Muslim Brotherhood & Women’s Rights (4)

In this section, we present the fatwas of the Brotherhood and their philosophy on several aspects related to women and their rights.

Fourth: Dress Code

The Brotherhood evinces an avid interest in the dress of women and their outer appearance. In truth, the essence of this entrenched attitude is that ‘women’s liberation’ is one of the vestiges of imperialism, advertised and promoted only by colonial proxies. To the Brotherhood, women is to be locked inside the house and never leave it; no need of her work outside and no benefit can be derived out of her attention to adornment, beauty or overall femininity.
In issue No. 54, released in October 1980, there is that one fatwa that best manifests a holistic model of the Brotherhood’s attitude.
A female university student asks about their stance on explicit calls for abandoning the hijab (i.e. the headscarf) and those attempts to make fun of committed Muslim women.
The answer comes as follows:
“Well, the twentieth-century movement of women’s liberation was called for by servants of colonialism in the Islamic world. The irony of it is that those who claim to speak for Islam, are the ones who are trying to demoralize the Muslim family system. With a heavy heart, we say that public morality has debased; and women are paying the heavy price on account of their arrogance, dissipation and intermixing with stranger men. The jurists of all times unanimously agree that the woman’s whole body is Awrah except for her face and hands; while they disagree whether her ‘face’ is an Awrah or not (lest it is tempting). All Muslims are fully aware of this scholarly consensus. God –Almighty- says in the Quran: “O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.”
The mufti continues: “Those who think that Islam is biased against women, who are, in this modern age, in need of liberation and work, and that Islam has not offered anything to her yet, are on a par with enemies of Islam who are regurgitating such notions day in and day out. God–Almighty- describes, them as saying: “Those who love that immorality should spread among the believers, will have a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter. And Allah knows, and you know not.” Such an attitude evinces less or no knowledge of the religion of Islam. Those who mock or oppose the Hijab or any other rite of Islam, have put themselves in an unenviable situation of having lost both this world and the world to come. Undoubtedly, such shameful acts or sayings turn people away from Islam.
For instance, God–Almighty- says: “Not a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that there should be a choice for them in the matter concerning them. And whoso disobeys Allah and His Messenger surely strays away in manifest error.” In addition, He says: “… So let those who go against His command beware lest a trial afflicts them or a grievous punishment overtakes them.”

Critique:
The Brotherhood insists that the corrosion of public morals should be blamed only on women going out wantonly unveiled and beautifully adorned as if public morality has always been perfect down the centuries. The Brotherhood adamantly stresses that the ‘juristic consensus’ is grounded on the fact that women’s entire body is Awrah, though, some other Jurists differ over whether her ‘face’ is an Awrah or not (lest it is tempting). The Brotherhood ‘s mufti propounds that “as we live in an age full of temptations, there is no doubt that the women’s face is an Awrah, too.” This is the version of moderation adopted by the Brotherhood to counter extremism! Additionally, Egyptian women are in need of liberation and work; and anyone who thinks otherwise, is an complete ignorant of Islam.”
The Brotherhood’s mufti neither give the specific reasons of this ignorance, nor do they provide an integrated and convincing argument to prove that Egyptian women do not need their freedom and labor rights!
The Brotherhood’s attitude towards women is tantamount to “sheer lunacy” to the extent that they have to judge the “tailor” or “dressmaker” whose job is to adjust, repair and make clothes, especially someone who makes short and close-fitting clothes as requested by the female customer. If you think questions on this trivial point are very bizarre, then how about the answers that are no less than freakish and outlandish.
In Issue No. 21, released in February, 1978, comes the following answer:
“Concerning the profession of tailor, it is forbidden if the tailor knows that such clothes, he/she is making, will be worn by women outside the house. He will be an accomplice in the sin as much as the wearer (i.e. the sinning woman) will. However, if the tailor adheres to what pleases God, God will shower His favors and bounties (upon him) and provide him/her from wherever they never imagined. God–Almighty- says:” And he who fears Allah — He will make for him a way out, and will provide for him from where he expects not.”
The Brotherhood’s mufti advises: “Here what the tailor has to do. First, to ask the customer if these ‘sexy’ clothes will to be worn outside the house, if the answer is yes, then such work and will be forbidden; and its gains are illicit. What if the clothes are pre-made and in no need of a tailor? Should retailers refrain from selling them unless the consumer promises that they will be worn indoors? Is it permissible to display such clothes in storefronts?
As we can see such minor and trivial issues are made important and main concerns of the abstruse discussions of the Brotherhood. Such idiocy goes on and on!
In issue No. 33, released in February 1979, a question was asked about the permissibility of Wudu (i.e. ritual ablution) when having fingernails or toenails polished.
Al-Dawah magazine answers:
“If the nail polish would prevent water to reach the nails, it must be removed since it invalidates the ritual ablution. However, if nail polish is just a color, ablution then is valid. A Muslim woman must lead a normal life away from blind imitation. She is strongly exhorted not to spend her time in such frivolous matters that avail her nothing; neither in the affairs of her religion or life.”
What is truly baffling about the answer is not the ruling on the validity of the ritual ablution; but rather, it is the view that sees woman’s self-care as spending time in frivolities, as if adornments are contrary to religion and life!
The Brotherhood’s overall rigid attitude towards women can be extrapolated from an detailed response to a question in issue No. 9, released in February 1977.
The question is from a Law female student about the legality of using nail polish and putting powders on the face, wearing trousers (or pants) and jackets as uniform for females, and going out of the house.
The answer comes as follows:
Firstly: “Any clothes worn by the woman outside the house and in public places must cover all her beauties. Such beauties include the head hair and the lower part of the neck, all the neck must be covered if it might lead to temptation. Her clothes should cover all her body except the face and the hands; her clothes should not be tight so as not define the figure of her body. If these conditions are met in her dress, then there is nothing wrong with her to design it that way. The same applies to trousers and jacket and suchlike.”
Secondly: “It is permissible for the woman to adorn herself as long as she stays in her house with her Mahrams (i.e. her unmarriageable relatives). Similarly, it is not permissible for her to show up, while adorned, before strangers, even if they are guests in her house. The dear sister asks us about putting powders and polishing nail; if it is all forbidden or not, and is ablution valid or not in such cases? In all truth, we consider such adornment as “altering the creation of God” and as categorically prohibited practice. It is a sheer deception, to say the least, which everyone should shun away from. When performing the ritual purification, be it ritual bath or ablution, these make-ups and add-ons should be removed since they prevent water from reaching the skin. Otherwise, the purification will be invalid, and by extension, acts of worships performed in such state are invalid, too.
Thirdly: “A woman should not be prevented from going out to work if necessity dictates so. The same applies when she goes out for seeking education, performing social duties or for recreation. She is only exhorted not to go out of her house wantonly unveiled, seeking the flirtation of other people or indulging into harmful activities. Women’s work is not a rule per se, but an exception for what Islam asks the woman to do inside her house is far greater than her responsibilities outside. We want to spare women the suffering that she might face in transportation back and forth. Women’s demand for work has always been justified under the pretext of her contribution in alleviating the living burdens of her family. However, this can be solved by raising salaries for men. Only then, women will have the chance to dedicate all her time and energy to her household and children, and to manage her family’s affairs—morally, emotionally, socially and culturally. Thus, we have to keep the option of women’s work limited to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation. It is known that “exigencies are measured against individual situations.”

