Is polygamy an islamic tradition?
There are quite a lot of examples of polygamy in Kyrgyzstan. I know a man who lives in one of the villages nearby Karakol town and has four wives and thirteen children. One can get an impression that they all live happily and treat each other well: children love each other equally and call their father’s wifes a mother. Another inhabitant of the same village is a 50-year-old man who has one official family, and two unofficial wifes and children with them. In this case, both women agreed to such an “illegal” marriage because of financial benefits that their husband can offer to them and their chidlren. At the same time, these wifes absolutely have no rights to claim something as their marriage is not registered. And their husband has neither civil nor moral responsibility.
It is not a secret that nowadays many impoverished women do not hesitate to make an already married man happy by becoming his second, third or fourth wife. This leads to an argument that it is necessary to legalize polygamy in Kyrgyzstan in order to protect rights of second, third and fourth wifes. Does it not sound ridiculous, I would ask. According to kyrgyz law, polygamy is a criminal action and during soviet times it used to be a taboo. Nonetheless, polygamy has turned into a very common exercise, especially in southern part of the country. Some argue that polygamy is an islamic tradition and a natural way of life of muslim people.
According to a national survey conducted by International Republican Institute in May 2007, 67 percent of the population think that polygamy is unacceptable, 14 percent say it is more or less acceptable, and 17 percent believe that polygamy is a pretty normal phenomenon. Marat Kayipov, Minister of Justice of Kyrgyz Republic declares that polygamy is not a ciminal action and a man who feeds several families is not a criminal. Those who favor polygamy argue that it equally protects women rights, resolves the problem of poor women and their children, and reduces the number of prostitutes. Does it correspond to the reality?
on July 2nd, 2007 at 11:40 pm
How does polygamy reduce the number of prostitutes? Maybe these men with multiple wives are marrying street prostitutes? If 67 percent of the population declare that polygamy is unacceptable, and the Minister of Justice is a true representative of the people and the laws of Kyrgyzstan, then it doesn’t matter what the Minister of Justice’s personal feeling is about polgamy. The Minister of Justice should do what the people he represents expect him to do…. his job…and his job is to see that the current Kyrgyz laws are carried out in Krgyzstan.
on July 3rd, 2007 at 8:53 am
I’ll bite.
Polygyny, from an economic point of view, can be said to favor women. Say the world has 2 men — one an attractive mate and the other unattractive, and 2 women — same deal.
With monogamy. One woman will by definition either marry an unattractive mate or not wed at all. With polygyny, both women can have the man of their dreams.
In the real world, women outnumber men, so if monogamy is the only option, the excess women will go unwed. This is exacerbated following a loss in the male population, as following a war.
While polygyny may be good for individual women, it is bad for peace in society. A surplus of “bare branches,” as the Chinese call unmarriable young men (in their case because of female infanticide), can cause massive social disruption. So while polygyny might sponge up excess women, it would likely also increase the demand for prostitutes, as well as countless other social ills.
on July 3rd, 2007 at 10:11 am
“Is polygamy an Islamic tradition?”
No, not by itself I think. Polygamy already existed in a number of pre-Islamic civilisations (Israël, China, Persia, pre-Islamic Arabia and even Byzantium) and in present-day non-Islamic cultures (the Mormons, several native African cultures).
The thing is also, I think, that there is a difference between having informal concubines which exists in many cultures and civilisations, and institutionalised polygamy as it exists in Islam through clear dispositions in the Holy Quran and the Hadiths.
I think it’s typical in societies where it is functional due to systems of property organisation or with a high mortality rate or absence of males because of warfare and labour migration. Nowadays, in many cases, it has more to do with traditionalism than with Islam.
According to some estimates (The New Encyclopedia of Islam, 2002) the actual number of formal polygamous marriages in the Muslim world is not more than 3%. Yet monogamous marriages where the husband has one or more concubines (‘mistresses’) will likely be much more than that.
