in the Arab countries appear with respect to the marriage institution, since the actual practice of these rights give men the upper hand, in many cases allowing them not only to violate Islamic instructions, but more so, to find loopholes in the legislative system, thus getting away with any possible violations. The strongly-rooted cultural male dominance creates this discrepancy between theory and practice, between what ought to be and what is actually done.
According to the true teachings of Islam, as clearly stipulated in the Holy Book, women's rights in marriage not only acknowledge their independent will, but more so, their identity as full-fledged partners in the relationship. For the marriage to be valid in Islam, and religiously sanctioned, both parties have to give their consent. In some Arab societies, however, this requirement may be violated. Underlying this rare situation is the traditionally patriarchal backbone, where parental authority is accepted to dictate what it sees proper as the top, and sometimes sole, authority.
In the context of the marriage institution, appears one other situation of possible violation---namely, in the case of divorce. Non-Islamic societies usually criticize divorce procedures in the Arab world, since they see in them a violation of human rights, because in many cases, they are discriminatory against women, and even abusive at times. Such criticism, for the most part, overlooks the perception of marriage by Islam. Islam considers marriage an institution which has its sanctity. It entails a permanent, sacred relationship, that includes a detailed, meticulous code of behavior pertaining to all practices related to family matters, the sum of which advocates "holy matrimony", as well as great respect of the couple for each other. It follows that divorce is seen by the religion as "the most hateful privilege granted to man by God". Consequently, the practice is not to be used loosely---rather, it falls under clear-cut conditions, and requires certain acknowledged steps. The fact that divorce is allowed in the first place is due to the fact that Islam is a worldly religion, and as such, allows for human conditions/possibilities that may take place between married couples, and create differences/problems that may, at times, be serious. Divorce, in this case, should be the last resort after the couple has exhausted all possible ways and means to make the marriage work, if they fail to resolve the problems between them. When all attempts at resolution fail, divorce is the solution, but guaranteeing all rights of all involved parties, especially the women and children----the vulnerable groups in this relationship.
Stipulations by religion, as given in the Qoran, require the husband to pay his divorcee a lump sum of money, which is normally agreed upon in their marriage contract, because she gets that same sum in the case of widowhood, in addition to her legal right to her share in the inheritance. A divorcee is also entitled to one year's alimony after divorce takes place. Such arrangements are meant to guarantee a woman's financial security in the case of the loss of a husband in whatever way.
Child custody is likewise seen as the woman's right, considering children's needs for maternal care. She keeps her children until the age of puberty-those formative years of their lives, their custody to be later decided. In the meantime, while she keeps them, the father is responsible for their financial support.
A divorcee is free to remarry, if she chooses to. Islam requires that this can take place only after three months have passed after the legal divorce. The rationale here is to give the couple the opportunity to restore their relationship after having reconsidered their situation. A more important reason for maintaining a required interval before the divorcee's marriage is to guarantee that there is no pregnancy. In the case if she is pregnant, the baby is the ex-husband's. He, then, is obliged to give it his name and also support it.
The above procedures, as stipulated by religion, are followed in many cases. In many others, however, complications arise, with the end result that women fall victims to discriminatory practices, especially when cases go to court, where there is a codified law of personal status, and are therefore subject to lengthy trial measures/details.
The Arab countries, following Sharia' (Islamic Law), are not consistent nor standardized as to the laws that regulate family matters. Some of them have a codified Law of Personal Status, based on Sharia, while others settle family cases---divorce, custody, etc.-on the basis of Sharia, either in special courts or through informal religious councils. Examples of the first group are Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Morocco, and Tunisia. The Arab Gulf States are examples of a judicial system that applies Sharia, though personal status law remains uncodified. In Yemen, the legal system is not reachable to women, with the strong prevalence of ancient customs. There is a common belief that women should solve their problems away from courts, and rather, depend on custom and mediation.
It must be mentioned that even in those countries where laws of personal status exist, there is always the possibility of inequality in the actual practice of these laws where women's rights are concerned. The male bias, for the most part, can occur by manipulating loopholes in the system to their advantage. The problem here is, therefore, not the absence of a legal base for women's rights; nor is it because Islam places them in a position inferior to men, and discriminates against them. The real problem lies with a traditional heritage that creates a gender -based unequal situation.
