[Scheherazade]

(Original post by Vienna)
Because the abuse is not arbitrary. There is mutual respect that the man is better able to lead the family and thus the wife, while she has many valuable attributes, must be obedient to the male. While there is nothing to suggest the male can beat the wife for amusment or without reason, the Quran makes explicit the legitimacy of reprimanding ones wife, including physically, if she disobeys the male or shows a lack of respect for her position relative to the male.

As I've said the wording here is debatable and mere disobedience doesn't justify any action, disagreement is allowed within the relationship, and only in serious dispute between the partners is action called for be it betwwen the pair or with their families if there is fear that either will be unfair.

(Original post by Vienna)
A tap? A tap on the shoulder? A push? A slap? Where does the Quran offer such distinctions?

In the wording. The intention should obviously not be to hurt or threaten.

(Original post by Vienna)
What advice would you give a friend if she confided in you that her partner had physically reprimanded her and while not hurt, she felt physically and psychologically threatened?

It's not a threat to her safety because he's not allowed to harm her and it's pretty implicit that physical abuse of any kind should be the last thing on your mind and any physical action should not hurt at all.

(Original post by Vienna)
This is a non-argument, since the premise for legal action is that a certain amount of violence is acceptable in reprimanding a disobediant wife.

No, I meant if any violent action is taken then the woman has grounds for a divorce. If any friend of mine's husband hit her, then her family would certainly not look upon it kindly(and that's an understatement) that's where the family mediators come in so that the power doesn't rest on the husband to decide what is and isn't acceptable.

I have n exam in 24 hours time and should revise, I'll answer any replies tomorrow afternoon or Friday.

[Vienna]

(Original post by Google)
yes, I missed the point

but what I was trying to say this punishment is not bad as you may imagine
it is bad because its a punishment
and I think its not worse than kid punishments I mentioned before
when you punish a kid you do not hurt him, or just to punish him
you just want to make him know that he made a mistake
its the purpose of punishment

Whatever you believe the reasons to be, they remain reasons for 'beating your wife'.

[Scheherazade]

(Original post by Google)
yes, I missed the point

but what I was trying to say this punishment is not bad as you may imagine
it is bad because its a punishment
and I think its not worse than kid punishments I mentioned before
when you punish a kid you do not hurt him, or just to punish him
you just want to make him know that he made a mistake
its the purpose of punishment

You don't 'punish a wife like a child. It's not right for one adult to be dependant on anothers good will to that amount, which is why the extended family is so important in the equation, even in the case of parenting, there are generally two parents to balance each other out.

[arranque]

(Original post by Google)
yes, I missed the point

but what I was trying to say this punishment is not bad as you may imagine
it is bad because its a punishment
and I think its not worse than kid punishments I mentioned before
when you punish a kid you do not hurt him, or just to punish him
you just want to make him know that he made a mistake
its the purpose of punishment

lol oh dear....

it is acceptable to punish a child in order to teach him or her the difference between right and wrong, or that he made a mistake etc. But this is a child, which obviously as of yet does not possess fully formed ideas, emotional or mental maturity or indeed the right to participate on an equal level with its parents in terms of making decisions about what it should or should not do. Obviously children need discipline, otherwise they wont learn, granted.

But applying the same logic to your wife?!! Surely you can see the difference between using this criteria on an adult, who can rightfully be said to be deserving of no less rights or privileges than her husband in any respect, and a child. Yeah, just give the silly bitch a few backhanders to let her know who's the boss. After all, the opinion of a wife is obviously not as valid as that of her husband. I think we have just definitively answered the question posed in the title of this thread.

[Vienna]

(Original post by ayaan)
As I've said the wording here is debatable and mere disobedience doesn't justify any action, disagreement is allowed within the relationship, and only in serious dispute between the partners is action called for

Including physical action against the wife administered by the male.

In the wording. The intention should obviously not be to hurt or threaten.

What is the purpose of physical action if it does not harm or threaten?

It's not a threat to her safety because he's not allowed to harm her

You claim that, I havent seen that in the Quran.

and it's pretty implicit that physical abuse of any kind should be the last thing on your mind and any physical action should not hurt at all.

So as a last resort, and if the wife needs to be reprimanded, the husband should administer physical action that should not hurt at all or even threaten the woman? Whats the point of it?

