Women's Role In Religions

[arthra]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

Arthra, the evidence is simple - Baha'i is a religion that has the highest positions of authority reserved only for men. That makes it something of a patriarchal religion.

You can argue about the UHJ fulfilling the will of Baha'u'llah, but if the system set up is patriarchal, then that is what it is.

Any patriarchal religion can draw on a list of venerated list of women contributors - but that does not mean they are egalitarian or offer actual practical equality.

Sorry, Brian, I must still object to your characterizing the Baha'i Faith as a "patriarchal system".

Male dominated religions of the past I think relegated women to a very servial role and that is not what we Baha'is are about.

Here is the Baha'i view as expressed by `Abdu'l-Bahá:

"The world in the past has been ruled by force, and man has dominated over woman by reason of his more forceful and aggressive qualities both of body and mind. But the balance is already shifting; force is losing its dominance, and mental alertness, intuition, and the spiritual qualities of love and service, in which woman is strong, are gaining ascendancy. Hence the new age will be an age less masculine and more permeated with the feminine ideals, or, to speak more exactly, will be an age in which the masculine and feminine elements of civilization will be more evenly balanced."

"Bahá'u'lláh and the New Era", p. 141

We're actually interested in dismantling some of the social structures that maintain patriarchal society such as the removal of authority from individuals and the decentralization of power.

Formerly many religions had male priesthoods that dominated society. Baha'u'llah has abrogated priesthood.

The role of the man as head of the family is another feature that Baha'i teachings deal with:

"The purpose, in brief, is this: that if woman be fully educated and granted her rights, she will attain the capacity for wonderful accomplishments and prove herself the equal of man. She is the coadjutor of man, his complement and helpmeet. Both are human; both are endowed with potentialities of intelligence and embody the virtues of humanity. In all human powers and functions they are partners and coequals."

"Promulgation of Universal Peace", pp. 135-7. 

So to simply characterize the Baha'i Faith as a patriarchal system is inaccurate I think and doesn't do the subject justice by a any means!

- Art

[Silverbackman]

I disagree with the Baha'i view that there should be no distinction between men and women. First of all that is impossible, because men are men and women are women, but to try to destroy femininity and masculinity is a very dishonorable deed, what would life be without femininity and masculinity?

IMHO men and women are equal spiritually under the eyes of God. But God (whether you call Him nature, Brahma, Yahweh, or whatever) did create men and women different from each other. In other words men and women are equal but different. Men are designed for different roles than women, and vice versa but most roles overlap you can say. If God created women and men to have no distinction, then he would have only created one gender . God doesn't care what gender you are, but he did intend for men and women to be different IMHO.

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by arthra

Sorry, Brian, I must still object to your characterizing the Baha'i Faith as a "patriarchal system".

A patriarchal system is simply one where highest authority is reserved only for the men.

Unless I am mistaken, the Universal House of Justice is the highest spiritual and administrative authority for the Baha'i movement on earth - and if these positions are reserved only for men, then the Baha'i movement is indeed patriachal.

Many Muslims, Christians, and Jews, tell of how important women are in their societies, and how they have often been commanded to treat them as equal - but where these Faith's have systems that resolve final authority only to men, then they are properly classed as patriarchal.

A council of men as the highest authority is patriarchal under any conceivable definition.

Here is a link you may find helpful (sorry it didn't work before): Definitions of patriarchal on the Web

[Awaiting_the_fifth]

Arthra,

I know that your religion gives equality to men and women, but can you not see that the administration of your religion is biased towards men?

A good analogy would be a company which employs both men and women at middle management and below but refuses to allow women to work as company directors. Such a company would undoubtably be sued(sp) for sexual discrimination, and rightly so.

[9Harmony]

Originally Posted by Silverbackman

I disagree with the Baha'i view that there should be no distinction between men and women. First of all that is impossible, because men are men and women are women, but to try to destroy femininity and masculinity is a very dishonorable deed, what would life be without femininity and masculinity?

IMHO men and women are equal spiritually under the eyes of God. But God (whether you call Him nature, Brahma, Yahweh, or whatever) did create men and women different from each other. In other words men and women are equal but different. Men are designed for different roles than women, and vice versa but most roles overlap you can say. If God created women and men to have no distinction, then he would have only created one gender . God doesn't care what gender you are, but he did intend for men and women to be different IMHO.

