If the Holy Quran commands that men be the breadwinners in the family, then is it only logical that when it comes to finding jobs, getting promotions, ect then men should be given priority over the women?

B.H. wrote: If the Holy Quran commands that men be the breadwinners in the family, then is it only logical that when it comes to finding jobs, getting promotions, ect then men should be given priority over the women?

Bismillah,

No.  Because we don't live in a perfect world where there are men to take care of the women as in this scenario.  It happens sometimes, but not always.  Would you deny a job or support to a mom supporting her kids on her own and give it to a man who might have his own home and less financial obligations in reality to meet?

We live in the real world and need real world solutions.  Black and white answers to questions are rarely the answer.

Salaamu Alaykum

You have given a  good objection. However, I infer you have no problem with what I suggested per see in and of itself when the woman has a faithful husband who is able to take care of her and her family.

when a woman has a caring husband who is financially stable then there is no need for her t work BUT i think that if she still wants to work after that then she should be given the chioce and recruited on the same grounds as any man.hwever it might also happen that she is given the job over a man who really needs it cos he has a wife and kids to support.but as herjihad has said we dont live in a pefect world.i mean u are not required to put "i have a wife and kids to support" n your CV so pple will choose you over someone less "worthy"

Be careful how you interpret the Quran and its teachings and make sure that u dont accept an interpretation that suits you but rather one that is just and fair

Allah Knows Best

Yes, a man should be given priority.

This should be done in a country where every muslim woman should unquestionably have a reasonable life provided for her with dignity. This includes single women, widows and women who chose not marry.  

Which country in the world gaurantees a person this right (which ofcourse is God given to us women) based on her gender? Not even one.

Bismillah irrahman irrahim

Assalamu alaikum

I tell you an incident from time of second caliph Umar (ra) which might show the stand of islam. He needed a judge for his courts and after considering many sahabah (ra), he appointed a sahabia (ra). I am sure in that time there was no application process, he must have thought about capable people and He chose a woman.

Yes a man is responsible for the family but if a woman is applying too and she is more suitable for the position, it should be given to her. Islam does not ask women not to work, so if they chose to work, they should be judged fairly because Allah swt is Just and He likes Just decisions.

wassalam

The incident you presented is good. To be a judge, one requires mental skills which are not specific to either gender.

In the world we know today, most jobs are the same, you can get a lot done by pushing buttons. A man can write a program which a woman can do as well. If in the olden days women were bound to the household due to the kids and kitchen work, with diapers and microwaves, women have a lot of free time too (compared to the olden days when women would light fires to make bread).

Life has changed and instead of limiting ourselves with that which implies that women should be homebound etc, each one of us, men and women need to work to the fullest extent that islam would allow us to. Not for oursleves but for the good of the entire Ummah.

Regards

You do realize that having so many women in the workforce will put a lot of men in a position to where they can't support a family on what they make, and either the wife will have to work or the family will have to go on welfare.

fatima wrote: Bismillah irrahman irrahim Assalamu alaikum I tell you an incident from time of second caliph Umar (ra) which might show the stand of islam. He needed a judge for his courts and after considering many sahabah (ra), he appointed a sahabia (ra). I am sure in that time there was no application process, he must have thought about capable people and He chose a woman. Yes a man is responsible for the family but if a woman is applying too and she is more suitable for the position, it should be given to her. Islam does not ask women not to work, so if they chose to work, they should be judged fairly because Allah swt is Just and He likes Just decisions. wassalam

Perhaps so.  However, did Umar put men with families to support in the unemployment line? 

Again,  I understand where a woman who has lost her husband has to work and make enough to support herself and any children she may have.

I am just saying that anytime a married woman who really doesn't need a job enters the workforce she is potentially taking away a position a man could get and support a family with.

I'm not trying to keep the women from being happy or earn a little more money.  There are just practical considerations that have to be considered. 

I look at it from a different perspective than most I guess.  Allah commanded that the married men provide for their families.  This is our duty handed to us by Allah, and it is only right that we be allowed to be put in a position where we can fulfill that obligation. 

Bismillah irrahman irrahim

Assalamu alaikum

well Umar (ra) was the first to start benefit system like many other great firsts he introduced to create one of the great societies.

Now on the opinion about if the husband can afford all the basics then i too think that is alhamdulillah the great blessing. Sister can just be home, learn deen inshaAllah and raise a good muslim ummah. But Allah swt allowed or left it on women to decide so there is some wisdom behind it. There is a hadith which states that treat your women well as they some time feel like slaves. Because they have to take husband's view in almost every thing and they feel bound. So i think when Allah swt left some ways they must be for some good reason.

Like most other things if we try to make laws the way we think are best, it could lead to complications. What if some1 sart saying about education of women as such a high percentage does not use the qualifications. I am sure you can see where i am going with this. We are been told the forbidden, the allowed and the best option. What you saying comes under best option but best is not reachable by every1.

wassalam

BH

I do not know which country you picture this preference happening in. Shall we do some wishful thinking? Lets take the US/Canada as a first example. If we put your theory into the picture, it would apply only to the muslim women, non-muslims ofcourse will not agree to this. So, As of today, in 2006

 How many muslim women work? You say I would guess 40%, but since you say �so many�lets take it as 60% for sake of this argument.

How much of the workforce do they comprise of in the US and Canada? My guess here is 10%.

What are the usual professions that muslim women opt for? Medicine (usually general practice, dentistry, gynaecology, pediatrics, Nursing), teaching, IT, research, working in stores, running businesses, Office work including clerical work etc, daycare providers. In many of the above professions, they are not even a threat to their male counterparts as

1)men traditionally do not want to have these careers.

2)some of the above professions rely on individual aptitude, a muslim woman lawyer taken off work does not mean that a man will be filled in it. The law firm may simply not have that position anymore as this post was unique to the lady. Same for a clinic.

 This leaves us with work which men and women both like to do, IT etc. Let�s eliminate the 10% of muslim women that form this workforce. How much will it help muslim men get promotions and free up the hiring competition? I would say less than 1% because of the rate of unemployment and ability to get cheap labour from abroad. I dont think your suggestion will give you the result you want viz, job security and job growth for men who are family supporters. 

In an different scenario, it will not work either. Lets see a country that works something like your theory.

In Saudi Arabia, about 60% of university graduates are women. They account for 2% of the workforce. Most women do not work for family reasons.

Even with such little competition from women, Saudi men have steadily rising rates of unemployment. Among other reasons, mindsets and poor work ethics drive employers to hire workers from abroad This forced the state to put a �saudiazation law� which entails that 20% of the workforce should be Saudi. This did not solve the problem either as many companies hire extra local people in non-important positions like security gaurds and the top posts still go to skilled immigrant workers

A job has to be done and the employer will choose the person most suitable to do it. Reservations and preferences do not work. Ultimately the cream gets hired and then it rises to the top.

The last two posters have made very good points.  However, I will say this:  Allah in his Quran tells us how the the world is supposed to work and not we tell Allah and the Quran how things are supposed to work.  In the world of the unbelievers , many ideals found in the Quran are considered "impractical" because they (unbelieving) are wicked and unwilling to  make the sacrifices necessary sometime (longterm or short term) that comes with obedience to Allah.

If the Saudi businessmen cannot make their Saudi employees work, it is because the businessmen do not know how to run their companies.  They lack the discipline and drive to be where they are and have no one to blame but themselves.

