While this week’s reading may initially seem to be more progressive than a lot of the conservative ideology previously covered in other resources this term, I do not agree that it can actually be labeled as progressive. It is certainly not a shift towards more liberal interpretations of the Quran, the Hadiths or centuries worth of clerical jurisprudence. Instead, I see the surprising stance presented this module about both artificial insemination and sex reassignment surgery as merely loopholes through which to shove previously established dogmas and understandings. To frame my meaning in terms of a much more familiar (to most of us) religious context, we see a lot of progressive branches of Christianity attempting to fundamentally change and challenge various verses and doctrines found within the Bible, admitting in many cases that previous understandings were incorrect, and often acknowledging the harm those misunderstandings have caused others. That is not, however, what we see happening in Islam, contrary to what Abdullahi An-Naim advoctates for in his essay, calling on the need for understandings of Shari’a law to be fluid.[1]
In Islam, we see scholars finding loopholes around firmly entrenched interpretations and understandings in light of increased knowledge, technology and science. We don’t see them admitting to misinterpretation or error, merely finding ways around precedent as in the case of transsexualism and the fact that it is accepted in Iran specifically because the Quran does not directly address it.[2] While it was surprising for me to learn about not only the legality of sex reassignment surgery in Iran, its frequency and also its relatively early inception compared to other nations, the logic behind it was heartbreaking. While there are no doubt legitimate transsexuals in Iran that have benefitted from this policy, there is equally no doubt that a large number of people who would identify as gay or lesbian have opted for the label of transsexual in a desperate attempt to escape both the social stigma of homosexuality and its potentially lethal criminal consequences.[3] In a culture and society where being gay is not only deeply shameful to the individual and their family but also illegal, seeking escape by a willingness to be certified as transsexual is a desperate bid for even a small portion of individual freedom, expression and potential safety – although safety is far from guaranteed.[4] While difficult to say it is striking how many similarities there could potentially be between Iran and the United States in terms of the stigmatization of gender bias in the case of MtF transsexuals verses FtMs. Safety is hardly guaranteed even here, and it is far more socially acceptable to be a FtM transsexual than the other way around – a clear example of how much further our society has to go to truly embrace notions of gender equality and a distancing of stigmatism based solely on gender bias.
Finally, it was a remark by Morgan Clarke that caught my attention this week to wrap up a particularly difficult (for me personally as a gay non-believer in the United States) module. He argues that no one can truly be called a liberal when they truly believe that God has set forth a standard which defines unequivocally the right way to live, but then goes on to highlight the importance of continuing to readjust the understanding of that standard. If that readjustment or “evolution” of beliefs does not occur, the core belief will cease being relevant within the context of our ever-changing modern world.[5]
[1] Abdullahi An-Na’im, “the Dichotomy Between Religious and Secular Discourse in Islamic Societies,” in Faith and Freedom: Women’s Human Rights in the Muslim World, ed. Mahnaz Afkhami (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1995), 58.
[2] Afsaneh Najmabadi, “Transing and Transpassing Across Sex-Gender Walls in Iran,” Women’s Studies Quarterly 36, no. ¾ (2008), 27.
[3] Ibid, 29.
[4] Ibid, 35.
[5] Morgan Clarke, “Children of the Revolution: ‘Ali Khamene’I’s ‘Liberal” Views on in vitro Fertilization,” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 34, no. 3 (2007): 302.
tabletalktaboosdotcom 