Tag: women

Do we really need Free Speech?

James Damore was fired by Google for a memo he posted at work giving his views on why there are so few women at his workplace. Basically, he argued, fewer women are interested in math and science than men and thus Google’s hiring policies designed to attract and hire more women are misguided. In this note I make two points: First, we lose a great deal of first order importance if we counter erroneous or offensive speech by repressing it—FREE SPEECH is protected by the First Amendment for good reason. Second, it is more effective to counter false ideas with correct or better ideas than to repress them.

Damore went further than Larry Summers did twelve years ago. Summers, who was President of Harvard University at the time, noted the fact that there were so few women at Harvard in the hard sciences and asked why that might be so. He explored several possible explanations without endorsing any of them. He was, in fact, raising a serious question for serious discussion. Many of his colleagues found his question so offensive that he was forced to resign his Harvard presidency. This is what I wrote about it at the time: “Science-discrimination-and-Larry-Summers”

One of the possible factors in the underrepresentation of women in the sciences not raised by Summer is the fact that the approach to teaching math and science has been designed by man and best suits the ways men generally learn. Considerable research indicates that men and women tend to learn differently. A pedagogy best suited to men might discourage otherwise potentially interested women from perusing science.

Damore went further by concluding that Google’s hiring practices were discriminatory to men and thus illegal. In a Wall Street Journal oped Damore stated that:  “I committed heresy against the Google creed by stating that not all disparities between men and women that we see in the world are the result of discriminatory treatment…. I suggested that at least some of the male-female disparity in tech could be attributed to biological differences (and, yes, I said that bias against women was a factor too).” “Why-I-was-fired-by-Google” None of us needs to be convinced that there are biological differences between men and women (hopefully), so why not with regard to tastes in employment?

I have not read Damore’s ten page memo and don’t intend to take sides on the points he makes, over than to agree with his statement that Google will have a better Human Resources policy if it is based on fact rather than ideological presumptions of the facts. Open discussion of the issue—of Damore’s biological claims—is one of the best ways to sort out what is scientifically supportable from what is ideological fiction.

Opening public discourse to the views and comments of anyone wishing to say something, i.e., “free speech,” potentially exposes us to some pretty nasty stuff. There is a fundamental and critical difference between addressing rudeness—bad manners—via inculcating cultural values of mutual respect (good manners) and via government suppression. Today’s millennials seem to have been raised to expect protection from anything unpleasant (shame on you helicopter moms). Rather than take responsibility for their own good behavior and the encouragement of the same in others, they seek and demand protection imposed by the “authorities” with “safe zones” and the like. In my view this is on the “Road to Serfdom.” I have shared my views on the emergence of state imposed political correctness on several earlier occasions: “What-is-wrong-with-PC”

To my second point, suppression of speech is also an inefficient way of countering falsehoods or doubtful or “bad” principles. If such views cannot be aired openly and publically, they are very likely to live on and survive within social or ideological bubbles where they are not challenged. The Internet facilitates living within a bubble or reaching beyond it and we need to encourage everyone, and especially each new generation to reach beyond their echo chamber in order to confront their beliefs with other views.

In an interview with Bloomberg on August 10, Damore stated that: “There are simply fewer women that want to get into these fields,” he said. “If you’re a girl and you’re interested in technology, that’s great…. If anyone is interested in technology they should just pursue it,” he added. “It’s a great field.” “Fired-google-engineer-says-company-execs-shamed-and-smeared-him.” This doesn’t sound much like a bigot to me.

Science, Discrimination, and Larry Summers

It is clear that Harvard President Larry Summers has hit a nerve, yet again. It is far less clear why reactions have been so strong and often so disappointing to those of us who believe in science. Let us know the truth, whatever it is. If women have less “intrinsic aptitude” for science than men, and no one—not even Larry Summers—is arguing that such a fact has been established, then we should know about it. Choices are better made on the basis of facts than ignorance or fiction. To my mind, the key overlooked point is that such a fact would have almost no relevance to the values most of us believe in.

Equal treatment under the law and in public policy has nothing to do with whether the average intelligence or other indicators of aptitude or virtue of women is the same as men, or whether the same is true for blacks, whites, Asians, Jews, Arabs, Christians, Moslems, etc, or for gays or straights. We are each individuals, not averages. Our public policy and the personal beliefs of most of us are based upon the morality and advantage of dealing with individuals rather than classes of one sort or another. Whatever the averages might turn out to be—and why should we be afraid to know?—currently available evidence clearly establishes a very large dispersion of traits within each group and a very large overlap with all other groups.