No, I meant if any violent action is taken then the woman has grounds for a divorce. If any friend of mine's husband hit her, then her family would certainly not look upon it kindly(and that's an understatement) that's where the family mediators come in so that the power doesn't rest on the husband to decide what is and isn't acceptable.

The Quran gives the husband the right to get physical as a last resort, while the family may decide at what point this violence is too much, they surely dont have the right to contradict the Quran in regard to his right?

[Google]

(Original post by Vienna)
Whatever you believe the reasons to be, they remain reasons for 'beating your wife'.

and if she thinks she should not been beated she can take an action against it

if you were judged unfairly in a court you have the right to appeal against it
but this should not mean we should not have courts and judges because they may be unfair or misuse the law

got my idea

[Zuber]

lol, google landed himself in that one!
i dont actually think he meant punish your wife like a child.
however that being said, if a husband can punish his wife, then the wife can punish her husband. not sure what the quran has to say on this...anyone offer anything?

[Zuber]

(Original post by Vienna)
What is the purpose of physical action if it does not harm or threaten?

the purpose is psychological i guess. its like not talking to someone. lets them know that you are upset with them.

[arranque]

(Original post by Zuber)
the purpose is psychological i guess. its like not talking to someone. lets them know that you are upset with them.

i dont want to start a vicious argument with you which may quickly degenerate as you seem reasonable, but what i have just gleaned from your comment is that psychological bullying is much less damaging than the simple physical variety.

[Google]

(Original post by arranque)
lol oh dear....

it is acceptable to punish a child in order to teach him or her the difference between right and wrong, or that he made a mistake etc. But this is a child, which obviously as of yet does not possess fully formed ideas, emotional or mental maturity or indeed the right to participate on an equal level with its parents in terms of making decisions about what it should or should not do. Obviously children need discipline, otherwise they wont learn, granted.

But applying the same logic to your wife?!! Surely you can see the difference between using this criteria on an adult, who can rightfully be said to be deserving of no less rights or privileges than her husband in any respect, and a child. Yeah, just give the silly bitch a few backhanders to let her know who's the boss. After all, the opinion of a wife is obviously not as valid as that of her husband. I think we have just definitively answered the question posed in the title of this thread.

I mentioned it was on a documentary on BBC
its not Islamic or even Arabic to punish kids
and of course I see the difference when applying it on an adult
but would not you benn punished if you drive over speed, yet you are an adult
whats wrong with you people

[Scheherazade]

(Original post by Zuber)
lol, google landed himself in that one!
i dont actually think he meant punish your wife like a child.
however that being said, if a husband can punish his wife, then the wife can punish her husband. not sure what the quran has to say on this...anyone offer anything?

It says the wife should 'seek settlement, because that's what's best'(not an exact quote). So that's pretty open I suppose.

(Original post by Vienna)
What's the point?

That's my point exactly, that's why it makes more sense in reference to threat of divorce.
And a tap would be saying, this is a serious matter, but not I'll beat the crap out of you if you don't listen to me.

[arranque]

(Original post by Google)
I mentioned it was on a documentary on BBC
its not Islamic or even Arabic to punish kids
and of course I see the difference when applying it on an adult
but would not you benn punished if you drive over speed, yet you are an adult
whats wrong with you people

i think i will leave it to somebody more eloquent than my good self, perhaps Vienna, to point out the huge, gaping flaws in this statement, so that i do not make myself sound silly and thus undermine my own case. Its a shame you cant recognise them yourself.

[Google]

(Original post by Zuber)
lol, google landed himself in that one!
i dont actually think he meant punish your wife like a child.
however that being said, if a husband can punish his wife, then the wife can punish her husband. not sure what the quran has to say on this...anyone offer anything?

yes. I did not meant that
I meant its the same purpose why you would punish
to make one think of his mistake

WITHOUT HURTING

[Scheherazade]

(Original post by arranque)
i dont want to start a vicious argument with you which may quickly degenerate as you seem reasonable, but what i have just gleaned from your comment is that psychological bullying is much less damaging than the simple physical variety.

not psychological abuse, but message- 'there's a serious problem in our marriage'.

PS.Stop pulling me back in!