Some Arab countries have, therefore, been working hard towards guaranteeing women their rightful status in the marriage relationship. Morocco last modified its personal status code in 1993, resulting in some minimal reforms. These reforms include the requirement of the woman's consent to the marriage, as clearly documented in her signature to the marriage contract; the right that she includes in the contract a clause reserving her right to divorce if her husband takes additional wives; the right that if she is above eighteen to contract the marriage without a guardian, if her father is deceased (Machreq/Maghreb Gender Linking and Information Project:2000). It is interesting to note that the above rights are clearly given to the woman by Islam. Their inclusion in the law as a reform to an old version that had denied her these rights raises questions as to where exactly do the roots of discrimination lie, and confirms the role of tradition in creating a discrepancy between religious rights and their actual practice.
In 1999, another plan for reforming the personal status code was drawn, including the most important item of outlawing polygamy except in certain cases. The plan was met by fierce opposition by conservative and Islamist groups. Consequently, the plan was put on hold(Machreq/Maghreb GLIP).
The only Arab Islamic country that could address the very controversial issue of polygamy, and overtly ban it, is Tunisia. Tunisia has the most liberal code of personal status. In 1956, the Tunisian Code of Personal Status was promulgated, prohibiting polygamy, among other rights given to women. The shock to the Arab World was immense, since the law represented to them a clear violation of Islamic rights. Especially among the conservative societies was the effect stronger. Amendments to the law appeared in 1993, granting women more rights in marriage, through the larger share of the mother in managing her children' lives and in managing her own affairs---again rights that are already given to her by Islam.
It seems feasible to mention in the case of Tunisia that women enjoy relatively less inequality when compared to other Arab countries, the feminist movement in this country having succeeded in gaining rights for women not acknowledged in other Arab states, examples being given in the text.
Egypt is one other country that has been attempting to reform its code of personal status. Amendments took place in steps, with the objective of giving women more rights in marriage. One important item here is the right of the wife to include clauses in the new, modified marriage contract, specifying clearly her demands of the husband. Demands may include her right to divorce if he takes another wife, her freedom to work without his opposition to this right, and similar other rights already granted by both law and religion, but may be denied by tradition.
Many divorce cases in Egypt may be settled involving family members, especially the older ones, considering that the family is still the backbone of society. Many other cases go to court, however. The actual implementation of the law may, at times, reflect a male bias. It is for this reason that women's organizations have, therefore, worked hard to modify the old archaic law, which was discriminatory against women, especially as it included loopholes that worked in favor of men, as has already been mentioned.
Amendments of the Personal Status Code in Egypt also include divorce procedures. The first amendment came in 1984, then later in 2000. The objective has been to facilitate these procedures, lengthy and complicated as they have been. In this respect, the last amendment includes a clause which specifies an already existing right, which has long been ignored. It goes back to the days of the prophet and is practiced in other Arab countries. This right allows the woman to repudiate the marriage by giving back to her husband the gift he gave her upon marriage. In the old days this gift was in kind, its value depending on the groom's financial ability. Currently, this gift has been transformed to denote a status symbol for both parties, and is given in cash, indicating not only his status, but also, the bride's socio-economic value. The sum, therefore, covers a wide range, relevant to the respective socio-economic status.
This particular clause in the amendments created much controversy/debate in society, especially among the men, indicating the threat that faces them as a result of now-simpler divorce procedures----one other reflection of male dominance.
Other Arab States follow this procedure of repudiation, the Gulf included through the practice of Sharia in the judicial system.
The prevalence of the cultural heritage over legislation and even religion appears clearly with respect to a woman' right to divorce herself. Islam gives the woman the right to divorce herself. In this case, she shares this right with her husband, but the requirement is that if she so chooses, the marriage contract has to include a clear, explicit statement in this respect. Studies have shown, however, that this right is seldom practiced, and that the incidence of marriages where both husband and wife share this right is low, the reason being that this situation is in clear contradiction with cultural values and norms. It tends to threaten the husband's male image, as he is culturally considered the dominant figure in the marriage relationship. This kind of agreement can be normally seen to occur when the wife is in a situation to dictate her own terms. It usually happens when she is a celebrity of some kind---a movie star, or an heiress. In addition, if and when it takes place, in most cases, both sides try to maintain its secrecy.