As for the foreign workers, I suspect that their being employed has more to do with much cheaper wage rates than "lazy" Saudi employees. "Lazy" is a relative term and I bet if someone came along who would work longer for half of what the current foreign workers work at they would be regarded as "lazy" and sent back home to the Phillipines or wherever they are from in a heartbeat.  Remember the Quran says that people should have access to items of common use, and a businessman should not mind paying wages that allow a man to afford such things as a cost of doing business.

I'll respond more later.

I have thought about this for a while and have a possible solution.

Anytime a position is open and a qualified married man with a family is available to fill it it should be given to him over a woman who is married and has a husband who can support her.

If a woman holds a job that requires a special skill, she should be able to continue to hold the job until a qualified married man is available to be trained and/or already knows how to do the job.

If a woman does not have a husband to support her but she has children, the above should not apply. 

Personally, I think that an unmarried man should give deference to a married man when it comes to promotions, ect. though he should be allowed to hold a job paying enough for him to afford what is of common use.  I think the same should apply to an unmarried woman without a family.

If the economic situation does not allow such through means of the private sector, let all who need it have access to zakat.

This is ludacris.  Who are you to decide that just because my husband works I should be passed over for a position because I'm a woman?  How do you know if my husband's income is sufficient for our needs? 

Let me put it this way.  If YOUR system was in place.  I would be destitute with a husband who could not walk.

My husband was the main bread winner.  He worked very hard, but it wasn't enough.  I had more education than he did.  So I worked too and often found jobs equal to or better than his, these enabled our survival.  However, when he hurt his back, my income alone was not sufficient to support our family, but it was enough for us to keep afloat. 

Now, according to your system.  My job would have been given to the male equivalent who applied at the same time.  Why?  Not because he was more qualified (in your proposal both are equally qualified) but because he was a man.  We both have families, but according to you, I didn't need the job as bad, because I'm married.

Now, in your senario, I would not have my job.  John Smith would have my job, because he has a wife and kid.  Not to mention, John is capable of working in a factory and I am not.  But because he and I both applied, he was given preference. 

Now, when My husband was hurt...I had no job to cushion the blow.  I would have had to spend weeks looking for a job, being passed over time and time again because preference is given first to men with families.  Because I shouldn't have to work in a perfect society.

I would love not to have to work, but You cannot discriminate against a candidate because of sex.  You must solely chose on qualifications.

Oh and lastly, why should sex be any kind of factor?  As an employer, I would prefer to have the best candidate for the position.  This will strengthen my company.  Its not about the man with the family, its about the quality of work.  If he can't meet the requirements, they he can't have the job.  He wants the better job, he needs to have the better skills.  That's economics.

ANGELA

This is ludacris. 

BH

No it isn't.  The Quran makes it clear that the man is to be the one responsible for taking care of the family.  Since that is Allah's command the laws of an Islamic society should be fashioned in such a way as to see that it happens.

If I am not mistaken, you are a Mormon, correct?  This discussion is moot regarding you because Islamic law would not apply to you.

ANGELA:

Who are you to decide that just because my husband works I should be passed over for a position because I'm a woman?  How do you know if my husband's income is sufficient for our needs? 

BH:

My friend, I didn't decide that a man was the one responsible for his family.  As for your husband's wages, he probably would be able to make enough for you and him and any children you have if the married women were not in the workforce.  Labor wages would go up. I know that conventional wisdom states it was the feminist movement that got women their jobs and to some degree it is true.  However, it was the businessmen behind it for the most part---they wanted women in the workforce thinking they would work for much cheaper wages than men. History has proven this true and not only do the women work for much less it drives men's wages down too because of the increase in competition for jobs.

My grandfathers both worked and were responsible for bringing in the paycheck.  They were factory workers and could afford a home, a car, and raise children on what they made.  Now, where I live a man and a wife could work in a plant doing almost the same thing and still not be as well off as my grandparents were.  My father was a teacher and he was the only one who worked.  He didn't make a lot of money teaching school but still managed to have a home for his family, a good used car, ect.

ANGELA:

Let me put it this way.  If YOUR system was in place.  I would be destitute with a husband who could not walk.

BH:

No. One, you are not a Muslim yet and therefore Islamic law cannot be bound on you.  Two, you are in a situation different than what I was speaking of earlier-and  I am ashamed that I did not think of the circumstance you are in where the husband can't work due to health issues.  I would have no problem with you working (assuming you become a Muslimah one day) and moving as far up the ladder as you can because you have to be the breadwinner.  You are in a situation where your husband simply through no fault of his own cannot make a living for both of you.

ANGELA:

My husband was the main bread winner.  He worked very hard, but it wasn't enough.

BH:

I understand and believe everything you say.  However, the reason he wasn't able to do so is because of the economic factors I mentioned above.

ANGELA:

  I had more education than he did.  So I worked too and often found jobs equal to or better than his, these enabled our survival.  However, when he hurt his back, my income alone was not sufficient to support our family, but it was enough for us to keep afloat. 

BH:

One, you are not a Muslim and therefore cannot be bound by Islamic law.  Two, your circumstance is different than what I posted about earlier.  I have no problem with a Muslimah working and going as far as she can up the career ladder if her husband through illness cannot work.

ANGELA:

Now, according to your system.  My job would have been given to the male equivalent who applied at the same time.  Why?  Not because he was more qualified (in your proposal both are equally qualified) but because he was a man. 

BH:

I explicitely stated that a married man should have priority over even an unmarried man, though I believe that an unmarried man or unmarried woman should be able to earn enough to take care of their basic needs.

ANGELA:

We both have families, but according to you, I didn't need the job as bad, because I'm married.

BH:

True.  But I did not know of your special circumstance either.

ANGELA:

Now, in your senario, I would not have my job.  John Smith would have my job, because he has a wife and kid.  Not to mention, John is capable of working in a factory and I am not.  But because he and I both applied, he was given preference. 

BH:

If John were a Muslim with a family to support and you were a Muslimah who had a husband able to work and take care of his family, yes that would be the case.  True, John could be told of a factory job and instructed to go get it. this may save your position for a time until another married man comes along who can do yours, assuming your husband could be the breadwinner.  As such is not the case for you right now, your job would be safe.

ANGELA:

Now, when My husband was hurt...I had no job to cushion the blow.  I would have had to spend weeks looking for a job, being passed over time and time again because preference is given first to men with families.  Because I shouldn't have to work in a perfect society.

BH:

Assuming you are a revert in the situation, I have no objection to you working because your husband cannot.

ANGELA:

I would love not to have to work, but You cannot discriminate against a candidate because of sex. 

BH:

I am only trying to find out a way to implement the laws of Allah in a practical way. Allah has stated that a husband must work to support his wife and children while a muslimah can work and spend her money on herself.  I could gripe about this but I will not.  Why?   Allah willed it to be such and I knew that when I got married that was a sacrifice I was going to have to be willing to make, just as a woman who chose to get married knows that she is going to have to make some sacrifices on her own---one of which is that the jobs paying enough to support a family with are going to go to the married men.

ANGELA:

You must solely chose on qualifications.

BH:

Theoretically, anyone can be trained for a job--it is just a matter of someone teaching you how to do something.  I seriously doubt that out of the thousands of men out there one can't be found to do a certain type of job.  I never said pull all the married women out of their jobs and replace them with married men overnight anyway.