Such principles are expressed and upheld by governments only when they are broadly believed by the governed (in democracies), or by enlightened rulers, or, as in our case of a constitutional democracy, when enlightened leaders in the contemplative environment of a constitutional convention imbed such principles in a constitution that limits what majorities may do. Fortunately, in free market economies self-interest works in favor of such principles. Profit minded employers want the best employees for the least cost.

It is human nature to economize and conserve in various ways. It is part of being efficient. Economizing on the gathering of information is but one of the many ways we prioritize the use of our time. We often develop impressions of people or groups of people (say Southern Baptists) on the basis of partial information. We often rely on the views of others we trust. It would take more of our time than it is worth to gather ALL of the facts. Biases and prejudices are perpetrated for some time for these reasons even among the good hearted.

If women are being discriminated against in the market place, presumably because of incorrect perceptions of their productivity, they will tend to earn less for the same work. If this is the case, it is economically advantageous for an employer to hire them. Thus there is an economic incentive for firms to look beyond the stereotypes (or averages) for individuals whose talents may not be fully appreciated yet in the market place. Not all employers will bother to do so, but those who do so will profit at the expense of those who discriminate. Over time more profitable firms tend to grow more rapidly than less profitable ones. If employers are forced to pay women the same wages as men when they believe they are less productive, fewer women will be hired until such time as broadly held prejudices are over come.

Open and honest debate about such issues is another way of advancing the truth and overcoming prejudice. In my opinion Larry Summers has contributed to that goal and the sometimes hysterical reactions to his raising legitimate scientific questions have not.

Paid Family Leave

The view that if something is good or beneficial the government should provide or mandate it is one of the attitudes dividing those who favor limited government from those favoring a more expansive and generous government. The following provides one example.

Ivanka Trump and others make a convincing case for generous paid family leave, Paid-family-leave-is-a-good-national-policy. Stephen A. Schwarzman, Founder, Chairman and CEO Blackstone, explained that Blackstone extended its paid maternity leave from 12 weeks to 16 weeks because it improved Blackstone’s bottom line – Paid-maternity-leave-is-worth-every-penny. But for all of the many reasons that big government should be resisted in general (inappropriate incentives for government bureaucrats and the public, special interest capture of policy—i.e. crony capitalism and other forms of corruption, limitations of individual freedom, inefficiency, etc.), there is not a good case for the government to get involve in mandating or subsidizing paid family leave.

Generous paid family leave programs provided by employers are smart business. Companies that offer them will have a competitive edge and thus free market firms will increasingly adopt them. Employers will be free experiment with what works best (for employees’ and companies’ bottom lines), which may well evolve over time as markets and technology change. Governments’ rarely enjoy such flexibility and are often captured by voters best able to influence government to protect their special interests, and that is never the poor. Those who are unemployed don’t need paid leave as they are already receiving unemployment compensation or welfare support for staying at home.

Maternity or family leave has facilitated bringing women into the labor force and thus increased family and national incomes. Given the importance of education to worker productivity and thus individual and national incomes, the state has also undertaken to finance (and unfortunately in most cases also to supply) education for all children from Kindergarten to 12th grade. While upper income families can easily afford to pay for this education for their children, lower income families generally cannot. Thus public financing of such education helps give all children a more equal start in live and also facilitates two worker families. A gap in such assistance exists for preschool children (age 0-5). Financial assistance should also be considered for day care or nursery schools for such children.

In most cases where a policy or practice is good for the general public, it will be adopted by free market participants and better fulfill its purpose than is possible or likely by government.

Making sense of Trump

With the latest scandals and polls dropping, Trump’s defeat becomes ever more certain. But rather than broadening his appeal to the undecided Trump has instead doubled down with his hard-core base and declared the election “rigged.” What is he thinking? What is his strategy? The generous interpretation was given by veteran GOP strategist Mike Murphy: “’I think Trump is right: The shackles have been released, but they were the shackles of reality. Trump has now shifted to a mode of complete egomaniacal self-indulgence.’” http://wapo.st/2ef3vmQ This interpretation states that Trump is only making excuses for his defeat to save his damaged ego.

