Oikos/Polis Conflict Perspectives of Gender Feminists and Islamic Revivalists

Abstract

Conflict has been an inescapable phenomenon of Western society,
particularly since the sixteenth century. If the era of the medieval West is
characterized by the conflict between Pope and Emperor, which eventually
gave rise to modem nation-states, the postmodem era may rightly be
described as one of conflict between family and state.
The postmodem conflict can be traced back to the oikos/polis conflict
generated by Western political thought, which originated from Greek
misogyny. In the same way the church was overthrown in the conflict in
the medieval era, the family is being overthrown in the postmodern era by
the neo-Marxist radical school of postmodern feminism, which is also
called gender feminism.
Quite contrary to gender feminists, contemporary Islamic revivalists
find no conflict between the two institutions of family and state. They give
due recognition to both institutions and consider them as complementary to
one another. This is quite observable in their views and activities in the area
of women’s issues, particularly that of women’s political participation.
The aim of this paper is to examine the debate on women’s political
participation between gender feminists and contemporary Islamic revivalists.
The paper shall demonstrate how gender feminists prefer women’s
political participation at the cost of deconstructing gender and family. The
contemporary Islamic revivalists, however, support and encourage
women’s political participation-but not at the expense of family and the
distinct identity of woman.
The paper is divided into three parts. In the first and second parts, the
arguments of gender feminists and contemporary Islamic revivalists on
women’s political participation shall be analyzed. The third part shall identify
and discuss the differences between them. It is followed by a brief
conclusion ...