For those interested in reading more on the issue, I’d suggest an article on www.islamicweb.com . There is no direct url to paste so go to ‘Misconceptions’ and click ‘Myth: In Islam women are inferior to men’
As for resurgent polygamy in Kyr, Uzb, Taj… and other Muslim-majority Soviet countries, that has only partly to do with Islam. In a number of cases it has, or at least, those concerned justify it that way especially in the provinces. But in cities like e.g. Bishkek and Tashkent with their pornocracies, and especially among thes so-called ‘krutoi’ types, it has more to do with a loser definition of ‘manhood’ that revolves around 1) a cult of heavy drinking and 2) treating women like shit, which involves having a bevvy of girlfriends and hanging out with prostitutes.
on July 3rd, 2007 at 3:30 pm
Polygamy has been allowed by Islamic Law with absolute and very strict conditions. It is not as casually said that Islam allows four wives who without proper explanation may cause the type of thinking nowadays that women are taken for granted and are inferior to men.
Divine Law (Islamic Law) is not man-made and does not go by votes/polls taken to determine its acceptance or rejection. The creation of the world is the doing of God Almighty and we as human beings have no say in the Makers Plans but to accept. Polygamy declared by Almighty as permissible with of course stringent conditions.
on July 3rd, 2007 at 9:44 pm
Polygamy IS an Islamic tradition. Allah orders in chapter Nisa (arab. ‘women’), verse 3 of Koran’: “…marry women of your choice; two, three or four..”. In the same verse though it continues to read: “but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then marry only one…”. In the same chapter, verse 129: “..you are never able to to be fair and just as between women..”
So, as of today Islamic scholars agitate only monogamy. Go to arabic countries (where many think polygamy is widely practiced), you will find hardly anyone having two wives. Perhaps, only among ridiculously rich sheykhs.
Some Islamic scholars also say that polygamy was allowed, because many women were left widows and children orphans, due to long time wars and battles.
Polygamy in Kyrgyzstan - Polygamers have to be fined. Engaging religious leaders to promote monogamy would not be bad either. I also think politicians should care more about supporting women, give them jobs and equal rights, make initiatives. Society has to become more tolerant towards women.
I dont think any of those women grew up hoping to become second wife to someone, neither did their parents.
on July 4th, 2007 at 9:14 am
“Polygamy IS an Islamic tradition.”
Islam, through the Quran and the Hadiths, has REGULATED it but did not INVENTED it (cf. the presence of polygamy in many pre-Islamic and a couple of present-day non-Islamic cultures).
on July 4th, 2007 at 11:16 am
Jamiyat,
that’s the thing with rich people; they promote the idea of polygamy on state and judiciary level to justify themselves as some of the deputees in the parliament have second wives, and even children with them. So instead of supporting women by providing more jobs and equal rights, they are thinking about themselves by looking out for ways to legalize their actions. I would also put a big part of responsibility on women as they give their consent to be SECOND. I surveyed some women I know are somehow related to a married man, most of them don’t care if it is legal or not, they are just happy to be “loved” and taken care. So, unless men don’t get punished, the problem won’t be resolved
on July 4th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
Interesting discussion and some good information re Islam and polygamy. I’ll throw my 2 cents in. I don’t think that here in Bishkek polygamy has much effect on prostitution. Their services will be used regardless of the number of wives one may have. Polygamy has pre-Islamic roots and existed/exists in a number of cultures for various different historical reasons. Legalizing it has some real blow back potential as does a high profile resistance to legalizing it and drawing attention to the lack of enforcement of the existing law. Better to let sleeping dogs lie and not stir up a hornets nest; better to pick small “battles” that can be won in terms of the ongoing progression of woman’s rights. Regarding sex ratios, in normal human populations (exceptions being cases such as contemporary China and India) more males are born (approx 105-106 to 100), but the ratio balances out at some point and reverses later in life. Of course there are exceptions, especially in small populations,
on July 5th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
Islam, through the Quran and the Hadiths, has REGULATED it but did not INVENTED it (cf. the presence of polygamy in many pre-Islamic and a couple of present-day non-Islamic cultures).
hang on - Jamiyat didn’t claim that polygamy is an Islamic invention, but that it is an Islamic tradition. Religions have often adopted tenets of other faiths or absorb pre-existing cultural and societal norms and then judged them ‘legitimate’. Hence, polygamy, a practice which, as Ataman and Tobyji rightly points out, pre-existed Islam, susequently became an ‘Islamic tradition’.