Maybe. But few observers claim that Trump is dumb. This implies that he knows what he is doing. His repeated claims that the establishment (press, elites, corporate America) has rigged the elections is so treasonous that Republic House leader Paul Ryan spoke out against them Saturday: “’Our democracy relies on confidence in election results, and the speaker is fully confident the states will carry out this election with integrity,’ Ryan’s press secretary, AshLee Strong, said in a statement sent to several media outlets.” http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/10/15/paul-ryan-pushes-back-against-trumps-claims-that-the-election-is-rigged/

“The people who speak for Donald Trump’s presidential campaign on Sunday tried to walk back his incendiary comments about a ‘rigged’ election, with vice presidential candidate Mike Pence saying that Trump was only referring to media bias and vowing that ‘we will absolutely accept the result of the election.’… And literally hours after those media appearances, Trump was back on Twitter ― making clear that, yes, he thought voter fraud was a real threat to the election’s legitimacy.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-rigged-election_us_5803876de4b0162c043c7d1f

Poor Mike Pence who seemed a generally decent guy. He is in an even worse position than Paul Ryan being dragged along through Trump’s seditious muck. What does Trump want or expect his hard-core supporters to do when he losses in a rigged election? He doesn’t seem to be pumping them up to just hang their heads and go home. Trump seems not to care who or what he destroys as befits his disgusting model of zero sum capitalism in which he profits (wins) by gaining better terms in deals with counterparties and/or stiffing business partners with his bankruptcies. No win win for Trump.

The real concern, as expressed strongly by Fareed Zzkaria Friday, is that along with destroying the Republican Party, Trump will destroy America as well. http://wapo.st/2dWNmQe

Trump has gone from evil to seriously dangerous, not because he has changed any—he hasn’t—but because there are so many people who have been willing to support his ugly, incoherent, ranting candidacy. I understand their anger at an ever larger, more intrusive government that has in the nature of things been captured for the benefit of crony (rather than real, competitive) capitalists. But Trump only promises to expand government further and to manipulate it more skillfully, for the benefit of….??? I will vote for Gary Johnson and William Weld.

 

Some Afghan views on restrictions on women in the name of Islam

Most non-Muslim American’s, myself included, know relatively little about Islam. Unfortunately, what we do hear often comes from Muslim radicals, or anti Muslim hate mongers. I find it very interesting and enlightening to listen to discussions of Islamic teachings among Muslims. I belong to the Afghan Intellectuals Network on Facebook, which gives me a very good opportunity to listen in to such discussions among young Afghans (I snuck in with an age waver). You will get a very different picture of Islam in a very traditional society than you are likely to find in the American media. The following discussion was provoked by the announcement reported in the following newspaper article. I find the sharply conflicting views absolutely fascinating and hope that you do too. You might also be interested in my earlier blog on “Shariah and America” and comments on that blog:   “Comments on Shariah and America” 

President defends scholars’ guideline regarding women

by Mir Agha Samimi  Mar 6, 2012 – 16:18

KABUL (PAN): President Hamid Karzai on Tuesday said a guideline concerning women issued by the Afghanistan Ulema Council, involving the country’s top religious scholars, was in accordance with the Sharia.

Issued on Feb. 2, the guideline prohibits women from meeting men in public places like bazaars, offices and educational institutes. It said women, while travelling, must always be accompanied by male guardians.

But western media reports quoted some people as saying that the guideline was in conflict with the Constitution and amounted to curbing women’s right.

At a news conference in Kabul, Karzai said: “The Ulema Council, which issues a guideline every month, has in fact supported women in line with Islamic laws.”

Last Friday, the president added, the scholars handed out a statement that supported women’s stance in keeping with Islamic values. “It represents the country’s Islamic viewpoint and all Muslims of Afghanistan are bound to respect it.”

Wazhma Sadat  I am working on ways to stop the Ulema from making it illegal for women to travel. Inbox me if you want to work with me! You don’t have to be a woman, an Afghan, or a Muslim to disagree with this. This law is taking the most basic rights from women: the right to education. In a country with such limited resources, we travel thousands of miles away to gain education, so our kids won’t see the violence we’re used to today. And this law, if passed, will limit every sliver of hope we’ve built so far. If we’re talking about Islamic law, then the most respected Mullahs of Afghanistan need to learn the Sunnah of the prophet first, which includes respecting women, including women in the high-level decision-making process, and more importantly, the Fard (obligatory duty for every Muslim) of education for both men and women.

