36.5 C
Sunday, August 9, 2020

    Study: 1 in 5 young men in Qatar say husbands justified in beating wives


    A recently released government report has provided new insights into attitudes about the acceptability of domestic violence in Qatar.

    Some 16 percent of men and 7 percent of women living in Qatar say a husband is justified in “hitting or beating” their wives in certain circumstances, namely if the woman leave the house without telling her spouse or if she neglects their children, according to the Ministry of Development & Planning Statistics.

    The findings are contained in a wide-ranging report on the well-being of women and children that also looks at breastfeeding rates, educational attainment and reproductive health, among other topics, based on surveys conducted in 2012.

    According to the report’s authors, questions on domestic violence were asked to gain “an indication of cultural beliefs that tend to be associated with the prevalence of violence against women by their husbands.”

    The results cover responses from 5,699 women and 5,630 men between the ages of 15 and 49, and includes both opinions of expats and nationals.


    Acceptance of wife beating was highest among Qatari males, with slightly more than one out of five saying it was justified in some scenarios.

    Among non-Qatari men, 13.7 percent felt the same way. Young males between the ages of 15 and 19 years old were the most likely to say they believed domestic abuse in the form of hitting or beating was OK.

    Men who had attended university were less likely to find the practice acceptable than their peers with less education.

    Female respondents to the survey expressed far less support of the idea.

    Some 6.2 percent of Qatari women said a husband can be justified in beating in his wife, compared to 6.7 percent of non-Qatari women living in the country. Acceptance is higher among women with less education.

    The correlation between a woman’s level of education and tolerance of wife beating was also highlighted in a similar, smaller study conducted in 2012 by Qatar University that looked exclusively at the local population.

    That report found much higher rates of acceptance of spousal abuse, with 35.6 percent of men and 29.8 percent of women saying it was justified in some circumstances.

    Domestic violence laws

    Senior government officials have long called for a reduction in domestic violence incidents, which is perceived to have risen in recent years.

    In 2012, the Qatar Foundation for Protection of Women and Children was recording an average of nearly four cases of abuse daily.

    Legislation that specifically outlaws domestic violence has been in the works for more than two years, but has not yet led to any new laws.

    Currently, cases of spousal and child abuse are covered under general assault laws, which experts say hinders investigations into violence that takes place in the home.

    There has been no recent discussions about the status of Qatar’s draft law, although GCC officials said earlier this month that Gulf officials are considering a region-wide approach to the problem, starting with the establishment of a human rights office at the GCC headquarters in Riyadh.

    Human rights advocates have pressured governments across the Gulf to do more to protect women from domestic violence.

    The UAE continues to be criticized for a 2010 court ruling that permits a man to discipline his wife and children providing he leaves no marks and has attempted other methods of punishment.

    Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia drew praise for a powerful public awareness campaign that featured billboards of a veiled woman with a bruised eye. The English version features the words, “Some things can’t be covered.”

    However, Human Rights Watch last year questioned whether the country was serious about ending domestic violence after a Saudi court convicted two activists who had attempted to assist a woman and her child who had been confined to their home with inadequate food and water.

    Here’s the full report (the domestic violence section begins on p.108):

    [scribd id=246841032 key=key-YsP4okI8ATExGoJoNOSp mode=scroll]


    Peter Kovessy
    Peter Kovessy is a reporter with Doha News. Prior to moving to Qatar in 2013, he was the editor of the Ottawa Business Journal in Canada. He holds a Bachelor of Journalism degree from Carleton University.


    1. How about the SHE beats HIM for:
      – Going out at any time of the day and night without acknowledging her presence
      – Cheating with as many women as he wants
      – Arguing with her over the smallest things in a bid to keep being in control
      – Neglecting his marital bed because she’s not attractive enough for him, or merely a woman enforced on him by his parents.
      – If he refuses food or disregards all her efforts in the kitchen to please him and feed the family
      – For any of these reasons!!!