ANGELA:

Oh and lastly, why should sex be any kind of factor?

BH:

Sex isn't the factor.  Allah is.

ANGELA: 

As an employer, I would prefer to have the best candidate for the position. 

BH:

True.  The employer better see to it that the married man gets the training he needs to do the job right

ANGELA:

This will strengthen my company. 

BH:

Yes, following Allah's law no doubt leads to blessings.  However, if the employer does not follow Quranic ethics he will no doubt receive a curse from Allah.

ANGELA:

Its not about the man with the family, its about the quality of work.

BH:

It is about neither.  It is about following Allah and pleasing him.  If a man was a cheat in his business yet was very prosperous, even to the point of running his honest competitors out of business, would that still make what he did right? 

I say that the businessman better see to it that the married man gets the training he needs or finds a married man out of his applicant pool that can be trained to do the job.  Keep in mind I never said to just yank the women out and replace them with married men overnight.  I said replace the women who have husbands who are able to support them and only when a married man is able to fill in the replacement.

ANGELA

  If he can't meet the requirements, they he can't have the job.  He wants the better job, he needs to have the better skills.  That's economics.

BH:

Agreed.

Bismillah irrahman irrahim

Assalamu alaikum

Brother you do realize that you are giving your personal preference name of islam. No where in islam i have found what you are stating. Yes married man is responisible for providing the family but no way islam says to give him preference over women or unmarried guys if the other two are more capable.

It is exactly like forcing women to wear face covering when it is not fard, like forcing people to pray tahajjud, forcing extra fasting of three days a month or all the other hassanat which are being told. You do realize that next thing might be said is women should not be allowed to work or come out of the house, full stop, as it creates a chance of free mixing or some thing similar. You can not bend or turn Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala's laws according to your will and understanding.

In the time of Sayyidina Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wassalam) there were women in trading and there were men whose families did not have anything to eat for many days. I have never read an incident in which some thing similar to what you are pursuing was said.

Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala's laws are not equal oportunity system, we are going to be judged for our circumstances. Every1 has different capacity, capability and means to deal with thing. Our end depends on what did we do with these things.

Lastly you can not reply to every question raised about this system of yours that it dont apply to you as you are not muslim. This is totally against essence of islam because islamic laws are in such a balance that when a non-muslim ponders over them without prejudice, he/she can see the justice and wisdom in them. This is what draws them to islam.

wassalam

Frankly BH,

The idea that women in the workplace are creating the inability for men to take care of their families is falacy.  In a perfect world (the one in which you are talking about), God's laws would rule.  Therefore, I would be Muslimah and Shariah would be the law of the land.  People would pay their zakat, orphans and widows would be cared for and the rich would help the poor.  But, you cannot justify your statements.

One of the most wondeful aspects of your Prophet was his fairness to women and his giving them their equality in the world.  His own wife was his strength after his first vision.  She was a business owner.  Not him.  She was the financial power in the family. 

Are you saying that somehow Khadija, the wonderful and beloved wife of the Prophet, was somehow doing wrong because her business was detracting from the male traders around her?  Because she created competition and they were unable to take those goods that she traded that she was preventing men from caring for their families???

That is what you're saying in a nutshell.

There are fewer women in positions of authority then men, because of lack of education in the past.  Now, when a woman reaches a place of power, its because her skills are superior to the men around her.  She has to work harder, better and more efficiently than her male counterparts to get the same recognition and often for less pay.  She is not the cause of the men below her not having opportunities, she has earned her place.

Your just blaming successful women for lazy, unsuccessful men. 

ANGELA: Oh and lastly, why should sex be any kind of factor? BH: Sex isn't the factor.  Allah is.

Men and women are equal before God.  Therefore, even this conclusion is wrong.  If God had intended for women not to work at all, then he would have not given us the skills.  He would have revealed to Muhammed that we could not work. 

The revelation of Men being the maintainers of women was probably more geared to the men that don't take care of their families more than it was to those men who do and fall short.  Its not an absolute, or else why would a woman be given the choice that she can give her money to her husband even though she doesn't have to.

I'm going to assume that these basic truths are not taught in the Campellite church anymore.  I know Islam teaches them because that has been a focus of my learning is the place of women in Islam.

In today's age, when the average mortgage in the US is around $1100-1200 and the median income according to statistics is less than $45000.   That's $15,000 a year just in housing expenses.  Now, most families fall below that $45000.  A person that makes $10.00/hr only makes. $21,000 a year. 

Its not women in the workplace that are keeping men from earning enough...its that one income is no longer enough.  With and unemployment rate of about 5.4% we are hovering right around where we should be.  In areas like Utah, there are more jobs than people to fill them.  In places like Flint, Michigan, unemployment is almost 50%.

Its not about men vs women in the workforce.  Its about economics.  You cannot just start replacing women with more qualified men.  Because in the end, you'll create an atomosphere that is discriminatory and hostile to women who have the skills.  There will always be the question...how did she get her job?  You would essentially make it harder for the single woman to provide for herself or like me, where I had to be the main bread winner.  By enforcing a preference for married men over women.

I could use a slightly different analogy...racism.

Immigrants move into an area and take jobs from the people who have lived their for generations.  There are many who think preferential treatment should be given to native citizens before giving the jobs to immigrants.  Why?  Because they're entering the workforce is creating an inability for the locals to survive.  Why are they getting the jobs?  They are better qualified. 

The blame for a man not being able to take care of his family is totally with the man.  If he's not earning enough, he needs to do what my husband is doing.  Get an education.  That's not the employers responsibility, its HIS responsibility.  If he cannot get the education or training, then he needs to look at cost of living.  He should get a smaller home, cheaper cars.  But, its up to him to make it work.  He cannot blame the woman who went to college and improved herself.  He cannot blame the Sudanese engineer who against all odds pulled himself out of abject poverty.  He can only blame himself.

(On a side note BH, did you recently get passed over for a position because of a woman????)

Plus it also implies that a man would work harder...

Besides economics driving everyone to work, both men and women, what happened to women who stayed home.  Many men, in our looser society left their wives, left their responsibilites. Especially around 40 or so.. that midlife crisis. These women, without the job skills were left destitute. You can have an education but after 20 years it does little good trying to get into the job market. Women look at it as an insurance policy.

Like my sister. She teaches. Her husband has a drinking problem. Sad to say. to protect the kids she may have to leave him. Having the job  skills allows her to do this with a lot less struggle. If she had not been working all these years she would be hard pressed to be able to support her kids. And thus either be forced to be poverty-stricken or stay in a bad situation.  

Since around the world poverty is a majority of women and children, something is wrong. This is universally all over.  Clearly if Allah's requirements were being fulfilled this would not be the case.

I think that to regulate any system on a large scale is really impossible.

Plus I remember reading about alot of young men in Saudi Arabia were not employable because all's they had were religious schooling. Where of course that is good, it has no "practical" skills in the job world. So how do you work for a company when you don't have the skills or knowledge?  Plus if you are really wealthy, why work anyways? This may be changing.

There are a few countries like Saudi where women are not out in the workforce in the numbers as they are here in the US.  And those places have higher poverty levels and higher unemployment rates.  Its not about women keeping me from work.  Its about people bettering themselves in the workplace.