This post received 64 comments. Here are a few of the more interesting ones

M. Ishaq Ahmadzai So, Wazhma jan..what do you want to get from this? Are you interested in challenging the law/religion. Islam does allow in certain cases when there are no options available. A woman can give birth to a child in the presence of male doctor but only if there is no gynecologist.

Wazhma Sadat I guess I am just hoping that our so-called Ulama learn about the real facts of Islam before imposing their own racial, gender, ethnic based agendas in the name of Islam. Islam, Alhamdulellah, is much more fair that what we practice in the name of it in Afghanistan. I am Muslim. I live Islam. I wouldn’t challenge it. But I do challenge thoughtless, and baseless rules on vulnerable people of our country. If the government wants me to stop studying in another country because I am not traveling with a mahram, then they should pay for my father to come live with me. AND they should guarantee for my father to get a US visa, as well. These rulings are pathetic: totally political to suppress women, and minorities in many cases. We live in a society where we call each other Kafir! In Islam Takfeer is haram. But look at how we address different sects of Islam within the country. The Ulema should talk about eradicating opium production, corruption, ethnic based discrimination. They should educate us men and women of Afghanistan to have mutual respect to each other. But look at what they choose to talk about. A woman’s traveling alone has not created the mess we are in now. The Ulema’s baseless rulings have!

Please don’t think that I am pro seeing women in tight shirts and jeans in Kabul. I respect my culture and religion as much as anybody else. But I want the Ulema to understand the importance of education. AND the importance of women’s education, which would be hurt really badly by this rule.

Ali Sher Learn the importance of education at what cost ? I’m sure they have good reasons. We have to give them the benefit of doubt. We really do not know or do not have enough information as to what’s really going on in Afghanistan. All we see is what’s on Afghan TV and what I see is that things are getting worse and worse as the years are getting closer to DOJ.

Wazhma Sadat We do have to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, including the women in Afghanistan. Not every woman who meets someone outside is dating. Innamal A’mal bennyyat. And ONLY Allah subhanahu ta’alla knows our intentions. Many women have had to work outside to support their dying family members. I don’t think every woman who talks to a man is wanting to attract the man. Remember the times that women came to the prophet and asked him questions, very openly.

Plus, we have lived the worst days in Afghanistan, not those who are in authority right now, including our president. He did not suffer poverty like all average Afghans did and still do. He did not see his wife get beaten in front of men on the streets by the Taliban for wearing white tumbaan. His female relatives did/do not have to choose prostitution to bring food to their family. Nor did any of these Ulema go through what an average Afghan goes through everyday. Do they think of the widows of our country? Do they think of the daughters who want to make their fathers proud… who want to help their ill mother gain better health? What about this is un-islamic?

True, we are getting close to yawm ul Qiyyama [The Day Of Resurrection – Day of Judgement], and I see the signs too. The signs include the hypocrisy of these people who discriminate everyone who is not like them. I see the signs when these ulama don’t talk about the hadith/Quran verses that talk about MEN lowering their gaze, but only impose laws on women. A society is never made sustainable if you have rules only imposed on a particular part of it. We know better what is going on in Afghanistan than those people who spend their weekends in Dubai.

Why don’t these Ulama remember Bibi Ayesha, Bibi Fatima, Bibi Rabia (who was the first person to introduce God’s love in Islam to the rest of the world). Did prophet Muhammad ever tell any woman not to go to school? Did he EVER force his wives to do anything? Anything?

In fact, what we call “dating” today, is allowed in Islam in certain circumstances like if we have the intention to marry the person and if we are meeting in a public place and if there is at least a third person present. What is not allowed is to force girls to get married before seeing the man (usually the old guy who is ‘buying’ a bride). This happens in Afghanistan and it IS un-Islamic. Think about it. For once, put yourself in an Afghan girl’s position, please.
Gaining education is fard in Islam. The Ulama and the gov. should be MORE islamic and build schools and make it MANDATORY for EVERY Afghan man and WOMAN to go to school BECAUSE it is Fard (like praying). They should make it illegal for people to stay illiterate, because amokhtan ilm ba hard wa zan musulman farz ast. The reason why we travel is not because we love leaving our families, and we love being at mercy of other people and countries. The reason why we travel is because our parents are not ministers to pay the bribe it requires to get into to Kabul University.