Relevant to the issue of divorce is the right of the woman to initiate it. In most, if not all Arab countries, this is not easily done in court. Neither does the culture make it feasible.
The most commonly criticized right given to men by Islam is that of polygamy, because its practice is often, if not always, imbued with all sorts of discrimination, and even abuse, against women. It is very difficult for a lay person to address the justification behind this right, because it needs a thorough knowledge of Islamic dogma. However, it suffices to state here that it is not given in absolute terms, but only under those conditions that may necessitate that it take place, and following the specified terms, as mentioned in the Qoran. If a man practices polygamy for ungrounded reasons, the right is considered abusive to women and in violation of religious stipulation.
The inequality of females in the Arab culture has more than one aspect, and can extend quite far. Examples may vary from one country to the other, yet they all reflect the same attitude, and represent a common theme.
One such example that can be cited here is the persistence of Saudi government on prohibiting women from the right to drive cars. Many a voice has been raised calling to remove this ban, to no avail. The strict cultural code in society cannot allow women to drive. This right is seen as an infringement of traditions.
A more serious discriminatory practice is seen in the rigid attitude against granting citizenship rights to children of a native woman who is married to a non-native husband. Arab countries hold a strict position in this respect. The one country that has succeeded in achieving a liberal attitude towards women is the only state that allows the mother to give the citizenship to her children---namely, Tunisia. A Tunisian woman can pass the citizenship right to her children, in the case when she is married to a non-Tunisian. Egypt has been struggling hard in this direction, but there is a strong opposition against this right, not only from the judicial circles, but more so, at the top governmental level. Arguments, for the most part, center around questions of loyalty/patriotism. In a patrilineal/patriarchal culture, it is the father's citizenship that counts, and determines the children's loyalty to the country. The struggle still goes on in Egypt, and women's organizations are lobbying strongly in this respect.
Egypt is actually struggling on more than one front, with respect to the inequality of females. The above-mentioned denial to females for the position of judge, as well as the also above-mentioned issue of citizenship occupy a major position in feminist priorities. One other problem emerges as a clear violation of human rights where women are concerned. This is the negative practice which is blamed on Islam, and receives wide media coverage outside the Islamic world----namely, female circumcision, otherwise known as excision of the clitoris. The non-Moslem world considers the religion barbaric, cruel, inhuman, because it includes this ritual, and requires females to undergo this act of violence. The truth is that Islam is innocent of this accusation. The ritual is a cultural practice that has its roots in Africa, and goes back to Pharoanic times in Egypt. Female circumcision is part and parcel of the strong cultural values repertoire pertaining to the behavior of women, and which center around female chastity---in fact, the Arabic word for it means "purification', referring to the female's sexual purity. The idea behind the practice is to reduce the female's sexual appetite by excising her clitoris. Because the girl's virginity is highly valued by tradition, circumcision is meant to protect her against any possible violation of the code of behavior associated with her chastity. A girl is, therefore, circumcized before she reaches the age of puberty---to be precise, before she menstruates. The idea is to make sure that the operation takes place before the time she reaches the "dangerous age", when her sexual urge can get her into trouble. By performing the operation, the family guarantees that her virginity remains intact until marriage.
One solid proof against the blame of Islam for this practice is the simple fact that it is practiced by both Moslems and Christians in Egypt. It is also absent in most other Arab countries. As such, the cultural and not religious background of the practice is clearly confirmed. Furthermore, female circumcision is also widespread in other parts of Africa. In the Sudan, in particular, its practice is so extreme that the excision extends beyond the clitoris, and the woman may be disfigured as a result. It is common knowledge that many cases of childbirth get to be highly complicated because the circumcision operation that the woman had undergone had gone too far.