I'm sorry to hear about your sister Hayfa.  I remember that was one point they stressed at the Women's Shelter I worked at.  Many abusive husband's keep their wives at home and out of work so they cannot leave them.  Then when the woman finally does leave the abusive situation, she has no skills, no experience and no financial cushion.  I know a woman who was a stay at home Mom for 26 years.  3 of her 5 children were grown, but she still had two left at home.  One night, her husband turned to her and said, "I don't love you, I never have."  The next morning he was gone.

She had no job, no money of her own, and a 25 year old Music degree. 

Now she never needed to work, but do you think anyone gave her a job that supported her family?  He left her with a mortgage and two children.  And minimum wage doesn't cut it. 

Saying that a woman shouldn't have a good job just because men are supposed to be the maintainers is very short sighted. 

Hayfa wrote: Plus it also implies that a man would work harder... Besides economics driving everyone to work, both men and women, what happened to women who stayed home.  Many men, in our looser society left their wives, left their responsibilites. Especially around 40 or so.. that midlife crisis. These women, without the job skills were left destitute. You can have an education but after 20 years it does little good trying to get into the job market. Women look at it as an insurance policy. Like my sister. She teaches. Her husband has a drinking problem. Sad to say. to protect the kids she may have to leave him. Having the job  skills allows her to do this with a lot less struggle. If she had not been working all these years she would be hard pressed to be able to support her kids. And thus either be forced to be poverty-stricken or stay in a bad situation.   Since around the world poverty is a majority of women and children, something is wrong. This is universally all over.  Clearly if Allah's requirements were being fulfilled this would not be the case. I think that to regulate any system on a large scale is really impossible. Plus I remember reading about alot of young men in Saudi Arabia were not employable because all's they had were religious schooling. Where of course that is good, it has no "practical" skills in the job world. So how do you work for a company when you don't have the skills or knowledge?  Plus if you are really wealthy, why work anyways? This may be changing.

Assalaamu alaikum;

Sister Hayfa is right, not all men fulfill their obligations

For those of us stuck in non islamic countries, We women Must have job skills.

As a nurse, my starting wage is $30 USD per hour. When my husband was hurt in his work ten years ago and could no longer make a living wage,  I went back to work full time. His disibility pay is only $750 per month and we cannot live on that, we are a second marriage and have 11 children between us. My youngest, the only one I had with this husband, just graduated high school and did it 6 months early. 3 of my children are going to college as am I, I am finishing my masters in multicultural education and I still work 1-2 days a week as a substitute teacher.

If I did it with all those kids, any woman can do it.I did my backelors over the last 10 years (finished in 2004) I paid my way as i went and accrued no debt. I am NOT wealthy, my house is paid off and we are moving to Mexico to live in the north region so that we may live more cheaply and take care of my elderly mother in law. I will be commuting and be here 4 days per week. It sounds crazy, but if you do as you are advised and stay away from the credit and pay your debts you will be surprised.

True, the standards in islamic countries are different. But we need to be prudent and be wise. you brothers need to get a good and practical education, but a good husband will see to it that their wives and family will not be left unprovided for in the event of something happening to you. either get your wives an education or buy insurance, and find a field to work in that has a good demand. You may have to start out in the latrine division, get over it, and work your way up. Stop blaming women who work!

I know what it is like to be left without job skills, My first husband was shot and killed when I was 28 and home with 5 kids,...5 small kids and no way to feed them. My first husband left a $250,000.00 insurance policy to his wicked witch of a mother who was already married to a wealthy guy and my children never saw ANY of it. (I will not contact her till this day!) I sold my first house and moved into low income apt. I took a job as a nurses aide and when the social security came in I started school and it took 3 years but I got my degree in nursing. I bought another house for my growing kids, and Alhamdullilah, I met my husband and it has been good since then! Sisters, be wise, dont be left in the ditch as I was!

Being in an islamic country does not gaurantee anything. Though I am not Saudi citizen, I can tell you if I was, I would still be facing certain issues that are common to all us women. women are routinely fleeced of their inheritances and even there are mnay cases where working women sacrifice their entire wealth and the husbands use this money to get a second wife. These kinds of stories are a dime a dozen. And in this backdrop, Islam seems a little hard to understand, especially the part of men being protectors.

I should have added this on the last reply. while saudi has its own problems, we should remember that there have always been men that had jobs and men that didnt. As there will always be those who get things done and those who complain about 1% competition from muslim women

Asalamu Alaikum Everyone,

I just briefly read the posts on this topic...

Brother who asked the question based his reasoning on correct knowledge but made the wrong conclusion.

Allah has made it clear that the man of the family is to be the breadwinner.  The husband is RESPONSIBLE for taking care of the family.  But, if the wife chooses to work, whatever she earns is for her. The husband cannot claim anything from it... unless she gives it freely.

I think the mistake lies in jumping to a conclusion where the man should be preferred over a woman.

The only time this situation would apply is if there are no more jobs left in the world and there is excessive unemployment.  In that case, the man should be given preference over a married woman because it is fard on him to support his family.  In today�s society, like that of united states, it would be unfair to give preference to men over women in any condition.  There are many jobs available, and Allah is Ar-Razaaq, the provider, He will provide a job for the husbands that need the jobs.  We as Muslims should do our best to be just.  

Even if you lived in Saudi Arabia, shariah shouldn't enforce Islamic legislations on anyone because there is no compulsion in the religion of Islam. Crimes...etc. is a different story.

I understand both sides of the argument... the brother has a valid point but it is conditional to a certain situation.  The key is to find a balance in religion and in the life of this world.

If you take the Quran and carry it to the extreme it is not Islam.  The prophet warned us of those people who are extremists.

For example, Allah said to lower your gaze, if you implemented this 100% of the time... you wouldn�t be able to live in any non-Muslim country...

Yes, you should lower your gaze... but you can't go around with your head lowered all the time... if your a business owner or any type of employee you have to engage with other people, including the opposite sex...  What Allah has told us is that we should try our best and not be tempted... loosely the term "lower your gaze" can be translated as "don�t stare at the person, gaze with lust, or check them out."  That's an example of moderation.

So basically, yes, the husband is to provide for the family... but that in no way means stop the women from working.  Neither does it mean that we give them unequal status or preference in the workforce.

May Allah guide us all and give us proper understanding of His deen, Inshallah.

W�salaamz,

SISTER FATIMA:

Brother you do realize that you are giving your personal preference name of islam.

BH: 

Respectfully sister, I am not giving a personal opinion as far as the man being responsible for providing for his family is concerned.

SISTER FATIMA:

No where in islam i have found what you are stating. Yes married man is responisible for providing the family but no way islam says to give him preference over women or unmarried guys if the other two are more capable.

BH:

If Allah commands that a man support his family inference requires that society should be built in such a way as to allow him to fulfill his requirement.  It's really no different than expecting the law to protect people's right to pray, pay zakat, read the Koran, not lie, ect.

Sister Fatima, I do not wish to be among the arrogant so perhaps you can help me with something.  It has been said that there shall be no forcing of religion on others.  However, how do you know that stealing, murder, and rape are wrong in an objective sense? Is it because Allah has forbidden these things?  If such is the case and you base your belief on the rightness and wrongness of such because you believe in Allah and punish people who perform such deeds aren't you de facto forcing your religion on others?