Critique:
As we can see the mufti brings nothing new or special about women’s dress code; however, what is really shocking is how women’s use of powders and nail polish, inside the house not outside, is decried by the Brotherhood, and they see it as an “alteration to God’s creation”!
Here we see how the right of woman to adorn herself turns into an offense. Women are condemned because she decides to beautify herself to please and charm her husband. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to call on men to adorn for their wives and the vice versa; and here the Brotherhood steps in to just prohibit that on ground that it is a change of God’s creation!
The second part of the response compels us to pause a little to review the Brotherhood’s position on women’s work, which necessarily requires her to go out of the house. To the Brotherhood, women’s work is not a rule per se, but an exception. Women ultimate and sublime role should be inside her house not outside. It is as though the Brotherhood seeks to push women to talk about the difficulties she faces in transportation, while losing sight of the fact that the working woman is more aware of time management, more caring for her household and more able of solving her family’s problem than her non-working peers. This, in fact, attaches practical and real value to any service she does to her family and community at large.
What’s more the Brotherhood’s mufti offers a simple yet immature solution to the issue of women’s work. He proposes raising the wages of men, dispensing with women, as if all female workers and all male workers are married with children. Similarly, it is as if two persons can do one-person work, as if competence and merit are not taken into account. Can we imagine our society devoid of female teachers, doctors, engineers and saleswomen?!
Women’s work is just an exception to the rule. such rare exception is to be subject to strict conditions as indicated in issue No. 40, released in September 1979. One Muslim sister asks:
“I applied for a job in the private sector, and I passed all tests. Then, I found out that the job is to be a private secretary of my employer. I would like to draw your attention to that I am in dire need of work; however, I am committed Muslim girl who consciously fears God. I have heard a lot about what such a job would entail as well as its conditions. “May I ask Al-Dawah Magazine folks to guide me for the satisfying answer that reassures my troubled heart and conscience?
Is it allowed for a woman to work as a secretary, a decent job that thousands of women have taken on in Egypt?
However, the Brotherhood’s answer is “NO”, with a reemphasis that women’s work is exceptional to the rule. Here is the response as follows:
“If a Muslim woman has happened to be compelled to go out to work, then there is no objection to that according to Sharia, i.e. Islamic law, provided that she adheres to ethics of her religion. She should not work proscribed jobs nor mingle with strangers to her unless in limited circumstances. At the same time, she is required to observe modesty in her clothes and be diffident and reserved. God-Almighty- says: “O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” God-Almighty- also says: “If you are righteous. So be not soft in speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease should feel tempted; and speak a decent speech.”
A right-minded woman should avoid being alone with strangers, be he a colleague or an employer. I understand that working as private secretary entails that you will be alone with your employer from time to time. Never is a man alone with a woman except that Satan is the third party with them. Dear sister, suffice you what you have heard about this job and what it entails. Furthermore, your dire need of work does not justify that you take on a job that nothing good will come out of it, to say the least. Thus, safeguard your religion and your honor intact; and repose your trust in God who will make for you a way out of this.”

Critique:
The Brotherhood see that working as secretary is categorically prohibited; and the secretary being alone with her employer will definitely lead to the path of Satan and sin. These folks have no trust or whatsoever in women and men alike. They are obsessed with the notion that man is like an animal driven only by lust, who does not hesitate to commit sins without regard to morals or personal conscience.
The disregard for the girl’s dire need of work reaches its peak when the Brotherhood’s mufti literally says: “your dire need of work does not justify that you take on a job that nothing good will come out of it, to say the least.”
Will the girl then starve to death?!
Is not it possible that she takes on this job while her honor and chastity remain untouched?
Does not the mufti realize that his fatwa just condemns thousands of good secretaries, thousands of managers and thousands of decent employers? However, the Brotherhood are only obsessed with keeping women locked in the house. They are fighting tooth and nail to make women acknowledge that work is a detestable exception. What should we do except to say: “God suffice us, for You are the best disposer of affairs.”