Judge's justification: the woman is Muslim!
The judge decides that since the husband and wife are Muslims of Moroccan origins, the wife is not eligible for the speedy divorce because the Qur'an has a verse allowing the man to beat his wife. In other words, there's nothing to worry about here: it's just your typical Muslim man beating to a pulp his typical Muslim woman because the Qur'an orders him to do so. No cause for alarm. It's in their religion and their culture and probably their blood.
If the woman was a non-Muslim German, the judge would worry because violence against non-Muslim women is intolerable. But she's Muslim and violence in this case is seen as "culture as usual." Muslim women, everybody knows, have thicker skin.
So this German judge who is more Catholic than the Pope--so to speak-- considers it her legal duty to remind a Muslim woman who believes that her husband's abuse of her is intolerable that she is mistaken and that there is nothing out of the ordinary here. In other words, the judge is saying to the plaintiff: you are not a woman, you are a Muslim.
In my non-legal opinion, when you start seeing the people of a particular culture as creatures from outer space (or Muslim for short), then what you're practicing is not multiculturalism. It's called racism.
Now, you'll excuse me. It's time for my daily beating. It's in the Qur'an you know and as a Muslim woman I got to submit. If you don't believe me, ask the judge. She knows. She's German.
Afterthought: This post goes well with an earlier one "Do You Beat Your Wife?"
After Afterthought: those who can read Arabic may want to check the comment section on Al Arabiya. I'm glad to see that a healthy majority of respondents are horrified at the judge's interpretation.
23 comments:
This is completely shameful.
It's not a "Right" to beat. Stop making fun of Quran, you should know better
You know people take it into their own hands and interpretations. and Excuse me for saying the following but the type of people that lived 1000 years ago, beating was a common practice. Don't judge them from your 21st year old moral ivory tower and most certainly don't ridicule Quran
ok am not saying the judgment is right or wrong, putting my self in the judge's shoes I see it as cultural tolerance.
So yeah in that sense i think the judgment is not racist, cause understand one thing that either way she went we would have complained, cause we have both parties (the for and against)
As for Qwaider, so u realize what you are saying here ? that we can't take that advisement because it doesn't fit well in the 21st century ? from what i know about the issue you are allowed to do so but according to the recently popular thought not to physically harm, just emotional scaring :)
This is shameful. But there seems to be a trend of fear influencing courts, no one wants to make Muslims in the West mad, or to appear intolerant or disrespectful of their traditions.
I hope that woman, who had the sense to appeal to the law, appeals to a higher judge. I've had beaten girlfriends who couldn't wait to visit move back West so they could divorce and retain custody of their kids.
This is a quick response to Qwaider, No Angel, and Kinzi:
Qwaider said, "... (for) the type of people that lived 1000 years ago, beating was a common practice." -- That's true not only for Muslim history but also the history of the Christian West. English law did not try to limit a husband's violence against his wife until the 17th century when a statute was passed forbidding a husband to beat his wife with a stick thicker than his thumb (but he could still beat her). As for legal equality, even in the U.S., in most states, women did not have the right to own property in their own names until a little more than a century ago (in some states, not even that long ago).
To No Angel and Kinzi: No Angel mentioned the judge's cultural tolerance and Kinzi mentioned fear of enraging Muslim opinion -- In the case of that one single German judge, that judge might think of herself as respectful toward what she thinks is Muslim custom and might be afraid of inflaming Muslim opinion, but that judge's interpretation of the Koran seems very, very superficial. The Spiegel Online article did not say that that judge consulted any Muslim or non-Muslim scholars who might have provided insight into how to handle cases where German law appears, on a superficial interpretation of the Koran, to conflict with Muslim custom. That German judge doesn't seem to be the sharpest knife in the drawer, so to speak. The Spiegel Online article said that some German politicians are calling for the judge to be disciplined.
This case is precisely why in many countries in the west the shari'a courts are being discussed as an alternative.
About cultural tolerance, this is really confusing. I knew of a case in Montreal where a man (I really don't remember what country) got off the hook with rape because he said in his country that's considered normal practice.
The other thing is this problem of multiculturalism in which different ethnicities clamor for difference when they think they are assimilated but then clamor for sameness when it is in their best interests. What the judge seems to be following here is in spirit coming from that perspective of difference that all ethnicities clamor for.
If it is normal to beat women in Saudi Arabia and Jordon, how can you ask of a German judge not to take that into consideration in a case of law? My sense is that he must apply German civil law, but then I don't know the extent to which ethnicities there have asked to be treated differently from your everyday German.