Hi Silver,

I don't think the Baha'i view is that there should be no distinction between men and women. My understanding is that men and women are different, but equally important. We have different strengths which compliment each other.

I like the analogy of the bird, men and women are the two wings of a bird, and not until both are fully developed, will the bird truly be able to fly. (the bird being humanity)

So i really don't think you disagree with the Baha'i understanding.

Have a great day!

[arthra]

Brian,

I agree with the definitions of "patriachal" you've referred to but they by and large do not apply to the Baha'i Faith or it's goals and principles.

Once again.. We DO NOT endorse a patriachal system.

Check out your definitions:

A patriarch (from Greek: patria means father; arch?eans rule, beginning, origin) is a male head of an extended family exercising autocratic authority, or, by extension, a member of the ruling class or government of a society controlled by senior men.


A social system of male supremacy. Power and significance resides in the father of a family group or clan, and this is passed down through the male heirs.

social organization in which political power is held by males.

A system of social relations whereby the senior, decision-making member of the group, clan or tribe is a male elder.

Societies in which women defer to men; societies run by men and based on the assumption that men naturally directed political, economic, and cultural life.

"Male-centered and controlled. . . organized and conducted in such a way as to subordinate women to men in all cultural domains, religious, familial, political, economic, social, legal, and artistic"

a collective dominated by men, a society which identifies the male as the norm or standard by which all are judged

______________________

None of the above apply.

There are ten thousand localities around the world where Baha'is have communities, they are all open equally to men and women;

Baha'is do not endorse the model of the patriachal family but rather a model where both share in decisions and consult as equals.

The education of women is stressed more than that of men.

Social developement projects stress the health, education and well being of women.

Our International Community also supports the United Nations convention against discrimiantion against women.

Also equality is not uniformity...women have talents and abilities and strengths that are as important and valuable as men but men are not more exalted or placed on a higher pedestal.

- Art

[lunamoth]

But wasn't the Guardianship also meant to be passed from male heir to male heir, although that was interupted when the Guardian Shoghi Effendi did not appoint the next Guardian before his Ascension?

I agree that the Baha'i Faith does a much better job emphasizing the equality of men and women in its scriptures and promoting the two wings, as Amy pointed out, than most other religions before it. However, many denominations of Christianity are even more egalitarian than the Baha'i Faith and because of the Baha'i laws of interpretation and the termination of the earthly role of the Guardianship, there is no chance that women will be allowed to serve on the UHJ until the next Manifestation arrives, according to Baha'i teachings.

As much as the role of the UHJ is downplayed as a central authority in the posts above, it remains that it is the ultimate and only active authority of the Baha'i Faith. All other spiritual assemblies of local and national orders obey the the UHJ. Indeed, every individual Baha'i turns to the UHJ for guidance.

Finally, the inheritance laws of Kitab-i-Aqdas also show a bias toward the male heir, although granted one is free to write their will to speicify it as otherwise.

peace,
lunamoth

[arthra]

Luna moth:

I think what we've seen in the past century is a transition from male dominance in religion to a more egalitarian concept.... For Baha'is this also means actually supporting the liberation of women in many areas of the world...and working toward seeing that needed educational and health services are provided. Many areas of the world women cannot read and vulnerable to exploitation.

The office of a minister or priest is another area that we Baha'is would probably differ with many Christians about. That more women are accepted now as priests and ministers is coming about and people may feel this is more egalitarian but we Baha'is would feel that role is again one where there is still dominance and authority. Yes it was held by men before and now more by women but the institution is still there.

It's true the Guardianship was supposed to have been passed to male heirs, but that's a mute point today. It's true the Universal House of Justice consists of males elected every five years but male dominance is not a Baha'i teaching as you recall.

- Art

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by arthra

I agree with the definitions of "patriachal" you've referred to but they by and large do not apply to the Baha'i Faith or it's goals and principles.

Once again.. We DO NOT endorse a patriachal system.

Arthra, I don't see how you can at all avoid applying the term patriarchal with reference to the Baha'i faith.

You are keen to stress that women are well veiwed within the Baha'i movement, and that there are many communities where women have equal local responsibilities - but you seem to shrink away from the fact that your administrative body is ruled by a male elite.

Poetry and bird wings as may be, but practical fact appears to be an organisation that answers ultimately only to male authority, to the exclusion of the female voice.