    2. Hardly surprising when respected scholar Yusuf al-Qaradawi, “ahem”, uses religion to justify beating your wife that young impressionable minds think it is ok.

      The comment section on this will be fun……

          • Somewhat true ( e.g. I found the miniscule number of people claiming not to use any form of contraception extraordinary ) but then you have to lead with something & as they teach you in journalism school… “If it bleeds it leads”.

        • Hi Osama – You are correct that we focused on one particular issue from
          the report. As the story notes, the study is but one topic covered in a
          wide-ranging document. The domestic violence issue was selected in large
          part because several locally based experts have publicly said in recent
          years that Qatar needs to do more to change attitudes surrounding
          spousal (and child) abuse, as well as draft new laws that make these
          offenses distinct from general assaults. This new research about
          attitudes towards domestic violence help advance those debates and

      • Meh – Mr Al Qaradawi is head of the “International Union of Muslim Scholars”, a group that is classified as a Terrorist Organization by the UAE. He’s also involved with the Muslim Brotherhood, a group that is classified as a Terrorist Organization by Saudi Arabia.

        I don’t think many people think he’s someone to be taken seriously anymore.

      • Ur mixing 2 things. U either talk about yousuf al qardawi or About religion. I myself do not find interest in his speech. Coming to religion or Islam I’m sure u would know better about relationships between a husband and wife and if not I assume u have no knowledge of Islam or you must be an atheist. About beating of wife Islam never permits to beat harshly or in jallad way. Under certain rules only he should give a light beating and not a hard one. Read Islam to know more. Jazakallah

        • But why would you want to know more about a system that permits any sort of spousal abuse, whether ‘harsh’ or not? What sort of person is drawn to that sort of mindset? If you are brought up in it, fine, you have had no choice, but to freely choose? Why?

          • Great ready for a response like, “If you aren’t an Islamic scholar or already a Muslim or know which version is the CORRECT interpretation or don’t speak Arabic you wouldn’t understand. Just accept that it’s truth.” I’ve had a few instances on this comments board where I’ve asked what I felt were legitimate logical questions and that’s the essence of the replies that I’ve gotten. I’ve had great, logical, open discussions with Muslim friends, but the theology on this comments section will make you pull your hair out. You just opened Pandora’s Box…..

            • Exactly. Apparently there are 4 common (and different) interpretations of the same verse:

              Most of the Islamic justification rests on only one ayah of the Quran. Verse 4:34 of the Quran has even been used by some religious scholars to justify wife beating. The verse states that:

              “Men are the qawwam and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more strength than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in the husband’s absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them first; next, refuse to share their beds; and last beat them lightly; but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means of annoyance: For Allah is Most High, great above you all.”

              The meaning of the terms in Arabic has been an issue of major debate. For example the meaning of qawwam has be interpreted in a various ways, from superior, to financially obligated to provide for poorer women. This could also have consequence on the entire meaning of the verse. The scholar Nawal H. Ammar identifies at least four different interpretations of this verse. The interpretations range from one who “sees wife beating as permissible if a wife does not obey her husband” to one who “understands Islam as permitting wife beating but with conditions of consideration for her safety.” Yet others interpret the verse by, “acknowledging exceptions when wife beating is allowed because it is generally unacceptable.” Ammar also argues that there are those Muslim scholars who claim that Verse 4:34 “has been misunderstood and does not even refer to beating when using the Arabic word idribuhunna.” There have been several recent attempts at deconstructing the Arabic term idribuhunna, which comes from the root (d-r-b) which has various meanings including to beat, or to forsake or to leave.

            • I thought the Koran was the exact word of God and not open to interpretation. Surely he could have been more specific, seems very strange of an all powerful creator to leave things open to doubtl. (Just like 8.12, nasty stuff)

        • Islam permits a light beating?? Really? I’ve not read it, I’m pretty shocked. How can Qatar possibly introduce domestic violence legislation when the book says light beating is OK? How is light beating defined or is that up to the person in the heat of the moment? Or the policeman? Or the judge after the incident?

        • and there in lies the problem. Someone using his book to justify spousal abuse.
          I have lots of knowledge of Islam and that is exactly why I choose Mr Al Qawardi who spouts this BS on his TV programmes.
          If a man on the street said I beat my wife because I believe it is my right as the stronger of the two he would be condemed. Put it in a holy book and people scream you have no right to attack my culture or my beliefs! it is amazing in the modern world such abuse is allowed to continue in the name of religion or culture.

    3. And what’s the correlation between those 20٪ and their regilious believes ? To say 1 in 5 without providing the regilious context is misleading..

      Many follow a very strick interaction of religion .. Others believe in the very strick interpretation but don’t necessilry follow it…

      They believe under the context of religion it is okay and therefore choose to support it .. Not necessarily practice it… Like if you ask an alcoholic Muslim.. Is drinking right ? No.. But I do drink..

      This doesn’t justify the high number in Qatar but it does explain it …

      The question should have been “have you ever exercised a form of domestic violance?” Or “would you ever hit your wife?”

      • Is their religion as important as their stance on beating wives?

        That seems to me to be tailor-made to confuse the matter. It really shouldn’t matter what religion someone has if they believe in domestic abuse.

    4. WOW…!! Interesting!!
      Where i come from we are taught never to raise a hand on a woman, simply because it is HER who will take your family name forward.
      We are taught to respect women, from your Mother to your sister, your wife and your daughter.
      This is just shameful as this shows the narrow minded someones thinking can get.
      No religion / custom / tradition allows you to beat a women or physically abuse a women.
      *sigh* Totally disgusted at this.

      • Actually, Islam allows you to do that. And a lot of men take advantage of it, of course. religion provides them with the perfect alibi to stick to barbaric traditions.

          • Actually the interpretation according to some is hit not beat, but only after everything else fails. Apparently hit is better than beat, well maybe but only after your pet, sorry wife, has disobeyed you many times.

            • That is not true… It is just a reminder that you are doing something wrong. The method is just touching them with something like a pencil and it should not hurt. It is a way of programing and not to reflect pain. It is wrong and prohibited to hit or beat a woman in Islam.

            • That too is not something from the prophet’s teaching or from the Quran but from Iman Shafie who lived 100 years after the prophet. He was referring to the Siwak…twice as long as one’s index finger and as thick as one’s thumb.

            • I think people need to read between the lines and figure out it’s not allowed. When it says not preferred, only in extreme cases, light touch etc… Basically it’s trying to say don’t hit without spelling it out. But then why all the confusion, why not just say it to avoid some men taking advantage with their own interpretation. I mean seriously, tapping anyone lightly with a little pen sized stick isn’t going to achieve anything and sounds bizarre, screaming will probably have more of an effect. Anyway, I’m done analysing now before dig myself a hole. As always no offense meant to anyone or any religion, just musing

            • Oh, sorry it likes training a dog to sit and beg, or programming a parrot to repeat words. Sounds more like indoctrination to except servitude.

            • It is more like cognitive behavior correctness indicator (communicator), as spouses are obligated to develop EACH OTHER when any of them stray into a corrupted path…

              Thank you for your inquiry and giving me the chance to clarify my statement MIMH 🙂

            • If I may add, and you may already know much of this; based on the various hadiths on this subject, it seems fairly clear to me that no person is allowed to cause harm, especially physical harm to another person, even a husband to his wife or a parent to their child.

              I don’t remember ever reading any story where the prophet got physical with any of his wives, in spite of there having been a number of cases where one of them, usually Aisha, disobeyed him.