Likewise, Mecca was a pilgrimage spot long before the Prophet Muhammed received his first revelations, but now the Hajj is one of the 5 Pillars of Islam and is regarded as an ‘islamic tradition’. Anyway, this is all semantics - but it does shed light on the use (and, sometimes, abuse) of ‘traditional’ religious, cultural and societal practices to serve the needs of new creeds.
on July 7th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
I don’t think the speculation that polygamy (i.e. one man, many wives) would benefit women holds much water. Women aren’t in a tougher situation because it’s difficult to marry “the man of their dreams”, as someone above mentioned. Their situation is more difficult because Kyrgyzstan remains a significantly patriarchal society, even though the Soviets made significant efforts to equalize the sexes. In fact, if anything the society is becoming *more* patriarchal: one major post-independence factor of Kyrgyz society is the attempt to define what it means to be Kyrgyz and a big part of that involves pushing back the influence of Soviet (and Russian) society and focusing on perceived traditions. Hence, more polygamy and more bride-stealing (among other things). Legalizing polygamy will not help Kyrgyz women since such legality does nothing to enhance women’s rights or position within society. If anything it degrades both since polygamy tends to strengthen the idea of woman as chattel. As long as Kyrgyz society continues to become more patriarchal the position of women within it was be reduced. Instead, what would make a difference is enabling those women who have two options - marry or be poor - to not *have* to get married in order to avoid poverty.
on July 9th, 2007 at 9:51 am
“that’s the thing with rich people; they promote the idea of polygamy on state and judiciary level to justify themselves as some of the deputees in the parliament have second wives, and even children with them”.
Good point Asel, shows yet again, where state money flows or in whose pockets it lands.
And thanks Nick.
A random question: Are you guys about to kick the American base out of Kyrgyzstan during the ShanghaiCO summit?
on July 9th, 2007 at 10:25 pm
The number of women is 3 times that of men
any proposals???
The polygamy cannot be only related to Islam since there are many such families in other countries without an islamic background —> take Russian Federation…
on July 9th, 2007 at 11:06 pm
Matt, here is the thing with most women in Kyrgyzstan; they prefer to be any wife, second, third or whatever, just to escape the poverty and being alone, as the society is pretty harsh towards those who raise thei children alone, called mat’-odinochka. By all means, the try to marry or re-marry, just to be called a wife and not a single mother. And, Aibek is right, Russian leaders are also pushing for the new law on polygamy, especially Jirinovsky who is famour for his bizarre ideas and proposals.
on July 10th, 2007 at 4:44 pm
In general, the idea of polygamy questions the standard of a so-called ‘normal’ family which consists of one woman, one man and children. I support the concept of challenging this issue, yet I find it very unfair that only men are allowed to have many wives.
The idea of ‘bare branches’ sounds a little Nazi-like to me. Human lives are not about reproduction these days and you cannot force people to procreate and marry everybody off. It is part of human rights that human beings have a right to marry or not and give birth or not on their free will.
I will try to provide on my blog views of organizations which work on women’s issues in Kyrgyzstan and their experiences with polygamy in Kyrgyzstan, as now the discussion is very much based on people’s beliefs, rather than factual information.
Couple of points:
1. Many Kyrgyz women especially in rural areas live in marriages blessed by mullahs and not registered in ZAGS, which means that they have legally no rights for shared property or alimony in case of their ‘husband’ leaving them. Therefore, ‘wives’ in polygamous marriages would be left without any rights in case their partner decides to move on to another woman.
2. A polygamous family would have more children and given that the family is very traditional, both or more women would not be working outside of home and, therefore, it could be a household with single male breadwinner which puts the family in poverty.
3. The economic incentives of marrying for women are overestimated, yet as the employers expect women’s income to be supplementary to that of their husband, they are likely to pay women less. Then it becomes a social problem with again women not being able to manage on their own. In general, it is better to have a society with educated, informed and empowered citizens who are able to produce own income instead of depending on others. Economically, polygamy is not sustainable unless there is a functional division of responsibilities. (search for polygamy in Uganda, for example).
