~ archived since 2018 ~

Feminist Assumptions & The Great UVA Rape Hoax

Statecensor

March 26, 2015

4 upvotes

/r/MensRights

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRBtVbQ7S3g

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Feminist Assumptions & The Great UVA Rape Hoax
Author	Statecensor
Upvotes	4
Comments	3
Date	March 26, 2015 12:41 AM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/30bi36/feminist_assumptions_the_great_uva_rape_hoax/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/feminist-assumptions-the-great-uva-rape-hoax.984859 https://theredarchive.com/post/984859

Comments

[–]DavidByron2 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Statecensor[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Sanguifer 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

do you want us to believe that with the exception of Turkey and Israel most of the Arab/Persian world women are not second class citizens?

They may be. They may not be. How would You tell? Ever been 'there', wherever 'there' may be? And if not, what are You relying on to judge? Media coverage? From the Rolling Stone, mayhaps?

Ever heard of Mahr or Mahriyeh and/or Nafaqa? Here, it makes a good read.

And here's my layman analysis of it, just because I feel like it. It's long! Also disclaimer: I do not know how this all translates into both everyday and legal realities in Iran. Never been there. I can only speculate from an MRA perspective.

One of the things that are often brought up in order to describe how terrible the treatment of women in the middle east is, is the islamic concept of Tamkil, or obedience: The wife is legally obligated to be sexually availble to the husband at all times. This is also one of the reasons why she can't, for example, leave the house without his permission. If the wife refuses to comply, she may forfeit her right to Nafaqa, or maintenance.

Sounds terrible. Now let's look a bit deeper. What about this whole mahr thing?

The mahr is a sort of dowry, except it's a bit different. It's a sum of money or other sort of material wealth that is given to the wife by the husband (or promised to be given over the course of the marriage, legally binding). This money or other items of wealth becomes the property of the wife and the wife alone.

So how much is it? Well, that's up to the people who negotiate the marriage contract. Estimates vary, so I can't say either way. I heard as low as 50 and as high as 800 and above. But suffice to say that the maximum enforcable amount of mahr payment (on penalty of imprisonment) is 110 gold coins. That's about 35 000 dollars, IIRC. In a country where the average full-time wage is about 500 dollars. Being generous, let's say that's 6 years worth of work. Calculate in expenses, and it'll be more like 12. If the average Mahr is any higher than that... I mean, IF the estimates that put it at 400 gold coins are correct, the average iranian man simply can't pay that much. That'd be 120 000 dollars on a 6000 dollar / year sallary. 20 years of full-time work, and that's without calculating the expenses for himself, his wife, and potential children...

Okay, but that's just fair, right? I mean, after all, that's all the insurance a woman will get in marriage, and there's still this inhumane Tamkil thing, right?

Well, about that...

“As long as the mahr is not paid to her, the wife can refuse to fulfill her duties toward her husband, provided that the mahr is prompt.

Oh shit. So, as long as the wife negotiates a high enough Mahr, she doesn't have to worry about this whole "sexual submission" thing for, like, at least 12 years or so (possibly more, because the 110 gold coins means You just don't go to prison if You can't pay them... You still are indebted!) , because that's how long it would take her husband to pay off the Mahr (by lower-end estimate of average Mahr) even if he doesn't give her a dime otherwise!

Oh wait... that quote wasn't finished.

This refusal does not debar her from the right to nafaqa (maintenance).”

Well great. And how big is that problem for men in Iran?

Although there are no precise official statistics about prisoners sent to jail for inability to pay their wives’ mahr, it was revealed by a judicial official that, between April 2010 and September 2011, around 20,000 men have been imprisoned for mahriyeh cases.[66]

20 000 men jailed for not paying enough. God knows how many not jailed but working themselves to death to pay off their Mahr.

Well.. that doesn't look too good...Okay. What is Nafaqa?

The second financial consequence of the marriage contract is the man’s duty and women’s right to maintenance. A husband, under Islamic law, is obliged to provide his wife with the required maintenance (Article 1106). According to Article 1107 of the Civil Code:

“Nafaqa includes all reasonable and appropriate needs of the wife such as dwelling, clothing, food, furniture, the cost of health and remedy, and a servant if the wife is accustomed to have servants or if she needs one because of illness or defects of limbs.”[68]

Well, that's some maintenance all right.

The wife can even sue her husband in court if her husband refuses to provide her with maintenance. In such cases the court shall decide on the amount of nafaqa and force the husband to pay it (Article 1111).

So, if she prefers hard cash to provisions, she can sue. Roger.

Moreover, Article 542 of the Penal Code[69] prescribes 91 days to five months’ imprisonment for a husband that, despite his financial ability, refuses to pay nafaqa to her wife.

Holy shit, that's some second-class citizenship right there!

So let me get this straight: The wife has no duties to the husband as long as he doesn't pay her an absurd amount of money first, an amount that he likely won't be paying for a long time - because he's also obligated to pay his wife maintenance, which she can sue him for. That maintenance even includes servants. If he wants to divorce her and she disagrees, he is required to cough up the Mahr and, IIRC, continue to pay Nafaqa for some time. Moreover, the husband is legally obligated to provide for his wife to a very generous extent, and if she ever feels that he doesn't provide enough, she can sue him and get the money by court order.

Second class citizens - as long as we don't view it in the cultural context? I dunno how much of that actually applies, but it sure seems like having to pay child support is peanuts compared to this whole Mahr business.