The rate of female circumcision had been dropping significantly in Egypt, as the liberal feminist movement had advanced. The efforts of the women's organizations, culminating in the fifties and sixties of the twentieth century, succeeded, as the attitude towards female circumcision was significantly changing. The practice continued in the rural areas, however, being more spread in the southern parts of Egypt. The latter represent the most conservative, traditional segment of society, where cultural values and norms are strongly upheld. With the reactionary tide taking over, however, as the seventies and eighties came, the practice became more and more widespread. The more recent years, in particular, have witnessed a surprisingly growing upsurge of the ritual. What is even more surprising is that it has come to be explained on Islamic bases. Consequently, in the midst of an increasing Islamic tide, this explanation has found listening ears from a wide public.
Efforts on the part of the health authorities to explain the many health complications associated with the practice, as well as its negative impact on the women's psychological condition, have not proved successful, in the face of a strong Islamic wave not only advocating the practice, but more so, emphasizing it. One minister of health tried to pass a law banning female circumcision, but he failed, because of the strong opposition from the community. A later attempt was made to restrict the practice and to avoid ----actually reduce--- the many problems associated with its malpractice. This step was taken through a ministerial decree to limit its practice to medical centers only-namely, hospitals, clinics, and/or health centers-with the requirement that it be performed by doctors only. The underlying reason here is that the actual practitioners of female circumcision have historically been the traditional health providers---e.g., traditional midwives, health barbers, herbalists. In most cases, the operation would proceed with no guarantee for sanitary/hygienic conditions, but rather, in an environment full of a multitude of health hazards that eventually lead to all sorts of complications, least of which is hemorrhage, let alone the long term negative effects that afflict the victim. The rationale behind restricting the performance of the operation to professional health providers was meant to guarantee against these complications. The practical side of the decree lay in the fact that even in the case of legally banning the ritual, it is practiced anyway. By requiring that its performance be limited to trained, qualified practitioners it aims at reducing the ensuing health hazards under unqualified practitioners, if avoiding these hazards totally does not seem feasible.
It is interesting to note that the attempted intervention by the government to control the increasing incidence of female circumcision was confronted by a strong wave of opposition by whoever claimed to have a say in Islam. Lawsuits against the government were filed in court, with the objective of confirming the religious base for the practice. The search for this base is attempted in the sayings of the prophet. The cases have not been resolved.
A final approach to female circumcision was made by The Ministry of Health in the last few years in the form of a ministerial decree banning the practice. It, however, does not have the power of law, and is not binding.
At the community level, there is still the widely propagated belief that female circumcision is an Islamic ritual, which leads to the strong conviction of a large segment of the population of its sanctity. Field studies support this situation. (ElSafty). What is surprising is that women who themselves were circumcised are keen to have their daughters circumcised, believing that it is Islamicly wrong if they are not.
Some women may go as far as believing that their future sons-in-law would require that their brides go through the operation, if they discover on their wedding nights---the first sexual encounter between the couple---that they are not circumcised.(See El Safty, "The Sociological Profile" in "Enhancing the Socio-Economic Status of the Egyptian Woman":1996)
It is interesting to note that excision of the clitoris is not a common practice in Gulf society.
The incidence of female circumcision in any one society raises the important question of violence against women. It is not an issue of inequality. It is more an obvious, drastic violation of human rights. International conventions are continuously calling for the eradication of violence against women. It seems, however, that the cultural tide is stronger, and that neither law nor global consensus can stand against it.
This paper has tried to shed light on gender inequalities in the Arab countries, a situation which has been the subject of much criticism not only by the non-Arab world, but also among Arabs who have a good understanding of their religion, and are aware of the legal rights of women in those societies that guarantee the equality of all citizens.
