Columnists

The case for ensuring chastity for men with women's emancipation

AMONG my parenting commitments is the ritual of driving my children to school and fetching them back home every school day. In both ways, I negotiate with them on the selection of media/information entertainment.

They want to listen to their favourite music or watch preferred cartoons. With their approval, I opt for listening to various (international) news bulletins.

Sometimes, given the presence of my children in the car, the news content causes embarrassment and I have to turn off the channel. Sexual scandals and detailed descriptions of sexual offences involving politicians and so-called celebrities are often featured in the media.

More often than not, perpetrators of such sexual violence are men of influence. This perhaps reflects the sexual behaviour of men in the wider society.

What does male sexual delinquency mean for women? Let's turn to history for an answer.

The struggle for women's right to vote was the most memorable and effective feminist movement in 20th century Europe and America. Its success marked the end of first-wave feminism.

As described in the British suffragette Christabel Pankhurst's book The Great Scourge and How to End It (1913), the suffrage movement was premised upon two basic concerns: Votes for women and chastity for men.

In addition to fighting for the voting rights of women, Pankhurst launched a moral attack on the double standard of sexual morality.

In Victorian Britain, women were stigmatised for fleshly behaviours that were condoned if committed by men. Sex outside of marriage was considered "an indelible stain for women but a mere peccadillo for men".

As a result, men freely visited prostitutes "many of whom were infected with social [venereal] diseases".

In her book, Pankhurst states: "That cure, briefly stated, is votes for women and chastity for men. Quotations and opinions from eminent medical men are given, and these show that chastity for men is healthful for themselves and is imperative in the interests of the [human] race" (p. 7).

While demanding an equal (universal adult) franchise for women, Pankhurst did not forget the need to protect them from sexually transmitted diseases. Hence, she sought to dissuade men from visiting brothels and having extramarital sex.

In The Militant Suffrage Movement: Citizenship and Resistance in Britain, 1860-1930 (2003), Laura E. Nym Mayhall of the Catholic University of America sums up the double-edged suffrage movement in the following way:

"Until men adopted women's sexual standard of conduct, that is, until men embraced chastity and eschewed promiscuity, all women would remain in a state of slavery. Votes for women and chastity for men, then, were intertwined" (p. 94).

I don't think that the notorious sexual double standard has disappeared completely. The #MeToo movement (founded in 2006) started bringing accusations of sexual violence against women and exposing its perpetrators.

However, the vehemence of the demand for men's responsible sexual behaviour in the present-day world does not seem to have attracted many voices like Pankhurst's.

I have friends in the medical field and, through them, I have heard stories of men carrying venereal diseases from visiting brothels and transmitting them to their partners or wives.

Therefore, 110 years on from the publication of Pankhurst's The Great Scourge and How to End It, the relevance of her concern and demand for male chastity is still palpable. Women obtained the voting right a century ago. But, are they assured of the chastity of men?

The risk of sexually transmitted diseases is not the only menace of spousal infidelity. The issue of adultery or cheating on spouses is also a common reason for divorce.

We should not forget that in the event of a divorce between a couple with children, the latter are the worst sufferers. When marriages are destabilised, in most cases, the harm thus caused to the children is greater than what the divorcing couple suffer.

Jayakrishnan Seeridaran, [11/8/2023 12:59 PM]

Given the role that promiscuity plays in destabilising marriages and in causing sufferings for family members, champions of women's rights should tread carefully in addressing this problem.

They can follow the example of Pankhurst and demand that men abstain from extramarital relationships.

Some feminists tend to disregard conventional sexual morality or appear to be reluctant to follow the religious code of conduct regarding sexual relationships.

However, I believe that they should exercise extreme caution and weigh the consequences of sexual delinquency whose victims are most often women and children.

It is perhaps worth mentioning here that, in conventional societal perceptions, the chastity of women is given greater attention and importance. Such an attitudinal bias is unacceptable in Islam because the two verses (24:30-31) in the Quran that discuss chastity and related matters highlight the need for sexual purity of men before that of women.

Feminists especially in Muslim societies may bring this particular Quranic perspective to the fore when calling for the equal importance of male chastity.

* The writer is a faculty member at International Islamic University Malaysia and the Editor-in-Chief of Asiatic: IIUM Journal of English Language and Literature. He can be reached at mmhasan@iium.edu.my

Most Popular
Related Article
Says Stories