            • Most of what we know of Mohamed are biographies written 200 years after his death, so who knows what is true and what is false. Biographies were just the propaganda of their time

      • In Qatari society, as in many other Muslim societies, this verse remains one of the most important justifications for gender-based violence. The intentional misinterpretation of the Verse has allowed the extent of violence not only to be more prevalent than any other time in the history of the region, but it appears to be becoming more socially acceptable as well. In a 2007 groundbreaking study sponsored by the Supreme Council on the Family, Dr. Kaltham al-Ghanim conducted a study in which she discovered 23 percent of the respondents were subjected to some form of violence. In the same study she recorded that the rate among the married respondents was higher at 24 percent. Of those subjected to violence, 64 percent stated that the violence took the form of beatings, and 1.2 percent indicated that they experienced sexual violence in the form of rape. Dr. Ghanim’s study also discusses the difficulties in reporting cases of violence. She argues that, “in a culture such as that of Qatar, where women are expected to uphold the family’s honor, it is unacceptable to reveal anything that might bring shame and dishonor on the family or the tribe. Since governmental security bodies are part of this cultural context, their performance is restricted by the social attitudes, rendering their statistics inaccurate and their enforcement of laws against violence ineffective.” In addition, whenever governmental security bodies, such as the police, are called for a case involving domestic violence, they often urge the female victim not to file an official complaint, and just settle for a written promise from the perpetrator that he will never use violence again. This approach is taken, the female victim is told, to help her and her family avoid any possible scandal. The pressure on the female victim to keep quiet is understandably more intense if the perpetrator is from the same family, such as a brother, or in a situation of wife battery, if the woman is married to a cousin.


        • How bout we just get rid of religion and the horrible misinterpretations of both Christian and Islamic documents that lead to Horrible injustices through out history that are justified as being in the name of some obscure deities that people claim have communicated with them but can never prove the communication yet tell/force people to blindly believe the fantastic and fictional stories that are told in their beloved books that have been translated and re-interpreted differently over and over again.

          How bout we just accept the idea of the creation of this great existence by something/someone that we will never be able to explain and stop trying to falsely explain it. Maybe then people will stop interpreting fictional materials as something that justified the beating of an equal partner that you have chosen to share your life with… I’m just say’in

          • Get rid of religion or the misinterpretation of it? And the obscure deitys are related to Christianity and islam or others? I believe in islam the words have not been translated and the stories relayed are referenced so to speak. I disagree with you on the point of fictional materials but a 100% on the misinterpretation. Also agree with the other gentleman on here who said this post is designed for comments and cherry picked from a long document to display a somewhat misleading and ridiculous argument. A survey this large would be more interesting with some correlations on who and why. Ie. Who thinks this is ok and why and then perhaps an educational strategy and support system to deal with this. Perhaps that would have been better than a sensationalist headline

            • The stories in Islam are not referenced and the Quran has changed over time. Even early Islamic scholars realised most of the hadiths if not all attributed to Mohd are simply not true, most made up by the leaders of the time to justify their actions.

            • No they are just my comments.

              However if you are interested in a good read based in facts and referenced material I recommend this.


              it chronicles the end of the Roman and Persian empires and the rise of the Islamic Empire that crushed both. First by Prophet Mohd and then even more successfully by Umar, whose military campaigns ripped the Roman and Persian empires of the near east and middle east to shreds.

            • “The stories in Islam are not referenced and the Quran has changed over time.” is not a comment, it’s presented as a fact, I’ll take your suggestion into consideration, and although I may learn something, it still represents one view point, which is not enough to create a balanced image, but merely add to an ongoing learned and knowledge based viewpoint that considers as many factors as possible.

            • Also the reviews of your book come off as extremely polarised, as well, on the surface it appears he’s more a novelist than a theologian or historian, and in fact studied English and Latin vs. say theology and / or history. All things that are considered when using a piece of literature to form opinions and / or arguments. A more interesting read may be something by Reza Aslan, although again, same considerations and cautions to be taken

            • Indeed.
              I read a fabulous book years ago written by a Muslim scholar (female).
              She shed so much light on the reasoning behind the way women are treated in Islam.
              Most of the problems today stem from ‘The Dark Ages’. A term that applies to Christianity and Islam of the time concerning their attitude to women and freedom and rights.
              After Mohammands death during the creation of the Hadith, The women who were close to Mohammad and knew his beliefs and intentions better than some of his henchmen were totally ignored. Even when they tried to dispute what they claimed was a complete misinterpretation of his words, they were ignored and not allowed to contribute to the Hadith.
              There is a lot in the Hadith that has been used by men to suppress women. Unfortunate and sad, as everything I have read about Mohammad seems to show him as a very progressive and open minded man especially in his attitude toward women. They gained more freedom and rights through early Islam than Jewish and Christian women ever had.
              What happened along the way?

