WOMEN's voices have been drowned out as male progressives and conservatives battle for the soul of Glasgow Central Mosque, Muslim feminists have warned.
Campaigners Talat Yaqoob and Nighet Nasim Riaz support many of the aims of a reformist faction currently fighting for control of what is Scotland's biggest single place of worship of any faith.
But the two women stress that reformers, despite calling for a fuller role for women at the mosque, are just as male-dominated as the conservative "Old Guard" they wish to replace.
"While reading the unfolding drama, it was striking that every single voice commenting was a man. All those involved were men. And all those approached by the media for comment were men."
A cultural war has been under way at Glasgow Central Mosque for years but has come to a head over the last month.
Progressives, led by General Secretary Nabeel Shaikh, had been in control of the Clydeside complex since last year with the support of OSCR, the charities' watchdog, which had concerns about the way the mosque had previously been run.
Mr Shaikh and his allies had been very eager to support both women and people from a more diverse ethnic background to play a bigger role at the mosque.
However, Mr Shaikh and his supporters have resigned, citing threats to them and their family and more conservative figure, all from a Pakistani background, have regained control.
A general meeting will take place next month with a new committee to be appointed.
Muslim "suffragetes" - women who want to get on the the mosque's ruling committee - have been quietly campaigning for some years.
Back in 2009 two Strathclyde University students were the first to apply for a place on the mosque board but were unsuccessful.
They are part of a wider global movement by Muslim women, especially in non-Muslim countries, to challenge a patriarchy in the faith. Campaigners stress that attitudes that exclude women from positions of power in mosques are cultural rather than religious.
However, the conservative currently in interim control of the mosque stressed he had spiritual grounds to oppose, for example, female imams.
Shafi Kausar, acting general secretary of the mosque, said: "We have to follow Islam's rules, which are made by the prophet and the Koran.
"We don't bring it in to the western politics. There are women who say they want to be Imams. It is not allowed in Islam. It is not needed.
"You can't pass a rule in parliament for the Mosque. Islam is a faith. If you believe in a religion, you have to believe in all that it dictates."
Ms Yaqoob and Mrs Riaz have rejected what they call a "get-out clause" of setting up "women's committees" within the mosque.
Women, they said, must serve "alongside the decision-makers on the Executive Committee, where we play our part as community members.
"It would be right to ask for half of those spaces to be allocated to women, considering that we make up more than 50 per cent of society.
"We have a legacy of strong women leaders in Islam, but today it is the cultural values and norms of the patriarchy, mostly of Pakistani and Kashmiri descent, who decide what role we are given, as they go forward.
To be truly bold and progressive, we should welcome healthy discussion into mosques and provide not just an education in how to pray but on the difference between culture and religion.
"The former, after all, currently does an injustice to the latter."
Reformists have argued that excluding women from mosque decision-making is making some vulnerable to extremism.
Aamer Anwar, a lawyer who advised Mr Shaikh, earlier claimed attitude to women left the Muslim community "ill equipped when along comes someone like Glasgow’s ‘Jihadi Bride’ Aqsa Mahmood who went off to Syria and overnight became a poster girl for ISIS".
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel