There are interesting questions on the margins of sensitive topics such as the consideration and reflection of the progress of women’s rights and in the contexts of the Middle East, doubly so when together. Sarah Mills, a friend, and colleague, and I write and reflect on this. Please find part 2 here.
By Sarah Mills and Scott Douglas Jacobsen
What about moderate countries like Lebanon?
When discussing Arab countries and their treatment of women, we look to moderate nations as examples of what can be achieved within the framework of societies influenced by religion in a negative way. Lebanon comes to mind, a country often the object of international contention and internecine strife but that has nevertheless been able to achieve relative stability between its numerous factions.
While the Lebanese constitution formally recognizes equality between all its citizens, the power is distributed among diverse religious groups, the values of which differ widely and influence the rights women to have in their respective communities. An article from Human Rights Watch (HRW) states the following:
“Lebanon has 15 different codes – for Sunni, Shia, Druze, Catholic, Orthodox, Evangelical groups and others – governing divorce, child custody, and the financial rights of spouses during and after marriage”
Lebanon is comparatively progressive to other Arab League countries. Women earned the right to vote in 1952, five years after men. Married women have the right to independently own and manage the property. And yet, neither the woman’s spouse nor her children can inherit her citizenship. While problematic in and of itself, it is not comparable to the injustices women endure in the legal realms of divorce and rape.
Article 503 of the Lebanese Penal Code defines rape in the following terms: “forced sexual intercourse [against someone] who is not his wife by violence or threat.” In other words, Lebanon does not recognize spousal rape. While laws against domestic abuse do recognize violence and threats thereof, whether the penalty of jail time is enforced or not depends on the state of the victim, and whether she has required a minimum of ten days to recover. The fine itself is paltry, equivalent to anywhere between $6 and $33 USD. Civil marriage is not recognized in Lebanon; religious law dictates how divorce is handled.
Sunni, Shia, and Druze men can divorce their wives simply by uttering the words, “I divorce you.” If the women, however, wish to divorce their husbands, the process is arduous and the grounds are limited. The burden of proof is on the women to supply evidence pointing to “hardship and discord.” Progress on some of the more egregious violations is a recent phenomenon. As of February 2017, Lebanon has abolished Article 522, which allowed men convicted of rape to avoid a penalty if they supplied a valid marriage contract.
In August 2011, Article 562, which had been previously allowed perpetrators of honor killings to commute their sentence, was repealed. Adultery and abortion still remain illegal and women are significantly underrepresented in politics. If Lebanon, a country that boasts a reputation for being progressive, still contends with these issues, where does that leave other nations in the Arab League?
Sethrida Geagea, a member of parliament and wife to the leader of Lebanese Forces, says that to effect change, women also have a responsibility to ‘stop giving priorities to the son over the daughter in terms of education.’ She references other instances in which men and women both might combat stereotypical roles that have their origins in the notion that women are inferior, such as the portrayal of doctors or business persons as men and women as their secretaries.
While working to change collective mentality is essential to overcome harmful views of women, it is idealistic if not accompanied by international pressure and cooperation on the part of those who influence public opinion. We must above all fight at the legislative level to provide a legal framework in which women may assert their right to the same education, work, opportunities, and protection as men.
The way a country chooses to view and treat its women often means the difference between a developed country and a developing one. Investing in women is investing in the country’s economy, in untapped potential. As women have increased access to education, proper nutrition, and reproductive healthcare, they have more time, energy, and resources to invest in children. With the individual children better provided for, and with equitable and safe access to reproductive health services, including abortion, women tend to have fewer children, as is the case in the most developed nations.
Women who are educated and independent have control over their health and their finances. They have a lesser chance of being exploited. They do not settle for low standards and unsafe working conditions. Denying women fundamental rights directly impacts other vulnerable groups, including workers and children. Economies and societies lose potential growth by denying women their rights. Human rights, and therefore women’s rights, go hand in hand with development.
Those who can, who are either in positions of power or privilege, must not stay silent on the abuses endured by women in developing countries. We must be especially critical of any beliefs or cultural norms that only serve to legitimize the mistreatment of women. We must fight against the blatant permissiveness in the face of these continuing offenses. They are an affront to human dignity. What is more, no country can benefit, or has been shown to benefit, from the mistreatment of half its population.
—
Original publication on www.conatusnews.com.
—
Get the best stories from The Good Men Project delivered straight to your inbox, here.
—
Photo Credit: Getty Images