2.
on July 12th, 2007 at 10:55 am
“Human lives are not about reproduction these days”
Well, maybe not in terminally decadent societies like Europe and parts of the US where post-feminist selfishness and the pc promotion of homosexuality have become a tiranny in its own right.
“The number of women is 3 times that of men any proposals???”
I assume that this is related to Kyr, but where do you get than number from Aibeque?
Even though the official/internatioan data and population charts (eg. http://www.tkb.org/images/pyramids/originals/kg-pp.png ) might not fully reflect reality as well, I think this ‘1 for 3′ rate is pure nonsense.
I mean, such imbalances occured in history in areas with a disproportionally high mortality rate among men due to war (eg. parts of Poland and the Western USSR after WWII). But it’s not that case in Kyr even if more men are absent due to labour migration or die early due to the secular virtue of alcoholism.
It’s not the first time that I hear about the ‘1 for 3′ thing. It’s a myth that started to lead its own life and is also pulled out, amongst others by persons in mailorder bride and traficking schemes to justify their ‘busineses’.
on July 12th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
Ataman Raqin,
Interesting value judgements about Western socieities. How do you feel about women in general? Is their only role in life to bear and raise children? What is selfish about deciding not to have children?
As for ‘pc promotion of homosexuality’, come on! Take any media, any social institution, what kind of lifestyle are they promoting? Mostly heterosexual and mostly for white men (also true in Kyrgyzstan unfortunately).
on July 12th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
“How do you feel about women in general?”
I have no particular problem with them. Why should I? In fact I am married an have a kid with one so I know what I’m talking about. I have a lot of respect and admiration for women — at least for those who *deserve* (!) respect. A woman’s beauty is in her dignity.
Likewise, I believe that liberal and bankrupt left-wing ‘gender’ concepts, for all their illusions of moral superiority, do not have the universal anwers on women’s issues.
It’s nonsense to claim that men and women are equal. We’re not. We’re complementary.
“Is their only role in life to bear and raise children?”
No it’s not their *only* role, Anna, but one of their natural key roles and many women agree with that.
“What is selfish about deciding not to have children?”
Look, at the end of the day, each women’s natural core wish is to have children even among those who boldy pretend they do not because of their ‘friidum’. I’ve observed that many times. Of course there can be reasons not to: lesbianism; obsessive materialism; certain family traumas; etc.
Biologically, the main purpose of reproduction is to continue the specie and the family, which is society’s basic entity. The deterioration of this entity is a major symptom of a civilisation’s terminal decadence.
on July 13th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
Ataman Raqin,
We obviously have very different perceptions of women’s roles. And I am a woman myself. I do not believe in biological differences making people’s destiny. I would appreciate more opinions coming from women themselves without men speaking on their behalf as this is usually done. Do female readers of Neweurasia feel that their ‘core’ wish is to have children?
Is it natural for men to want children?
How biological are humans really these days? How biological is the society as a mix of different SOCIAL units?
What exactly is ‘complementary’ about men and women? What happens to women and men who cannot have children for some reason?
on July 21st, 2007 at 9:47 pm
Hmm there’s not much of a feminist — oopsssorry: gender — solidarity wave, isn’t there Anne?
lol
on July 24th, 2007 at 12:47 am
Ataman Rakin: your last comment was unhelpful and unnecessary. It is snide comments such as this, which contribute nothing, that deterr potential commentors from contributing to discussions. Lively debate is one thing and a plurality of views is positively encouraged, but disrespectful jibes are not welcome.
Future comments of a similar nature will be subject to moderation.
on July 30th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
OK aunt Siv. I won’t do it again, promised.
on October 25th, 2007 at 11:39 pm
I don’ support polygamy. It’ s awuful from the woman’s point of view to feel that you are the second or third and have no equal right with other
on November 24th, 2007 at 1:11 am
According to the table Ataman depicts us, ” the number is 3 times that of men” only for seniors
at other ages number of males = number of women ???