These are the signs I see and fear. I am saddened that Islam is not practiced the way it should be in Afghanistan, where women are respected, where corruption is non-existent, where education is at its peak, where hypocrisy has no room to live. This is the Islam I know of and I live for, Inshallah. The life in Afghanistan seems so far away from what I believe Islam is.

Wazhma Sadat ‎

1: what the Taliban did was crimes against humanity. Not Islam AT ALL. I wouldn’t use the word “impose” here, since it has a diplomatic connotation. The Taliban were very far from anything close to that. And they still are.
2: Yes women get raped in the west, but who is comparing US with Afghanistan? The problems in other countries should not be the reason why we could justify our society’s flaws.
3: “We need to bring our women back to Islam so they can raise children that grow up to respect women and give them their rights. Our women are more and more involved each day in music, drama, movies, etc., etc.”?? — I am speechless. I think we need to bring our MEN back to Islam. Make them stop going to prostitutes and increasing the demand for such a terrible and un-Islamic practice. Make them stop harassing women.

Music, drama and movies have not been the problem in our history. I wish there were more movies if that kept us away from fighting with each other based on ethnicity, or if it kept us away from suicide bombing and other forms of crimes. Plus, if we watched movies like The Message, we would learn more about Islam than what our so-called, mostly illiterate Ulama have to offer.
4: dating in the west could mean whatever. Meeting with a non-mahram can be permissible according to Islam under certain circumstances.

Last: I don’t think it is the Ulama’s duty to “bring women back to Islam.” They are the reason why so many of people run away from Islam, sadly.

I am not going to fill everyone’s notification with more comments. I pray that we are all guided towards the right path. I pray that we all start thinking about major things like children dying in our country, women getting raped, small boys used for bachabazi, politicians using the people as their disposable promotional tool for fame. And most of all, I pray that we all strive to learn more about Islam and the beautiful path is has to offer through EDUCATION for ALL.

Abdul Waheed St  I just read your second comment…I totally disagree with You dear. Do You know what our Afghan Muslim females who have been studying on a scholarship in US or other countries do??? I guess You are one of the scholarship holders in US. Do You think that is the way a Muslim girl should live and study. They wear tight jeans and shirts with no scarf on their head, actually not studying there, but enjoying a few years of their life away from their parents.

[name withheld by request] It is not so my dear Waheed jan. Whenever we judge West we judge them from their clothes and Hollywood movies. But that is not the true reflector of US culture. Don’t look at their clothes, look at their mindset and the way of thinking.

Abdul Waheed St  Americans have a mindset of and thinking of occupying the world, killing innocent people, destroying peoples life, culture and basis. I think sending Afghan females abroad whether it is US or any other country is just destroying our culture and mixing our culture.

[name withheld by request]  Waheed jan the idea that Americas want to occupy the world and kill innocent people is what comes from Halwa Khoor Mullahs who don’t have the real knowledge of how the world works. If so then why is US spending billions of dollars a year in the world?

Abdul Waheed St  Well Walid Jan minds are different and everyone see the facts from different angels but I guess clever is someone who observes and sees the facts from every angel. US is spending Billions for their interest not for mine or yours…

[name withheld by request]  And if you look from the other angle, which you have never ever looked from, it is in our mutual interest. You need to widen your perspective rather than being strongly influenced by a Mullah who is less educated than you.

Wazhma Sadat  Salaam again! I am not going to go into details about what people wear or whether they continue to hold onto their values as Muslims and Afghans while abroad, because that is their personal choice and Allah is a better judge, inshallah. But if you are specifically talking about me, then you should learn more about me, brother 🙂

Additionally, who said we were talking about the US? How about women going to Jordan to study Islamic studies? One of the sad things about my education experience in Afghanistan was always lack of understanding of Islam! My teachers in many institutions in Afghanistan did not know much about Islam. I think by limiting people’s freedom to go abroad to get an education, we are limiting their opportunity to learn about many things that are not offered in Afghanistan, including a thorough understanding of Islam. Islam is not about judging people based on what they wear… the tightness of jeans does not determine people’s imaan. Who are we to judge.