So, there you go, this is not as simple as it is, and it is not about commonsense but it might be ensuing from the best principles of cultural tolerance that we all are fighting for. And, this is why multiculturalism is such a jungle...
So, I wouldn't just pull the gun on the judge...on the husband yes
I see this as a part of the continuing attack on arabs and muslims in Europe. As the hijab and niqab ban, this attack is happening to muslim women that are more vunerable in their community. This decision is denying the woman's right to live with out abuse and the right to a just divorce.
I think this is a tactic by the judge to divide, confuse and weaken the movement agaisnt arab and muslim racism.
Qwaider,
It amazes me how you miss the point completely. What I'm making fun here is the German judge and how she is interpreting the Qur'an and using that interpretation as the basis for what amounts to a racist argument.
no-angel,
I disagree. Not cultural tolerance, but racism as I made the case for it in my post. Under the guise of cultural tolerance people can say and do racist things. Cultures are not reified, they are not sacrosanct. Cultures are diverse and dynamic and contested all the time. Why did this judge decide to side with the man as a representative of the culture and not with the woman? Both are Muslims. Who told her that it's ok for a Muslim man to beat up his wife and threaten to kill her? Do you agree with that characterization of your culture as a Muslim woman or man?
Kinzi,
really? Muslims in the west are terrorizing the societies they are living in so judges are trying to not make them mad? The last I heard is that the niqab is banned in Holland for no good reason I know of, that British schools are going back on their policy of allowing Muslim women to wear what they want, and France banned hijabs etc from its schools not long ago.
There is no "trend" here. I'm always suspicious of the language of "trends." What we have is that European are suddenly discovering the Muslims among them, the immigrants, the brown people and are going after them with racist policies. The Muslims are on the defensive. They go to court to ask for protection from this racism.
James,
I agree with what you said. It's frustrating that one has to make the same argument we make to counter the Islamophobes to some Muslims and their friends.
ng,
I don't believe in this form of cultural tolerance. As I siad in my post, multicultrualism can tango with racism if we adopt a reified view of culture. If I don't have "cultural tolerance" to my culture back home (meaning I'm critical of aspects of it and would like it to change it), why would I suddenly embrace it in Canada or Germany? I refuse to accept that physical abuse of women and rape is part of my culture and if my culutre is going to be defined in this way to hell with it.
see how intolerant I am of "culture"?
The man who beat up his wife and claimed he has to do that because it's his culture and his right as a man is a sexist wife beating bastards.
The German Judge who accepted his argument is an ignorant racist.
anonymous,
I agree it's racist but I don't think this judge is capable of any plots to divide and confuse. She's just too confused herself.
Ok folks, I apologize for all the typos in the above posts. Got a huge cold with a huge headache. But you get my point. I hope.
I just dont see why a women judge would make this sort of position without a political agenda. There is a war of terror in Germany, too.
People arent racist without a political agenda, there is a reason they are racist, no way they live in vacuum. And in the case of the judge, she would be more connected/influenced by the politicians and lawmakers that enforce the war on terror then the poor woman and men that are the victims of it.
Anonymous,
I don't have any evidence to show that this judge was acting consciously to divide and confuse the Muslims and the anti racist camp. She's racist and literal minded, thinking that she is being "culturally tolerant"--this is what I gather from the news item about her.
I do know there is a war on terror in Germany.
Politically these racists have to continue the racist idealogy that fuels the war on terror. Even if it means ruling against innocent women.
The added bonus is to confuse people, evident in this comments discussion. In the war on terror they neeed also the idealogy to demobilize people to stop them from oppoing this racism.
You see a conspiracy, I see racism and people who are confused men dar abouhum! (on their own).
Let's face it: all it takes is some ignoramous (a German judge, a benighted Imam, the village idiot) to point at the Qur'an for some poeple to start popping their heads in agreement and reverence.
Their head popping makes me really dizzy.
What is the war on terror? Is it a conspiricy? I would not call it a conspiricy, but I would call it a plan and political agenda organized by the rulling elite, which the judge seems to agree with.
I dint think it is about religous interpretations, but a concious political decision.
everyone somehow miss your point, every single time!
Well, it's time for English classes for you I guess!
I didn't miss your point, but I take your withdrawal as a good sign. There is still hope for you!
Qwaider,
Why don't you just talk about yourself and let others speak for themselves?
"Withdrawal"?? You really don't get it at all. Talking to you, I hae to conclude, is a waste of time.
Here we are again, two adults with proper education, and happen to be almost on the same side. Yet we just can't get along or accept a little different version of the same story!
we are hopeless, I want a divorce!
Post a Comment