Muslimskt rundabordssamtal om våld mot kvinnor

Abstract

How should Muslims who live in a society like Sweden relate themselves to the laws of Shari'a that stands in sharp contrast to the Swedish laws? For example the verse in the Koran that allows a man to reprove his wife under certain circumstances using forcible means. Are all Muslims united in this matter? To judge by the discussions among a group of Muslim women who participated in a roundtable discussion at a summer camp in Sweden, in the summer of 2008 — we can establish the fact that there are different opinions in the subject.

One group believed Shari'a laws of that kind should be put on ice — i.e. not put into practice when they are in conflict with a modern perspective on humans. Another group maintained the verse of the Koran shouldn't be interpreted as an encouragement to physical assault of women. According to them the verse should be interpreted symbolically not literally. A third group considered the verse of the Koran as God's words that should be carried out without hesitation.

The roundtable discussion among the women in the summer camp is a miniature of the contemporary intern Muslim debate. Muslin organisations in the women's movement in Muslim countries that actively fights against abuse of women, and female and male theorists who believe the women hostile Shari'a laws should be interpreted through a historic-critical perspective, are to be gound as participants in the debate. The latter uphold such Shari'a laws to be seen as an expression for the patriarchal culture. Even here the opinion differ, however the common link is that the criticism is aimed towards the preferential rights of interpretation for men. Representatives for the historic-critical model are of the opinion that it creates distance from the recurring and endless drill on religious dogma and in return creates space for intellectual reflection.