[arranque]

(Original post by Google)
yes. I did not meant that
I meant its the same purpose why you would punish
to make one think of his mistake

WITHOUT HURTING

I will reiterate a point that has been made countless times. What is the point of punishment without hurting in some way? It will not make anybody 'think' if the actions for which they have supposedly been punished have no consequences.

[Manatee]

(Original post by Google)
IT DOES NOT EXIST TO SEE IT

it was clearly explained before
if your kid acted in a way you do not accept you would take an action against him

its the same idea her(somehow)

if my wife insist doing something I would not accept(reasonably) I should talke to her
if this did not work I would stop talking to her for a while to let her think of it
and if this did not work
I would beat her very gently not in tearm to hurt her
but to show her that I really resist what she is doing

similarly

if I do something my wife would not accept(reasonably)
she would take to me
if this did not work she would talke to the elders in the family
and if this did not work
she has the right to take a legal action against me
and if the judge found me hurting her and I would not stop it
he would force me to devorce her(if she wanted so)

sorry for my weak English
but I hope I made myselfe clear enough

Your post is a good illustration of the inequality we have been discussing. You are allowed to beat your wife (albeit "very gently" - as if that makes it alright), whereas all your wife is allowed to do is talk, first to you and then to the elders. Why can she not beat you if you can beat her? Surely that contradicts your claims that women and men are treated equally?

Also, you repeatedly compare punishing a child to beating one's wife. How are those two relationships comparable? A child needs guidance from someone more experienced, i.e. a parent - a wife, on the other hand, is an adult who should no longer be treated like a child or someone inferior to the husband.

I must admit that I find your views, as expressed on this board, genuinely scary, and feel sorry for any woman who has the misfortune of becoming your wife.

[Google]

(Original post by arranque)
I will reiterate a point that has been made countless times. What is the point of punishment without hurting in some way? It will not make anybody 'think' if the actions for which they have supposedly been punished have no consequences.

go ask a psychologist why would you punish without physical hurting


I am saying, as I said before, to show this person that he made a mistake

is it that hard to understand
or my English language is worse than I think

[Google]

(Original post by Manatee)
Your post is a good illustration of the inequality we have been discussing. You are allowed to beat your wife (albeit "very gently" - as if that makes it alright), whereas all your wife is allowed to do is talk, first to you and then to the elders. Why can she not beat you if you can beat her? Surely that contradicts your claims that women and men are treated equally?

Also, you repeatedly compare punishing a child to beating one's wife. How are those two relationships comparable? A child needs guidance from someone more experienced, i.e. a parent - a wife, on the other hand, is an adult who should no longer be treated like a child or someone inferior to the husband.

I must admit that I find your views, as expressed on this board, genuinely scary, and feel sorry for any woman who has the misfortune of becoming your wife.

a wife can not only talk, she can take a legal action
did not you read that
or you anly read what you whant?

I did not meant to treat your wife as a child
I said its the general purpose of punishing

and about why can not a wife beat her husband
I want to say this
but no one just quote it separatly of the context
in any system in this life
should not be a supervisor
or a higher person somehow
with a little bit more privileges
again do not quote it alone
in a family, the husband is this person in a way

[Zuber]

(Original post by arranque)
i dont want to start a vicious argument with you which may quickly degenerate as you seem reasonable, but what i have just gleaned from your comment is that psychological bullying is much less damaging than the simple physical variety.

firstly thank you
but the point i was making was not that it causes psychological bullying, but rather gives off a psychological message. i gave the simple example of not talking to someone - would you call this psychological bullying? as ayaan said it gives off the message "there's a serious prob in our marriage"
however that being said, i personally would never go with this approach (i.e. beat lightly without hurting). there are better (and less controversial!) ways to let your wife know that she has upset you.

[Zuber]

(Original post by Google)
a wife can not only talk, she can take a legal action
did not you read that
or you anly read what you whant?

I did not meant to treat your wife as a child
I said its the general purpose of punishing

and about why can not a wife beat her husband
I want to say this
but no one just quote it separatly of the context
in any system in this life
should not be a supervisor
or a higher person somehow
with a little bit more privileges
again do not quote it alone
in a family, the husband is this person in a way

i'm sorry to say this google, but i think your doing more harm than good for our side.