            • Rules and laws of ethics in human studies (research with human subjects) expressly forbid the researchers from identifying the subjects without their consent, and even then its a slippery slope, especially if the research outs people for social, moral, ethical, or legal issues. The research actually presents a significant issue that should be addressed and in a very sound manner. Yes, headlines are designed to grab your attention. The headline represents one component of the broader study, but is it any less shocking when you look at the totality of the statistics? This is nothing short of an epidemic at all age groups identified in the study and across genders and nationalities.

            • Well you’re right in that you wouldn’t specifically identify the individuals, as in the US census you would get a neighbourhood view that you could, using the data, take further down, how restricted the research in this case is on connected the data is where the restrictions on data correlation will take place, just by looking at the study and their selection criteria, and the drawing in of census data, as well as the door to door collection of it, it can be presumed that while anonymous, there is a high level of data correlation that can be done, down to the individual level, without names of course

            • Wow that’s cool. you guys all bring up some very interesting points but how about we take a look at the situation at a Macro level. Look at “developed countries” and examine their general perception of women. Most developed countries have an understanding of the equality of women and the necessity for their leadership and voice. Those countries have build lasting economies that will find a way to weather economic times. effectively they have doubled their thinking power by the incorporation of women into all aspects of their society. There are some nations that have not taken on that line of thinking for religious or some strange ancient cultural thinking. Sure they may be like the “Beverly Hillbillies” and found a natural resource that makes them valid for now but the question is… How will that fair in the long run. Maybe a 100 years from now if you consider the reduced thinking capacity that is forced on a nation by antiquated masculine overtures will prove to be the demise of what was once a rich and promising nation.

        • Well that goes beyond Qatari families.
          Haven’t you heard how Qatar Airways “FIRE” their cabin crew if they are raped by Qataris?
          I know at least 2 Qatar Airways girls who the moment they filed a complaint of rape against Qatari civilians, got fired and deported. In Qatar, if you get raped, it is a different story and it is mostly your fault for getting raped.

          Jack the ripper would have loved to reside in Doha 🙂

      • I only have a problem with how you and those 38 people who liked your post think of animals in general and dogs in particular. Not only it is used as a heavy swearing word (Dog)… My friend, TRUST me… If you ever own a dog, you will respect that dog more than many people around you. Dogs are true with their feelings. They are VERY loyal. They love you unconditionally and expect NOTHING from you, besides your love to them.

        A man that beats a woman WISHES he is a dog! Even dogs respect their female dogs and defend them.

    5. That’s pretty sad, I feel bad for any woman that is beaten by her husband, especially if she is unable to do anything about it, and even more so if she believes it to be justified.

    6. “1 in 5 Young Men in Qatar….” does not equal 16%. 15.9% (as the report claims) is actually between 1 in 7 (14.3%) and 1 in 6 (16.7%). In my humble opinion, anything above 0.0% for any reason is reprehensible, and I know this is a minor point compared to the ethical implications of the outcome of this study. I normally think DN does a pretty good job of being unbiased and isn’t a click generator, but this seems a bit below their standards to eschew simple math to try for a more sensational headline.

        • Your site is not very good, it still gives you permission to hit your wife like a disobenient dog.

          “Islam actually prohibits men from hitting women, except in one very limited case when the wife is continuously rebellious and disobedient—not when she disobeys one request—and only as a last resort after all else fails.”

        • I’ve read the link, and the answer, according to that website, is quite clearly yes, it is okay to hit (but not beat) your wife when she has been particularly bad. It certainly does not say that under no circumstances should you ever, ever, ever hit your wife.

