Holm reviewed some of the ways in which women are subordinated or exploited in contemporary religions. She argues that even though the classical teachings may stress the equality between men and women, the practice is far from this. Holm’s believes that women’s second-class status is often related to female sexuality. Menstruation and childbirth are seen as polluting. In many traditions, women are forbidden to enter sacred places or touch sacred objects during the menstruation period. For example women are not allowed to touch the Koran or go into a mosque. Holm, however fails to give an explanation for the reasons why these inequalities exist.
Simone de Beavoir’s explanation is that religion can be used by the oppressors (men) to control the oppressed (women) and it also serves as a way of compensating women for their second- class status as religion gives women false belief that they will be compensated for their sufferings on earth by equality in heaven. Nawal El Saadawi argues that it is not essentially religion that oppresses women but rather it’s the patriarchal system that uses it. For example, although Islam doesn’t preach oppressive practices, men have distorted it to serve themselves.
It should not be assumed that all religions are oppressive to women. Some sociologists have acknowledged that women can no longer be seen as simply being passive. Leila Badwali (1994) has noted that in the Islamic religion, women can actually keep their name when they get married. Helen Watson argues that the veiling of Islamic women can be interpreted as beneficial to Muslim women. She examined three responses by Islamic women and found that Islamic women were very open about the positive aspects of wearing a veil. However Watson’s work has been criticized of interpreting too simplistically the practices of a religion that is not her own. Her observations were based on three women and she appears to have made no attempt to find women who felt they were forced into wearing the veil against their will. Alexandra Wright notes that Reform Judaism has allowed women to become rabbis since 1972 and in n1992 women gained the right to become priests in the Church of England.
Many religions would argue that feminists confuse equality with sameness. As the Quran recognises, Women and men have equal but different missions in life, each pursuing their own path to holiness. For women to adopt the lifestyle of men is not only to contrary to their nature and divinely given task, but betrays a lack of self- respect for their own dignity and worth. Equality is not sameness. 3 + 2 = 5+1 equal, balanced but different. Men and women are biologically different and each has different qualities, neither higher nor lower than the others, they are simply different.
A quote from the Torah can be used to demonstrate the respect held for women; ‘The sages ordained that a man should honour his wife more than himself, and love her as himself. If he has money, he should increase his generosity to her accordingly to his means. He should not cast fear upon her unduly and his conversation should be prone neither to melancholy nor anger’
If we were to measure tasks, that of the women would rank of the highest, in terms of self fulfilment and importance. Is there anything in the world more important than bringing another person into the world? Therefore even though religious tradition says that the women’s role is primarily to raise children, it is seen as a sacred mission, more important than any other. It is a misjudgement of our times to perceive having children, raising them and looking after the household as being inferior to earning money or anything else seen by society as being the ultimate goal in life. Why replace a woman’s sacred mission with the ideal that having a business or professional carer is a goal for itself? Why should raising a family be seen as a secondary course of action, only after one has first had a business of professional career?
It may seem that women hold a secondary role in religious activities. For example, women are not called up to the Torah for an Aliyah and they are not counted as part of a minyan in the synagogue, but this is irrelevant to their worth! Aliyah means ‘ascent’ referring to the spiritual loftiness that a man can achieve when they are part of the minyan. Women however achieve this in a different way. Again; equal but different.
In light of the above evidence it would seem that religious text may have been misinterpreted in society to benefit patriarchy, however this does not mean that women are subordinate to men, as they still seem to benefit from their religiosity and even though they are treated differently to men, this does not make them any less of worth.