I am sorry if you’ve had a bad impression of girls who’ve been abroad. I am sure I don’t have to tell you that no one represents one another. And that we are not to judge who wears what with what intention (Islamically). Plus, not everyone is away from home to “enjoy”… many study day and night with the hope to return. Let’s not generalize, inshallah.

Inam Ul Haq Humdard  Dear Brothers and Sisters please don’t give fetwas from your stomach while you have not studied Islamic Scriptures….. don’t read those books which are written by so called Muslims/Wahabis and for exact detail read those books which are written 200 years ago by ulemas of that time…….thanks

Abubakr Asadulla There is absolutely no limitation to women traveling in the Quran. There are a few contradictory Hadiths—5 to be exact— that point to limiting women’s travel distance.
1) Hadhrat Abu Hurairah (Radhiyallaahu Anhu) reported Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) as saying

‘It is not permitted for a Muslim woman to make a journey of a night unless accompanied by a Mahram.’

2)Hadhrat Abu Hurairah (Radhiyallaahu Anhu) reported that Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) said,

‘It is not permitted for a woman who has faith in Allah and the last day to make a journey of a day and night.’

3) Abu Saeed (Radhiyallaahu Anhu) reported Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) saying, ‘It is not permitted for a woman who brings faith in Allah and the Last Day to make a journey of more than three days unless she is accompanied by either her father, brother, husband, son or a relative who is her Mahram.’

4) Hadhrat ibn Umar (Radhiyallaahu Anhuma) reported Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) saying, ‘A woman must not make a journey of three days unless accompanied by a relative who is her Mahram.’

5) Hadhrath ibn Abbas (Radhiyallaahu Anhuma) reported that Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) said, ‘A woman must not make a journey unless accompanied by a Mahram or her husband.’

Based on Islamic principles, men and women have equal rights and Surah an-Nisa’ 4:1 states that men and women are created from a single soul (nafs wahidah). One person does not come before the other, one is not superior to the other, and one is not the derivative of the other. Thus, if they are equal in God’s eyes why are they being treated under TWO laws. If a woman can’t travel without a Maharam, why can’t it be expected from men to travel without a Maharam? Both men and women are vulnerable to Satan; why pick on women? The simple truth is that many of these attributed Hadiths to the prophet were written at a time of tribal warfare, when neither men nor women were safe to leave home. Those same rules can not be taken literally to pertain to the 21th century. Fortunately, women can travel safely and there is no apprehension about them being harmed any more than men, as long as appropriate judgment is used to their destination.

We have to remember that the earliest documents attributed to prophet (PBUH) are at least 100 years after he passed away. Moreover, it should be mentioned that many of today’s restrictions on women originate from after the prophet (PBUH) had passed away and they are a reflection of Arab customs and traditions rather than Islamic law. For example, Saudi Arabia doesn’t allow women to drive. Does that make it Islamic for women in Islam to stop driving?

Abubakr Asadulla Any philosophy left to the hands of semi-literate is a dangerous phenomenon. The interpretation and application of Islam isn’t a privilege of a few, on the contrary it is a collective endeavor. Islam was complete with the death of Prophet (PBUH) and any philosophy thereafter is left for interpretation and modification, as someone pointed out, in Islam we are gifted with the right to Ijma and ijtihad. Ijtihad representing my right to utilize my intelligence to conform with what my goal is to worship God, and Ijma to have a consensus amongst people for collective good, in situations that are unique to our time and era.

In opinion of many scholars, this restriction on women, assuming this Hadith is really from the prophet, had limited application and duration. Times have changed and so have dangers to men and women. Above all we have been given the Ilm of Aqalia (knowledge of common sense) which in my mind and I am sure others dictates equal rights for both men and women.

If there is fitna in society, it is the failure of societies to have appropriately educated its population. One cannot restrict women for men’s evils. There are millions of women that travel freely without a consequence, why are we picking on Muslim women? Limiting women’s travel is insulting to women and our creator, which calls men and women equals (Quran 3:195).

Unfortunately, the truth is that men and women are prone to haram regardless of travel or not. We shouldn’t pass a blank law categorically limiting women’s movements out of fear of a few that may transgress. If such is the case no man should be allowed outside of their rooms, let alone their homes. At the end of the day, instill the right tools in your family, give them the right tools to judge right from wrong and trust Allah that He will guide to the straight path.