            • Except maybe in a hypothetical situation where she was trying to injure/kill someone else? – maybe a child? This is getting complicated.

            • No, it is not complicated. If your wife tries to kill someone you STOP the wife (and that get police and/or psychiatrist to deal with her) and not BEAT her in retaliation.

            • I’m not advocating beating. However to physically restrain someone it is feasible that a situation may arise when the only way to stop someone might be to physically attack them in some way – e.g. if they had a loaded gun trained upon someone.

      • Hi Chilidog – The headline refers to the number of men between the ages of 15 and 19, of which 22.5% – or slightly more than one in five – responded that they believe a man is justified in beating his wife in certain circumstances.

        • Your full of bs and you know it… I’m calling on your bs… You’ve taken the most damaging headline and went with it to provoke an emotional response… Cause you’re a dildo.. I meant dodo sorry ..

          • LOL. But then again that is what journalism is about….. No one wants to hear Olympics awarded in a completly clean way to a nice country, they want WC awarded in a shower of corruption to very hot Qatar…..

          • I think that passions are understandably high here on a subject this touchy. We talked extensively about how to approach this story and knew that some people would want to shoot the messenger for bringing it up.

            But Qatar’s government put the info out there, and we’re just writing about it – and giving people a forum to discuss it – in hopes of bringing about change.

            • I would say yes, especially when it comes to governments. You need a free press to keep governments in check, otherwise they can do what they like behind a cloak of secrecy.

            • But should they actively be advocating change in a society or is their role to state it like it is and leave it to the reader to interpret/act? If they start from the premise of their role is advocacy will that impact their capacity to report objectively?

            • But should they be accepting the two are the same or endeavouring to achieve something more objective. Reporting without prejudice?

            • Reporting without prejudice can’t be done. However, if the authors of the article have clearly stated that they chose to reprint these government stats with an eye to drawing attention to it and hopefully leading to change at least you know where they are coming from and their reasons for choosing those stats. That is legitimate and transparent imho.

            • Free press which advocates positive change yes… Sensational journalism to increase readership and fuel controversy and reinforce negative stereotype .. No

            • Unfortunately it just presents statistics and not facts because the stats don’t tell the whole truth. Already this has erupted into a debate about religion which was then corrected by DN as being religion free. Then it becomes about culture vs. Religion and if course culture out here has a different meaning than culture in say France! Ie. Art, music, history, literature. So a misappropriation of the word culture, it’s more like tribal traditions. Great example is local women marrying foreigners. Religion is explicit in saying it’s ok, the countries laws even allow it while somehow not allowing it because technically they can’t say no, but “culturally” they don’t like that

            • The only negative stereotypes being reinforced in this article come from some commenters, not from the article itself.

            • Not so. I agree with A_qtr on this. The article just spews statistics and opinions. Lazy reporting at best.

            • It’s all freedom of speech. You cannot decide who is advocating change and who is fueling controversy based on your own personal subjective appreciation of things. Everyone is entitled to his opinion and I hope you too you accept that 🙂

            • Relax! You’re getting so defensive about it. It’s government statistics after all. Remember we do not come from perfect societies. It helps to know about the ugly part of each one of them and perhaps someone cares to correct it.

            • No your reinforcing negative stereotypes about the local population.. You can achieve the same objective through using a less sensational title… Yet time and time again you take the dirt road in starting controversy and encouraging bigotry …

              What I’m interested to hear is your view as a Muslim women… Given your wear a hajib.. I’ll assume practicing … Say about this… Islam does in fact say in certain circumstances a husband is allowed to hit his wife ? Do you agree? Or do you disagree with teachings of Islam ?