SISTER FATIMA CONTINUES:

It is exactly like forcing women to wear face covering when it is not fard, like forcing people to pray tahajjud, forcing extra fasting of three days a month or all the other hassanat which are being told. You do realize that next thing might be said is women should not be allowed to work or come out of the house, full stop, as it creates a chance of free mixing or some thing similar. You can not bend or turn Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala's laws according to your will and understanding.

BH:  Please see my reply above.

Sister Fatima:

In the time of Sayyidina Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wassalam) there were women in trading and there were men whose families did not have anything to eat for many days. I have never read an incident in which some thing similar to what you are pursuing was said.

BH:If people were going hungry for days I conclude that the well off were not very good Muslims since they didn't see to it their hungry brethren were fed.  Also, at this time was the Prophet in a position of authority to find a solution to the problem?

SISter Fatima:

Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala's laws are not equal oportunity system, we are going to be judged for our circumstances. Every1 has different capacity, capability and means to deal with thing. Our end depends on what did we do with these things.

BH:  Agreed.

Sister Fatima:

Lastly you can not reply to every question raised about this system of yours that it dont apply to you as you are not muslim. This is totally against essence of islam because islamic laws are in such a balance that when a non-muslim ponders over them without prejudice, he/she can see the justice and wisdom in them. This is what draws them to islam.

BH:

I know that the Holy Quran forbids forced conversion "no compulsion in religion" but I can't help but wonder if that involves only forced profession of faith.  I believe murder, rape, lying, cheating, ect. to be wrong because Allah says it is wrong. If there was no Allah a person could claim jungle law was fine and his opinion would be no more valid than mine.  I used to be an atheist and argued that even though I agreed that murder, lying, cheating, ect. should be regarded as wrong, when it got right down to it it was simply a matter of opinion and who happened to have the power to force their will on others at a given time.

B.H

Islam is based on a construction and it is a system. Unfortunately many of us deliberate on a single aspect. To understand the wisdom, we need to see different reasons behind a particular law.

Thus far I can see that you are making an inference that women should be given preference over men in hiring and then promotions. I am not clear about three things here.

1) According to your ideal system, do you say that when women  in a similar circumstance (breadwinnersfor dependants,eg single moms,widows) are in the pool, this preference for men would not apply?

2) Honestly, do you envision women working at all in this ideal system, in postions other than female dominated ones, like gynaecologists etc.

3) When you ask for the preference, is there a clause "all other factors being equal like education/experience/skills)" or does empathy come into play?

Digitalstorm: You made a lot of sense. Can I say something. The first glance is permitted. I do not think that we need to walk with our heads hung low. The etiquette here is that when at first glance you see a non-mahram, then lower the gaze. It is the second glance which is Haram that leads to the third and then to all the mess!

Najamsahar

How do we know if the Imam is right?

Also, some Muslims accept only the Holy Quran as binding.

ANGELA:

Frankly BH,

The idea that women in the workplace are creating the inability for men to take care of their families is falacy. 

BH:

I have family who are businesspeople and I got my information from them.  I also have known plenty of people who have studied economics for a living say the same thing.

ANGELA:

 In a perfect world (the one in which you are talking about), God's laws would rule.  Therefore, I would be Muslimah and Shariah would be the law of the land.  People would pay their zakat, orphans and widows would be cared for and the rich would help the poor. 

BH:

The sooner the world comes to Allah the better.

.ANGELA:

One of the most wondeful aspects of your Prophet was his fairness to women and his giving them their equality in the world.  His own wife was his strength after his first vision.  She was a business owner.  Not him.  She was the financial power in the family. 

Are you saying that somehow Khadija, the wonderful and beloved wife of the Prophet, was somehow doing wrong because her business was detracting from the male traders around her?  Because she created competition and they were unable to take those goods that she traded that she was preventing men from caring for their families???

BH:

I have read some information on the Prophet's wife.  One source said that she retired from business after marrying him.

Also, what she did before marrying the Prophet and converting to Islam has nothing to do with this discussion now.

ANGELA:

That is what you're saying in a nutshell.

There are fewer women in positions of authority then men, because of lack of education in the past.  Now, when a woman reaches a place of power, its because her skills are superior to the men around her.  She has to work harder, better and more efficiently than her male counterparts to get the same recognition and often for less pay.  She is not the cause of the men below her not having opportunities, she has earned her place.

BH:

There are many factors that go into play concerning hiring and promotions and they are not necessarily all related to how good a person did/does/can do a job.  This goes for the men as well as the women.

ANGELA:

Your just blaming successful women for lazy, unsuccessful men

BH:

As I said before there are many factors that come into play regarding promotions and hiring in the workplace, many of which are not necessarily performance related issues.

ANGELA:

Men and women are equal before God.  Therefore, even this conclusion is wrong.  If God had intended for women not to work at all, then he would have not given us the skills.  He would have revealed to Muhammed that we could not work. 

BH:

1. I never said that I was against women working per see, only when a married woman who does not need to work puts a man with a family to support out of a job who otherwise could do the job.

2. I mean no disrespect, but I could use your logic to argue smoking dope was okay, because if it wasn't Allah would not have given us the skill to make the dope with.

ANGELA:

The revelation of Men being the maintainers of women was probably more geared to the men that don't take care of their families more than it was to those men who do and fall short. 

BH: Where does it say so in the Quran?

ANGELA:

Its not an absolute, or else why would a woman be given the choice that she can give her money to her husband even though she doesn't have to.

BH:

The woman has the choice to give money, the husband does not have a choice.  The case with one is not on par with the other.

ANGELA:

I'm going to assume that these basic truths are not taught in the Campellite church anymore.  I know Islam teaches them because that has been a focus of my learning is the place of women in Islam.

BH:

Angela, I am not sure what you mean here.  Could you clarify for me?

ANGELA:

In today's age, when the average mortgage in the US is around $1100-1200 and the median income according to statistics is less than $45000.   That's $15,000 a year just in housing expenses.  Now, most families fall below that $45000.  A person that makes $10.00/hr only makes. $21,000 a year. 

Its not women in the workplace that are keeping men from earning enough...its that one income is no longer enough.  With and unemployment rate of about 5.4% we are hovering right around where we should be.  In areas like Utah, there are more jobs than people to fill them.  In places like Flint, Michigan, unemployment is almost 50%.

BH:

I agree that there are many causes for the economic problems the US suffers from today.

ANGELA:

  Its not about men vs women in the workforce.  Its about economics.  You cannot just start replacing women with more qualified men.  Because in the end, you'll create an atomosphere that is discriminatory and hostile to women who have the skills.  There will always be the question...how did she get her job?  You would essentially make it harder for the single woman to provide for herself or like me, where I had to be the main bread winner.  By enforcing a preference for married men over women.

BH:

I do not think so.  No one should have a problem with a woman who really needs the job getting it.

ANGELA:

I could use a slightly different analogy...racism.

BH:

Is it sexist to believe the man is head of the household which is taught by  the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Quran?

ANGELA:

Immigrants move into an area and take jobs from the people who have lived their for generations.  There are many who think preferential treatment should be given to native citizens before giving the jobs to immigrants.  Why?  Because they're entering the workforce is creating an inability for the locals to survive.  Why are they getting the jobs?  They are better qualified. 

