2:223 Does Islam Define Women as Sexbots for their Men?

Muslims have sex too you know. They aren't asexual and their kids definitely don't grow on trees. I was pleasantly surprised to have come across a fatwa site with a Muslim brother asking about the permissibility of oral sex in Islam. *Big Smile*. It was a good read though (and yes it is allowed); lead to some googling regarding the infamous verse in the Quran (deemed terribly controversial by some women, including myself) 2-223:

Your wives are a place of sowing of seed for you, so come to your place of cultivation however you wish and put forth [righteousness] for yourselves. And fear Allah and know that you will meet Him. And give good tidings to the believers.

Or a more traditional translation:

Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will; but do some good act for your souls beforehand; and fear Allah. And know that ye are to meet Him (in the Hereafter), and give (these) good tidings to those who believe.

When you read this out of context (and I swear each and every one of them does!), it sounds so sexist that I could sometimes feel marbles boiling in the temples of my face, and my pulse pulsating like your brains at a heavy metal concert! It not only angers me because it is in the Quran, but more-so because it can't be wrong – and NO ONE can challenge it. But if can't be wrong, and if Quran supports women's rights AND her dignity, there has to be another angle to it. And I found it! Nothing makes me happier to find a non-chauvinist interpretation. And after having understood something, when you land on websites like these, it really is a pity and I sympathize with people who hold onto such crude and shameful interpretations, and do not struggle to find the truth. To this person I would only direct her to go read verses 4:22-23. That should clear up her confusions. Or perhaps it's just a propagandist website, with never-Muslim writers, instead of ex-Muslim ones.

When you read it out of context, it comes across as women being sex slaves to their men, who can go in whenever they please. It is definitely hard to my ears, and if it were to be exactly just this, I would've never absorbed it. Men who use this verse as a continuous reminder to themselves (and their women) that they are the sexually privileged and in charge, obviously have their heads too up in the sky. So what is the real deal then?

What I found is that back in the days the Jewish people (the people of Book) used to have sex with their women only by lying on their sides. This provided the woman with a sort of privacy and her body was not on a full display to her man. other than the Jewish, the Ansaars (the idol-worshipers) also practiced sex in a similar fashion, and had in fact adopted this from the Jews. When the Muhaajir came to Madinah (the Quraysh tribe), one of their men married an Ansaar women. Since the Quraysh were not bound to doing it only by lying on their sides, the Ansaar wife found it odd that her husband wanted to do it differently and strictly told him to either do it from the side, or not do it at all. The issue became bigger and the news finally reached Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). And that is when the verse 2:223 was revealed to him, implying that there was no restriction as how you choose to do it, as long as it is vaginal. The Jews also believed that having anal sex would bring a child with a squint. So it was to clear the misconception about what behind really meant. You can read about this with complete reference here.

Women in the Culture of Islam

In Islam, the man has been declared as the head of the family; the maintainer, the provider, the caretaker, the leader. He is the one who disciplines his woman if she goes astray.

Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance – [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand. (4:34)

I am conflicted over this verse. Firstly, this sounds more fair than what is normally practiced; men hear something unpleasant to their ears about their women, the first thing they do is hit them (oftentimes without even validating). They hit them so hard that it leaves the women black and blue. They hit them on their face as well. All commentary so far unanimously agrees that a man must not hit a woman on her face, and that the act must not leave a mark on her body. So what is the penalty for a man who doesn't follow the proposed way?

What is this then?

Secondly, what action can a woman take if her husband goes astray? It is irrational and illogical to believe that women cannot feel as angry as men, or that in their state of anger they don't have destructive thoughts as men do. So how do they show this anger? All she can do is take divorce, or forgive. Believing for a moment that a man's rage is far worse than that of a woman's, I fail to understand how the authority of divorce is in the hands of the husband, since in the advent of such an occurrence, it is the woman on the receiving end.

Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three monthly periods. Nor is it lawful for them to hide what Allah Hath created in their wombs, if they have faith in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands have the better right to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise. (2:228)

This constant reminder of how a man is superior, has a degree of advantage, is more knowledgeable, has more control, is more trustworthy, is more powerful, is not at all making me feel very useful. Perhaps to those who like submission, and who like to believe that they are worthless. But would that kind even exist by default? Or is it a character-trait that has been ingrained in our genes?

For all such Islamic characterizations of a man, it has been argued that a man is capable of maintaining control in his interfaith marriage; retaining his religion, and also making sure his children are brought up as Muslims. This makes me wonder. What right does this non-Muslim wife/mother have in such a relationship? She is obviously allowed to practice her religion, and any force on her to convert is haram. Is she an outsider in this marriage who prays separately, joins her family in her religious celebration, and most certainly has a different appearance than that of a Muslim woman? Would not the kids from this union be intrigued as to why their parents are different from that of other kids in the neighborhood, or in school? Or is this oppression a form of making the woman feel bad and disconnected, and thereby unconsciously self-forced into converting?

Taking this similar scenario with a Muslim woman married to a non-Muslim man, what the Islamic clergy fears is the similar unconscious submission of the Muslim woman by either giving up her faith or converting. One thing I absolutely do know, women who believe in Islam, have not given up their faith prior to falling for a non-Muslim man, know for a fact that turning back on Islam is a big sin, it is absolutely unacceptable. Under no circumstances will she convert or leave Islam, unless she becomes doubtful of the Text at her own account. Saying that it is inevitable that she becomes doubtful is not a legitimate argument because her doubts will arise from the behavior of the society around her and her culture, of how difficult they make her life. While non-Muslim women may easily consider converting for her Muslim partner for the sake of marriage.

Keeping our talk to the present times, we know that there are many non-Muslim women who end up hurt, forced and misused by Muslim husbands. I agree that many Muslim-woman/Non-Muslim-man marriages also end up in the dump. We all also agree that intra-faith marriages also fail, and the percentage of which continues to rise. Marriage is a gamble. You cannot guarantee success unless each of the involved parties put their egos and prejudices aside.

Do not do to others, what you would not have done unto you. As Karen Armstrong quotes repeatedly, is the golden rule for success at any level. Dethrone yourself, and put the other in that position.

There are more men in the Islamic world who are not excited over equal rights in comparison to those in the non-Islamic world. Islamic cultures are unjust towards their women. These women kill personal desires only for the sanctity and well-being of her husband and family. She reduces herself to a nobody; a nobody who keeps giving. In today's world where there are so many challenges and opportunities, why would a woman feel happy with becoming a nobody? Scholars argue that Islam gave women respect and the Western world has sexually objectified their women and turned them into social butterflies. Sorry, but they aren't being forced into doing so. I am not glorifying Western culture at all, I only see it as a stark contrast to Islam, and I am desperately seeking the mid-culture, the mid-road, where things aren't so black and white.

Regardless of how wonderful Islam is or isn't, that fact of the matter is, Islamic cultures are oppressive, they deprive the women of her rights. When her rights in her own culture aren't being met, what difference does it make if she marries a Muslim or a non-Muslim. So what if her husband isn't fasting with her or praying with her? I read somewhere, What can a Christian husband do for a Muslim wife? What is the Muslim husband doing for a Muslim wife? At least in the non-Muslim world, her rights are protected by the state, and she won't go hungry and naked in case of a divorce, where otherwise all she has is a few hundreds from the haq mehr.

They keep shouting and screaming, it's not Islam, it's the Muslims. Well I really don't care, because it is effecting me largely and negatively either way. Everywhere in the Quran the first command is for the man, and then to the woman. Every cause has an effect, every action has a reaction. So when the first order isn't being implemented, it is damn right going to effect of how women then implement it. It's a balance that needs to be maintained; the crop isn't going to grow if it isn't being taken care of.

It is seriously fucked up of how Muslim women are expected to follow their orders down to the last letter, while the Muslim men run around like horny horses with nobody to answer to.