And that is what male dominance is - it is not does not necessarily equate with misogyny nor of violence to women, but simply the subjugation of female authority - and it appears very much enshrined in how the Baha'i movement is administrated at the highest level of authority. That would very much be a patriarchal system.

[9Harmony]

Hi everyone!

I acknowledge that to those looking in from the outside it may have the appearance of a patriarchal system. And I can actually understand that.

But as a Baha'i and as a woman, I do not see it that way.

I personally would not want the responsibility of serving on the Universal House of Justice. Being the first educator of my children, how could I possibly do that adequately while simultaneously serving the entire Baha'i world? Those who are elected to serve on the Universal House of Justice basically give up having any personal life of their own. To me it seems to be more of a show of God's mercy to women. I think there is a wisdom enshrined within that escapes the average onlooker.

On the whole, women have made more progress in the past 100 years than they have made in all prior recorded history. Tremendous progress has been made with regards to womens rights. Yet, some parts of the world are still very backwards, a balance is still needed. Also, we often see how good things taken to extremes can produce negative results. Moderation in all things, is still necessary.

Some Baha'i's like to speculate amongst themselves about the reasons for this, one of my favorites is that perhaps the next manifestation will be a woman, and it will be up to an all male Universal House of Justice to recognize her. But that's all it is, speculation, truth is, we don't know why, and probably won't in our lifetime, that honor is to be bestowed on a future generation. But I'm okay with that. I don't feel oppressed or deprived. I feel liberated.

I believe things are unfolding according to Gods plan, all things in Gods time, not ours.

Have a nice evening!

-Amy

[arthra]

Brian,

I doubt very much we're going to reach agreement on this topic as I've already stated my reasons previously...

Your characterization of my Faith as "an organisation that answers ultimately only to male authority, to the exclusion of the female voice" is also to me inaccurate.

- Art

[I, Brian]

9Harmony, mercy or not, if the system is male-dominated then surely that is a sign of a patriarchal system? It seems that you're making an almost apologetic statement with regards to allowing men to dominate the Baha'i movement at the highest level.

I know you may not agree with that concept - heck, I hear a common complaint amongst Muslim women that they do not feel oppressed, and that if God has willed issues such as use of the burkha, then that s not patriarchal, but simply Divine Will.

It seems that the Baha'i perspective may be something along those lines - that because Baha'u'llah has decreed equality, that therefore any actual inequality is simply regarded as a different form of "equality". Does that make sense?

It doesn't make much sense from the outside, though - I should have referenced them earlier, but I don;t see how the following references raised do not apply to the UHJ position within the Baha'i movement:

Originally Posted by arthra

A patriarch (from Greek: patria means father; arch?eans rule, beginning, origin) is a male head of an extended family exercising autocratic authority, or, by extension, a member of the ruling class or government of a society controlled by senior men.


A social system of male supremacy. Power and significance resides in the father of a family group or clan, and this is passed down through the male heirs.

social organization in which political power is held by males.

A system of social relations whereby the senior, decision-making member of the group, clan or tribe is a male elder.

I'm not trying to judge the Baha'i faith, but I simply find it odd that where I'm told that your organisation is headed by males at the exclusion of women, that this is actually said to be a form of equality - some are more equal than others?

[Bandit]

all religions do something. if it is not this, it is something else. they say one thing on the outside, the writings say something else, & when you get inside what they say is something different, or there is a long explanation for it.

every religion does something or has some kind of doctrine that does not add up all the way through.

that is just the way religion is.

from what i can see a woman can do everything in the minsitry, except Pastor, because then you have a woman excercising authority over the men, not just one husband but all of the men.

2 cents

[arthra]

Brian wrote:

I'm not trying to judge the Baha'i faith, but I simply find it odd that where I'm told that your organisation is headed by males at the exclusion of women, that this is actually said to be a form of equality - some are more equal than others?

My comment:

It really does feel like a you are judging Brian... Problem is it's not as simple as you present

and maybe we should have some more talks about that.

- Art

[I, Brian]

Can you understand why your position seems odd, though? It's simply an issue of applying a general definition, whose basis is that a patriarchal system is one where the ultimate authority is exclusively male.

I'm simply surprised you have so much difficulty accepting such a general definition and applying it within your own Faith.

It's just a discussion issue, though.