BH:

No. One, often the immigrants are illegal and break the law being here.  The employer is also breaking the law hiring them.  Second, the immigrants are often paid  enough just to survive living and working here in the US and contrary to myth often do not make enough to send any money home back to Mexico or wherever they are from. I know this to be a fact from firsthand observation. Food, lodging, gas, and clothes take it all up.  Businesses who depended on natives making more money  no longer have the sales they did before and start to close down.  The businesses that take there place don't pay anything because they have to sell what their now impoverished clientel can afford which is not a lot.  Eventually, the community rots and crime, filth, and corruption take hold.

ANGELA:

The blame for a man not being able to take care of his family is totally with the man. 

BH:

In some circumstances this is no doubt true.  However, I do not believe it is so in many cases.

ANGELA:

If he's not earning enough, he needs to do what my husband is doing.  Get an education. 

BH:

This isn't a solution either.  Jobs that require an education operate according to market supply and demand like unskilled labor does.  There are only so many positions that truly require a degree available to be taken, and if everyone went to college you would still have the problems you do now. 

In fact, your suggestion would make things worse for everyone, for as more and more people get educated and certain  high paying fields get saturated with qualified people, the wages will go down because more and more people are available to do the job.  Have you ever heard where colleges allow only so many people into training programs for certain types of work so as to make sure there are not too many people trained and prevent this very situation from occurring?

ANGELA:

That's not the employers responsibility, its HIS responsibility.  If he cannot get the education or training, then he needs to look at cost of living.  He should get a smaller home, cheaper cars.  But, its up to him to make it work.  He cannot blame the woman who went to college and improved herself.  He cannot blame the Sudanese engineer who against all odds pulled himself out of abject poverty.  He can only blame himself.

BH:

I agree that people must be economical regarding their lifestyle, but it still remains that it is the employer's responsibility to pay a person enough so that that person can afford  items of common use.

ANGELA:

(On a side note BH, did you recently get passed over for a position because of a woman????)

BH:

I have lost out on promotions to both women and men.  At the same time I have beat out both women and men for promotions as well.

najamsahar wrote: B.H Islam is based on a construction and it is a system. Unfortunately many of us deliberate on a single aspect. To understand the wisdom, we need to see different reasons behind a particular law. Thus far I can see that you are making an inference that women should be given preference over men in hiring and then promotions. I am not clear about three things here. 1) According to your ideal system, do you say that when women  in a similar circumstance (breadwinnersfor dependants,eg single moms,widows) are in the pool, this preference for men would not apply? 2) Honestly, do you envision women working at all in this ideal system, in postions other than female dominated ones, like gynaecologists etc. 3) When you ask for the preference, is there a clause "all other factors being equal like education/experience/skills)" or does empathy come into play? Digitalstorm: You made a lot of sense. Can I say something. The first glance is permitted. I do not think that we need to walk with our heads hung low. The etiquette here is that when at first glance you see a non-mahram, then lower the gaze. It is the second glance which is Haram that leads to the third and then to all the mess! Najamsahar

1.  Any woman who had to be the breadwinner in the family would be exempt from my plan.

2.  Theoretically, I don't have a problem with women working in any field or position.  I just know that according to the law of economics that there are going to be jobs that pay so low that only one person can survive on it.  I think that the jobs that pay enough to feed a family should be reserved for the men who have familes to support.

It isn't that the women are inferior  or anything like that.  It's the fact that the Quran has placed responsibility on the man to support his family and not the woman.  Women have shown that they work just as hard and are as smart as any man.  No one is doubting their inherent abilities or worth.

3.  Could you be more clear on question 3?

BH

Q 3) when we assume that a man should be given preference over a woman as he is the breadwinner, in this scene are the two candidates, one man and the second woman,  equally  qualified? Or if the man has a little bit lacking he is still given preference because his responsibilty comes into the reckoning?

Najamsahar

Bismillah irrahman irrahim

Assalamu alaikum

Brother what you mentioned about there being no compulsion in religion in case of pronouncing your faith, i totally agree. If you do a bit of forum search you would realize that for past few months i am banging my head against the wall regarding clarification of this particular ayaah. This ayaah was revealed for stating that no one should be forced in proclaiming the shahadah. If you read major tafsir books thats what it says in the explanation of this verse.

No one in previous generations has taken the meaning that if some1 wants to forsake a part of religion you should let them because there is no compulsion in religion. We can start from the time of Sayyidina Muhammad (saw), there is a hadith which states that 'if it was not for women and children, i would burn down the houses of people who dont come for congregational prayer'. Congregational prayer is not fard but still sahabah (ra) encouraged each other to attend. Second incident is of 'uhud' i think, when two muslims did not go to war, they were not among hypocrites but were just lazying around. When muslims came back, Sayyidina Muhammad (saw) told rest of muslims not to talk to them. Then they asked for forgivness and it was granted. Now Jihad is also fard kifaya (an obligation which if few people take part in gets lifted from rest of ummah). First caliph Abubakr (ra) went to war against people who refused to pay zakah.

Now when i said to you that please do not give your personal preference the name of islam, it was not about men being bread winners, it was about your system or plan of giving preference to family men over rest. Brother no one is doubting your sincerity, its just that the matters which are left open by Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala should not be messed about with. I give you example of taaliban (inshaAllah you wont get offended, i am not comparing you to them, its just an example), they made women wear face covering which is not fard, they stopped the schooling of young girls. I am sure there must have been a good reasoning in thier minds about this. They might have taken a rule of no free mixing, or its haram to look at member of opposite sex, now if women were out and about, it creates a chance so why not make them wear niqaab. Or if girls get educated they might want to work, again working with men, again might lead to haram. Now they put two and two together and came out with twenty two. Yes islam has told the haram and anything leading to haram is forbidden too but those things are stated.

If you start doing that to every thing, we are going to make this society very suffocating. Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala has told that its best for women to stay home but it is not being made a compulsion. Because some women might have to come out and work, some might want to. Allah swt has made this religion a true nature of human being. Some of us can take the strict ruling rest cant, so it is alhamdulillah flexible enough to take every thing in.

Lastly you asked how do you know if an imam is good. Every1 should themselves have basic knowledge of  Holy Quran. Ask Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala for guidance and keep sincere. I am sure if you listen to any shiekh, you do get this feeling in your heart that mashaAllah he is good, if you still remember what he said few days later and then when you about to do some thing wrong and you remember about that lecture of advice and you back away from sin. Then yeah seek knowledge from that shiekh but main thing is put your trust in Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala. Another thing is dont limit yourself with only one scholar. Take good from wherever you can.

wassalam

Fatima,

The point you are making in the clarification of Ayaat "la ikraha fiddeen" is very valid. All the mufassirren agree to this and somehow in most discussions people use this to say that islamic law is not madatory and things like that.

Najamsahar

B.H. wrote: ANGELA: Immigrants move into an area and take jobs from the people who have lived their for generations.  There are many who think preferential treatment should be given to native citizens before giving the jobs to immigrants.  Why?  Because they're entering the workforce is creating an inability for the locals to survive.  Why are they getting the jobs?  They are better qualified.  BH: No. One, often the immigrants are illegal and break the law being here.  The employer is also breaking the law hiring them.  Second, the immigrants are often paid  enough just to survive living and working here in the US and contrary to myth often do not make enough to send any money home back to Mexico or wherever they are from. I know this to be a fact from firsthand observation. Food, lodging, gas, and clothes take it all up.  Businesses who depended on natives making more money  no longer have the sales they did before and start to close down.  The businesses that take there place don't pay anything because they have to sell what their now impoverished clientel can afford which is not a lot.  Eventually, the community rots and crime, filth, and corruption take hold.