Such criticism may be due to the fact that the Arab countries are currently caught in the midst of more than one current, which contradict gender inequality. On the one hand, there is the growing global trend calling for the equality of women in all spheres of life, in this case equating these rights with the concerns of development Moreover, the increasing call for observing human rights necessarily includes women's rights as an integral part.Arab countries have been participating in the international forums with this agenda, as has already been mentioned. On the other hand, the official religion in these countries is Islam, a religion whose teachings clearly guarantees women their rights. Moreover, many of these countries have legal systems which stipulate the equality of all citizens irrespective of race, religion, or gender. The actual situation, however, reveals gender inequality in more than one sphere, as apparent in opportunities, numbers, and status. Education, employment, political participation are examples of the discrepancy between males and females. The male -dominated traditional backbone prevails over the culture. The strength of this cultural heritage permeates all aspects of society in such a way that to the layman, there is that confusion between what is dictated by religion and what is required by tradition. To the non -Moslem, all aspects of inequality are blamed on Islam, which is believed to be the basis of the legislative system that may include aspects of gender inequality in some cases, as above presented.
The degree of inequality among women varies from one Arab country to another, at the same time that the kind of inequality may likewise reflect variation. If women in Saudi Arabia are forbidden to drive, women in Egypt are banned from the position of judge. Kuwaiti women are deprived of their right to political participation, much as this issue has been subjected to debate. In this respect, it is seen that Tunisia has gone a long way beyond Arab countries, addressing, with much courage, aspects of discrimination against women. Suffices to say here that it has succeeded in promulgating a Personal Status Code which prohibits polygamy. In general, it is seen that Tunisia has gone in strides in the rights granted to women, the liberal trend initiated by the feminist movement having succeeded where other countries have failed. The result is felt on more than one level. In the first place, women constitute nearly one quarter of the labor force. On the level of the legislative power and advisory bodies, the proportions of female representation are;11.5% in the Chamber of Deputies; 16.7 on the municipal councils; 11% on the economic and Social Council; 13.3% on the Higher Council of the Magistracy; and 12% among ministry department staff. (Human Rights in Tunisia: Options and Accomplishments:2000)
The variation in the attitude of the Arab countries towards women's rights appears in the ratificaton of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).Eight Arab countries did not ratify the convention. Most Gulf States fall in this category. They are Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Oman. Out of the twenty two (22) Arab states, the eight countries represent one third of all countries that have not ratified CEDAW.(Arab Human Development Report 2002)
The opposition to CEDAW is due to the fact that some items in the convention are seen as conflicting with the principles and provisions of Islam. Those unaccepted items are the ones that deal with adoption, abortion, rules of inheritance, and some aspects of the family code, since stipulations on these particular cases of concern in the region are clear and explicit in the religion, and similarly in legislation; therefore, they do not coincide with the content of the convention. It follows that even among countries that have ratified the convention, there are still reservations as to these items. Authorities on Islam are well-informed on the rationalization/justification behind the opposition, as much as they are well-informed on the basis underlying these stipulations.
It follows that gender inequality in the Arab countries, as it is in other Islamic states, tends to taint those societies with a negative image. To the West, in particular, women in these societies live under conditions of repression/oppression. They are marginalized, secluded, and kept from any form of participation in public life. The situation is not that dim. Neither is it grim. Women are active members in society. In the family they have an important role in decision-making. Where they are employed, they receive equal pay. There is no gender discrimination as to wages.
The fact remains that there is an ongoing struggle for women's rights in the Arab world-one that is strongly held back by the dictates of tradition. How far can the impact of the global currents affect the result of this struggle, leading it to a more liberal direction, remains to be seen, probably not in the near future, but on a longer term, considering the known resistance of traditionalism to change. More so, how far can the strong hold of the culture maintain its influence in the face of the global trend is subject to much speculation, especially with the rigidity of the ever-increasing reactionary tide. In the midst of these conflicting trends in the region, the question is raised as to where would the situation of gender equality be, among other concerns of development.
*. © Dr. Madiha ElSafty. All rights reserved.
For any query or information, please contact the author: elsafty@aucegypt.edu, melsafty@hotmail.com
No part of this paper may be distributed, quoted or reproduced in any form without permission by the author.
For authorized quotation(s) please acknowledge the Mediterranean Programme as follows:
"Paper presented at the Fourth Mediterranean Social and Political Research Meeting, Florence & Montecatini Terme 19 - 23 March 2003, organised by the Mediterranean Programme of the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies at the European University Institute"
**. The American University in Cairo
-A A A+