Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
<jats:sec><jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Debates over gender relevant legislation such as family law have led to serious conflict in many periods of Middle Eastern history, especially in recent times. One way to understand the intensity of the current debates is to recognize that gender issues raise fundamental questions about the relationship between individual and society and the role of states. In this article I argue that, in considering gender relevant legislation in the Middle East, we need to develop a framework that is different from the paradigms anchored in the politics of western liberal democracies in the U.S. and Western Europe. The frame of reference I propose is built upon the following propositions. (1) We should treat gender legislation in the Middle East as an inherently political matter that goes to the heart of the organization of power. Such a perspective opens up the possibility of considering the role of multiple and complex political processes including pressures from below by social movements and top down reforms. (2) We need to reformulate the concepts of tradition and modernity that have pervaded the study of gender in the Islamic world. Tradition and modernity as two distinct, well-defined cultural forms should be dropped altogether. Instead, the discourses of tradition and modernity should be taken as political constructs and the following question should be asked: who benefits from each discourse in given political contexts? (3) The role of kin-based solidarities should be considered in the nexus of conflicts and alliances that shape the process of state formation. The individualistic model of politics in western liberal democracies has limited value for the understanding of political processes in the historical development of the Middle East. The focus should be instead on the role of identities based in communities that define themselves in collective and ascriptive terms of common kinship.</jats:p> </jats:sec>
Hawwa – Brill
Published: Jan 1, 2007
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.