BH,

Are you that nearsighted?  I said Immigrant, not Illegal Alien.  I'm talking about LEGAL immigration.  My grandmother's family had to escort her back and forth to the movie theater and soda shop because the Americans in the area were mad that the Welsh, Eastern Europeans and Italians were taking their jobs.  That was in the 1940s, not the 1920s.  Its still happening today with the legal immigrants.  And not every Latino immigrant is illegal.  Many have done it the legal way, but they are discriminated against because of the 12 million illegals.

That's the point I'm trying to make.  A hard working man from El Salvador comes here legally and tries to get a good job, he's discriminated against because racist Americans assume since he's latino and doesn't speak very good english, he's illegal.  However, on the flip side I work in an engineering firm now.  (recent job change)

Of the 13 people in my office.  6 are born here in the US, 1 of those his parents were born in China and moved here before his birth, and another is Latino who was born and raised in the US but has family in Mexico.  That's 7 of 13 jobs, more than 50% that have gone to foreign born but LEGAL immigrants.  And we have an engineering position open now.  Roughly half the applicants have foreign educations in India, Puerto Rico, Germany, Japan or were born there and studied here.

Now, its an exact analogy to what you are saying about women.  These men are taking jobs from the local engineers not women.  I'm the only woman in this office.  On my company list there are only 5 of us, including myself. 

In my last company, there were 4 women (including me) and 50-60 men.  This has been the same for every well paying company I've worked for except for education.  The schools I worked for were about 50/50 on the sex of the teachers, counselors and caretakers.  However, if you looked at the top executives, most were men with a woman here and there.

http://www.news.cornell.edu/chronicle/98/2.19.98/Blau_report.html - http://www.news.cornell.edu/chronicle/98/2.19.98/Blau_report .html

http://www.workopolis.com/content/resource/usablenews/women.html - http://www.workopolis.com/content/resource/usablenews/women. html

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/03/02/MNG7RHGVVD1.DTL - http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/03/ 02/MNG7RHGVVD1.DTL

In the end, the job market is adjusting to women.  5.4% nationally BH, that's all unemployment is in this country.  Women only make up 47% of the workforce in the US and Unemployment is equal for both sexes, but women make less, have few executive jobs and less job security.  Check out these statistics below.  Notice countries where women are not the major part of the workforce. (On and note that when they breakdown by sex the unemployment rate, that is only among active workers.  If a woman is a homemaker and not looking for work, she is not counted into unemployment statistics, even if she's previously held a job)

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762531.html - http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762531.html

BH

The ayat is 4:34 The qawwam mentioned here is translated as "one who looks after the affairs of the other in his absence, as if his own"

To follow the the point I am trying to make we need to keep in mind that the islamic law of inheritance. the share of the female is always half that of the male. The brother gets twice what the sister gets and the wife gets half of what her husband gets.

Islam has not prohibited women to work, If her husband is in agreement. Islam has not biased men over women or vice versa in any matter unless there is a very obvious reason. Eg: breastfeeding, etc etc

This is the quranic law.I hope we can agree at face value as this is from quran.

 This is what shariah says about the muslim womans interests.

1)She has no need to work as the husband is the provider. The husband shall provide a reasonable standard of living according to his income and how other women of a similar economic group are living. The man shall marry when he is able to provide such.

2)I am not sure about this, as I cannot provide the reference right now, I can say it is from Imam Nawawi, The husband cannot enforce her to do chores in the house. She is the guardian of the house and children.

3)Till she gets married, her family, father, brother should be the providers.

4)In the event her husband passes away, her right is that for a year she should be maintained at the marital residence at a similar standard of living that she had with her  husband.

After a year, she is still not obligated to work for herself or her children. She has to depend on a Mahram relative for sustenance, in the absence of this, anyone in her husbands family should come forward and take responsibilty. In the absence of this is anyone in the society.

Widows are considered a weak part of the society and usually referred to in the Quran along with orphans. We have been exhorted to be kind and just when dealing with these two categories because their situation has been thrust on them for no fault of theirs.

5)If the husband has been killed, blood money should be paid to the wife and dependants.

6)Whatever she earn is hers alone.

7) In the US/Canada, the average muslim death is associated with about 10,000$(?). There are funeral costs, hospital co-pays etc etc. The muslim will calculated as follows, you pay the funeral costs, then the debts (which includes the maintenance of the wife for a year) and then pay the inheritors.

The basic flaw in your system is this

You want a preference based on the degree of responsibilty that the applicant(man) has and this responsibilty is God given.

However you also want to shirk this responsibility when it comes to someone elses wife/widow. You are doing this by saying that "if the woman has a dependant,she should be given priority too"

Islam does not recognise the woman as a provider in any circumstance.

Secondly, Islam is about rights and responsibilities. If men start getting a prefernce because they are the breadwinners, then they get the responsibility of taking care of women who are without the qawwam. So if a mans female relative has no one to take care of her, he will take care of her affairs and if she has no money, he will provide for her!

You are doing a pick and choose here. You want a part of Islam but then do not want to implement another part associated with it.

We women are given half of everything because the ones who are getting twice of our inheritance are going to be our providers for life. From fathers to sons to brothers and uncles and if she has no one, then the society.

If you see many women have argued against this idea of your. We know that we have to fend for ourselves. Life is hard wherever you go, NorthAmerica, Saudi Arabia, India or China!

Another issue is that in a low paying job this rule will not apply. How low do we go? What are some lowpaying jobs? Warehousing, labour, construction, cleaners? many of these jobs are unsuitable for women as they are based on physical strenght. And today a man working on this level is also taking care of his family and providing for them and women can be threat to his livelihood too. So where does it end?

If you see many women have argued against this idea of your. We know that we have to fend for ourselves. Life is hard wherever you go, NorthAmerica, Saudi Arabia, India or China!

At all economic levels, there will be people who can get by with what they have and those that want more. You can see the greed for more that drove wealthy people to resort to cheating and robbing when they already had far too much to last their life.

Imagine a wife with a husband who is no longer able to provide for her. She has the right to leave him. But how many women do this? Most of us brace up and start providing. Whats wrong with this. Granted that this is a Quranic right, but what is the better option? To be kind and keep the family together or be up and away? What will please Allah more?

In conclusion, BH,

If we did delve into the Quran and took your inference, seeing the above, how much would it help you? You may get jobs a tad easier, but then women are going to start demanding their rights and how easy will life be for men? Imagine providing for 2-3 women instead of one that fends for herself!

Do you agree to my first reply about the competition thinning by 1% if we put your idea in place?

Najamsahar

NAJAMSAHAR:

BH

The ayat is 4:34 The qawwam mentioned here is translated as "one who looks after the affairs of the other in his absence, as if his own"

To follow the the point I am trying to make we need to keep in mind that the islamic law of inheritance. the share of the female is always half that of the male. The brother gets twice what the sister gets and the wife gets half of what her husband gets.

Islam has not prohibited women to work, If her husband is in agreement. Islam has not biased men over women or vice versa in any matter unless there is a very obvious reason. Eg: breastfeeding, etc etc

This is the quranic law.I hope we can agree at face value as this is from quran.

