Mohammed Hijab – Fair Feminist Agrees With Muslim Logic

			The base of feminism is that men and women are politically, socially and economically.
		

			I say that, generally that's more true than false. Okay? I personally say yeah, that's okay. Why?
How can I prove that somebody also wants us to live.
		

			And they sell Chicago for the judge that men are equal to? Who's going to reject the idea of loss of
allies and allies? And this is actually a PSA here. And it's also generic. So it's generally true,
that men are more and women are equal, socially, politically or economically. Okay? Everyone
believes in exceptions, feminists believe in exceptions and and Muslims believe in exceptions. Yeah.
		

			I say that, from my perspective, as a Muslim, the exceptions I believe in are those which are
stipulating are
		

			the ones that kind of come all the time into controversial discussions, hijab being one example.
		

			Another major exception, I believe, is very difficult for feminists to swallow, is the role between
husband and wife.
		

			Okay, the Romans, though I made a video about this before, but let me talk about Islam.
		

			Islam regards mothers is more important than fathers point one,
		

			three times more more important than fathers. So if you were to ask me, who is more important, the
man or the woman in the context of parental responsibilities, I would have to say it's not a
perspective, the woman is more important. In fact, whenever Allah subhanaw taala, when he mentioned
the word leader in the Quran, he mentioned them with that. With that phraseology, well, he didn't
except for two or three different verses, when he they means those who gave love to you. So it took
about more specifically the mother and he found it when He then
		

			said, I'll work with both of your parents, because you're both your parents, but it's emphasizing
the mother more than the Father.
		

			So if the mother is more important than a man, in the context of a familiar relationship, familial
relationship, like in the family, and we have equal rights, that would mean that mothers are more
overall, generally more important than men. Why? Because if you think about if husband and wife are
5050, and mother and mother and father, then the woman's 75 in the match 25, then if you add up the
aggregate, then you'd have more for the woman than you would have for the man, in which case we
would say that wouldn't be equality with it, right. So in order for there to be equality, Allah
subhanaw taala has allowed for certain rules, certain things to be given to men, not to be given to
		

			women in the context of husband wife relationship. One of those things is called Emma. However,
Argento comunale. Men are maintained as a protectors of women. This color entails one specific
thing, if there is gridlock between the man and the woman, in relationship, husband and wife. And
there is no way of finding a resolution,
		

			then, and also the man doesn't transgress the woman's rights, fundamental rights, Islamic tribes.
And he doesn't say tell us to do something which is anti Islamic, then it's the man's opinion which
goes now this I believe, if you believe in this, which is actually something you must believe in as
a Muslim. And there's lots of a hadith that basically put this to, to practice so many days becomes
COVID, Akbar, if he does believe it, you become a disbeliever. If you believe this believe this
particular tenant, if you believe in that you've kind of come up feminism because feminism also
dictates inequality into domestic relationships between husband and wife. We say no, there is no
		

			equality there. Why? Because the mother has more superiority than the Father, and the husband has
more superiority than the wife. And if people don't accept that, then they have rejected Islam. So
from that angle, it's easy for someone. So this is really important point. Yeah, I believe that you
cannot be faithful to both traditions. If you understand properly, you can't be faithful to the
Islamic tradition, whilst at the same time being faithful to feminism for that reason. But
generally, though, I would say this, like a Venn diagram, it's not black and white. And there are
lots of there's lots of overlap in between. So where there's parts of overlap is the colleagues,
		

			generally speaking, the hokum and things like things like law.
		

			Law is the same for men and for women.
		

			And things like spirituality. It's the same for men and women in the law, they
		

			occur in our own survival coming back, Allah subhanaw taala doesn't like to waste any of the goods
from any of you if you're male or female. And both of you are from each other. So the question is,
How comes Islam allows the man to be more superior as a husband? Because he is let's be honest,
there is a degree of superiority there in settings in the case of divorce, for example, you can
easily divorce more easily than the wife, the wife could divorce. The man can divorce movies in the
making more variable wise, that's not equality. Actually, that's not equality, that you can't argue
that equality, that would be a good argument. If you got to it.
		

			You're a feminist Muslim, and you say, the man can marry for and the woman can't marry except for
one, and you're trying to sell us equality.
		

			Thank you. So so here we have
		

			that are certain exceptions. Yeah, you got it. So from that perspective, I think the and you agree
now that feminism until spiritual equality, and generally speaking political, economic and social
equality, we agree generally. But the minute shape is where we disagree with the broad, you know,
the the wide scale like, you know, that the feminist movement, because they wouldn't say that, for
example, a man could, for example, have the final say in the marriage, don't say, No, no, you can't.
Why should he? It should be complete equality, you get it? We say no, you don't even implement that
in your Parliament's, you don't know, you have first past the post system, which by the way, first
		

			past the post system is the least democratic system. This is a bit technical, but they could have
they could have had a V, they could have had proportional representation. Do you know why they've
chosen first past the post, knowing that it's less than democratic, because they want a decision
maker? Even if democracy is sacrificed, they don't mind having a decision maker that they don't mind
it. Why? Because they know that when you have a situation of gridlock, and you don't have any
decision being made, that creates contact creates confusion, that creates no movement forward. And
as Muslims, we say to them, okay, if you allow that in your Parliament's, why don't you allow in
		

			your, if you allow that on a macro level? Why not allow that micro level?
		

			If it works on a macro level, and it works on that level, then why not micro? It should be the same
logic. But then you'd have the question of who should have the who should be the one because the
perfect democracy, man and a woman when a woman who should be the one to break the gridlock, we say
the man, why because the woman has already a higher influential power with the kids. And this is a
big thing as in my, in my unit about what is more important, what is more?
		

			What is a greater power, the power to as Robert Dahl says, to get agents to do something that be
wouldn't otherwise want to do, or as backwards, embarrass them, microphones and do it, Michel
Foucault? And others say no, actually, is the power to influence the power is everywhere. And it has
the power to influence, okay, women have power and so much as their mothers, they have more power
than men. So how can we counteract that power, we have to counteract it by putting something in the
law. Because if you don't, you're gonna have transgressions of power, you're gonna have women
getting kids to turn against their fathers, because they have more control over them. And the father
		

			can't do anything to counteract that. You don't even have that American Constitution. You have
checks and balances in medical institution, such that the executive branch checks, the executive
branch checks the legislative, electric legislature, and they all check each other. And if you if
you eradicate that, and you say don't the woman and men should have the same decision making
capability all cases, then what you're doing is you're eradicating the checks and balances that
should exist in order for a functional system to take place. So if not, we say we have the solution.
This is the problem. And they don't have the solution. Let's look at the just go home today and look
		

			at the divorce rates from 1960 to 2017. Today, you'll realize that the divorce is going up and up
and up. Why because disagreements happen within marriages is one of the main reasons sociologists
talk about and they don't have any solution. How do you resolve I want this I want that how are you
going to resolve it? We say let the mind finish off. Just as we would say to say for example, the
kids they have a decision to make Who should I be better to? Who should I give them more time and
energy to microfiber? Let them let go to let them have an affinity to the mother. That way there's a
there's a pure equality which manifests itself in a different way. You see what I mean? Okay.
		

			Are you happy? You're happy.
		

			You're on the same page.