 This is what shariah says about the muslim womans interests.

1)She has no need to work as the husband is the provider. The husband shall provide a reasonable standard of living according to his income and how other women of a similar economic group are living. The man shall marry when he is able to provide such.

2)I am not sure about this, as I cannot provide the reference right now, I can say it is from Imam Nawawi, The husband cannot enforce her to do chores in the house. She is the guardian of the house and children.

3)Till she gets married, her family, father, brother should be the providers.

4)In the event her husband passes away, her right is that for a year she should be maintained at the marital residence at a similar standard of living that she had with her  husband.

After a year, she is still not obligated to work for herself or her children. She has to depend on a Mahram relative for sustenance, in the absence of this, anyone in her husbands family should come forward and take responsibilty. In the absence of this is anyone in the society.

Widows are considered a weak part of the society and usually referred to in the Quran along with orphans. We have been exhorted to be kind and just when dealing with these two categories because their situation has been thrust on them for no fault of theirs.

5)If the husband has been killed, blood money should be paid to the wife and dependants.

6)Whatever she earn is hers alone.

BH:

Greetings and Salutations!

Could you please provide me with a Quranic reference that states the brother, father, or nearest male kinsman is responsible for taking care of a woman with no husband?

I was not aware this was in the Quran, and do admit such changes things quite a bit.

NAJAMSAHAR:

You want a preference based on the degree of responsibilty that the applicant(man) has and this responsibilty is God given.

However you also want to shirk this responsibility when it comes to someone elses wife/widow. You are doing this by saying that "if the woman has a dependant,she should be given priority too"

Islam does not recognise the woman as a provider in any circumstance.

BH:

I was not aware of this when I started the discussion.  I accept the correction but wish for you to site the Surah and verse for me so I can see it myself. 

NAJAMSAHAR:

Secondly, Islam is about rights and responsibilities. If men start getting a prefernce because they are the breadwinners, then they get the responsibility of taking care of women who are without the qawwam. So if a mans female relative has no one to take care of her, he will take care of her affairs and if she has no money, he will provide for her!

BH:

I agree that for consistency's sake such would have ot be the case.

NAJAMSAHAR:

You are doing a pick and choose here. You want a part of Islam but then do not want to implement another part associated with it.

BH:

Yes, I guess I am guilty of doing such, but not on purpose.  I was not aware that a man was responsible for women other than his wife.

NAJAMSAHAR:

We women are given half of everything because the ones who are getting twice of our inheritance are going to be our providers for life. From fathers to sons to brothers and uncles and if she has no one, then the society.

BH:

Yes.

If you see many women have argued against this idea of your. We know that we have to fend for ourselves. Life is hard wherever you go, NorthAmerica, Saudi Arabia, India or China!

BH:

You're not kidding about life being hard.

NAJAMSAHAR:

Another issue is that in a low paying job this rule will not apply. How low do we go? What are some lowpaying jobs? Warehousing, labour, construction, cleaners? many of these jobs are unsuitable for women as they are based on physical strenght. And today a man working on this level is also taking care of his family and providing for them and women can be threat to his livelihood too. So where does it end?

BH:

I think I see what you are saying.  A man may be working hard and just barely able to support his wife and child, and then all of a sudden he has an invalid sister need his support to.

NAJAMSAHAR:

If you see many women have argued against this idea of your. We know that we have to fend for ourselves. Life is hard wherever you go, NorthAmerica, Saudi Arabia, India or China!

BH:

Life is hard.

NAJAMSAHAR:

At all economic levels, there will be people who can get by with what they have and those that want more. You can see the greed for more that drove wealthy people to resort to cheating and robbing when they already had far too much to last their life.

BH:

You're not kidding about this.  It also seems you have to be a liar to get a management job these days. 

NAJAMSAHAR:

Imagine a wife with a husband who is no longer able to provide for her. She has the right to leave him. But how many women do this? Most of us brace up and start providing. Whats wrong with this. Granted that this is a Quranic right, but what is the better option? To be kind and keep the family together or be up and away? What will please Allah more?

BH:

to love her husband and family and stay, though it might be tough on all.

NAJAMSAHAR:

In conclusion, BH,

If we did delve into the Quran and took your inference, seeing the above, how much would it help you? You may get jobs a tad easier, but then women are going to start demanding their rights and how easy will life be for men? Imagine providing for 2-3 women instead of one that fends for herself!

BH:

I see that you still have a potentially large problem yet to be dealt with.

NAJAMSAHAR:

Do you agree to my first reply about the competition thinning by 1% if we put your idea in place?

Najamsahar

BH:

Maybe.  I am not sure yet.

najamsahar wrote: BH Q 3) when we assume that a man should be given preference over a woman as he is the breadwinner, in this scene are the two candidates, one man and the second woman,  equally  qualified? Or if the man has a little bit lacking he is still given preference because his responsibilty comes into the reckoning? Najamsahar

I would say that for jobs that you had to go in knowing right off what you had to do (like a doctor) then qualifactions should count.

there are many positions where you can get trained for the job in a few days after being hired.  I am not so sure about them

What if both men and women are allowed to work and can hold any job they can get hired into, providing they are honest, moral ect?  This will allow the women to live up to their full potential and------

For the married men who must support a family, or sister, or female relative, why not let the government provide a job for him if one cannot be found in the private sector?

The man who wants to work but cannot find a job, he starts his own business (he can borrow money if does not have any) and employs other people.

But then if men and women are allowed to work in this system, how come this man has this family to support. If they live in dire times, and he is not able to provide for all, the women start to work too. The above scenario is paradoxical.

-Najamsahar

When the Prophet PBUH was asked about the plight of family of a man that could not survive after his death, He PBUH replied "they come to us" meaning the islamic community/state. This is Tirmidhi and Bukhari

Salem,

What if a divorced woman has to work because there are many bills from her 1st marriage that the Ex Husband will not pay and she needs a means to support herself, Is this haaram? Perhaps she gets married again, Is is okay for her to work until there are children?

Dear Suzanne

We are imagining an ideal situation here in this topic with the assumption that each and every man is extremely diligent about the responsiblity he has towards his family.

We all know that in these times, some men are far from responsible. Secondly, even if the men are responsible, life conditions are so hard that women are working to get some kind of financial cushion.

Islam has never prohibited women to work. The only situation that I can imagine it being Haram is when her husband has forbidden her to work. If her husband is okay with her working, no problems at all.

In the scenario you present, if the lady does not work, how else will she support herself?

InshaAllah she will get married and if her husband is okay with it, she can work regardless of whether she has children or no. However it is her right that she can ask her husband to be the sole provider.

Better these issues are cleared up before the marriage takes place.

-Najamsahar

najamsahar wrote: The man who wants to work but cannot find a job, he starts his own business (he can borrow money if does not have any) and employs other people. But then if men and women are allowed to work in this system, how come this man has this family to support. If they live in dire times, and he is not able to provide for all, the women start to work too. The above scenario is paradoxical. -Najamsahar

The woman though workling is not required to spend on her family like the husband is.

I do agree that the man becoming self employed is a good idea.

najamsahar wrote: When the Prophet PBUH was asked about the plight of family of a man that could not survive after his death, He PBUH replied "they come to us" meaning the islamic community/state. This is Tirmidhi and Bukhari

This is good.