            • The article says young men in Qatar, not Qatari men. My views are irrelevant with relation to this article. Become a DN member, join us for coffee and we can talk about it someday 🙂

            • I understand that is a difficult question for you to give a straight answer on social media like this. You will get attacked with ever way you go

            • attacked or not if you believe strong enough in your views why not share them…. unless the view opposes that of the majority readership’s views…. bad business

            • I think you’ll find all comments from DN staff typically answer questions that clarify article content, clearly they’re not going to start expressing personal opinions one way or another, so don’t go acting like you’re about to uncover some big scandal

            • An even better approach would have been to look at how to tackle domestic abuse and raise awareness on how to get help. Also DN should call on the Imams here to issue a fatwa against such abuse. Start a campaign, go to the refuges here in Qatar and show people what is being done to support women.
              As the report says the acceptance for abuse was more prevalent in the lesser educated. So if DN want to churn out gov figures that’s one aspect of reporting but it’s lazy reporting. If DN genuinely wants to be a community news outlet they they need to take responsibility for the news they report on especially on provocative issues like this. Educate as well as inform.

              I would like to see a follow up on this showing that Qatar will not tolerate domestic abuse and what they are doing about it.

            • Dear Shabina, my reply to you said it was under review (why?) and now it has disappeared. What about that comment made it unfit?

            • My last comment was never approved, so I’ll state it differently. Is it really OK for A_qtr to refer to someone as an instrument used for pleasure? I guarantee if I called someone that term in public there would be a lot of trouble coming my way. Why is here any different? The comment section rules specifically state that this is intended for an all-ages audience. I wouldn’t read his/her comment out loud with my son in the room.

            • I didn’t say cull any data, in fact this should be made very public and addressed, my objection is on the way the author choose his title, not in the the fact this data has been published.

            • To be honest .. I am unsure how the title is misleading anyone. It says 1 in 5 men in Qatar ……; not Qatari and the title for me personally makes me want to read the article. If one chooses to come to a bias conclusion just based on the title without reading the article…is that the author’s fault or the person reading it ? Secondly … yes … titles promote readership and nothing wrong with that….that is part and parcel of news outlets. Thirdly … is it possible it is you who has taken a introvert stance and subconsciously without and malice on the author’s part have taken upon yourself to see a bias when there is non ?

            • Authors rarely choose titles, that is more of an editorial decision, but regardless, what is wrong with it? We could quibble over the difference between 17% and 1 in 5 and the need for an ‘almost’ in there, but it doesn’t smear the local population – it is referring to the young male population of Qatar, not the young male Qatari population.

          • Actually, if you look solely at Qatari men, the number is 20.5% so the headline could have read, 1 in 5 of Qatari men, would this be less inciting? I think that all of the numbers are reprehensible, despite education levels, nationality, etc. The idea that this is even acceptable in the minds of 17%, 16%, 15%, or 14% is disturbing enough. If we consider a total population of 2,000,000 people (54% male), then 151,000 of them, at the lowest number consider this to be acceptable. If a disease infected that many people it would be called an epidemic. I don’t think this is sensationalist at all, it is quite in your face, and it should have people asking a great many questions, which is what a good article does.

        • Fair enough, it was confusing to me right off the bat. I still stand by my assertation that anything greater than zero is atrocious.

    7. The good news: If 16% of men believe it is justifiable for them to beat their wives, then 84% of men disagree and believe it is not okay. Therefore the majority of men are not represented by the statistics provided by the article. Of course, if the statistics were flipped to be more positive then it wouldn’t generate enough comments.

      • Would you say that if it was 16% of men believed sucide bombing or beheading infidels was justifiable? Oh, wait 84% was against its actually a postive story.

        Tell that to the women that get beaten that you are in the minority probably, so don’t complain so much and make it look bad.

    8. Violence is always inexcusable, but mostly it happens in the heat of the moment, a rush of blood to the head you might say, but to actually have it in your head that it is right to beat a woman in certain defined circumstances is truly breathtaking.

    9. Guys, even if DN sensationalised the story, the report still thinks domestic abuse is an issue in this country, as well as other local experts. To be honest, I applaud the government for carrying this sort of research out. It is our negative reactions to these shocking statistics that will be the catalyst for change.

    10. Its amazing how so ,many comments here seem to miss the importance of this article but are instead going on a DN bashing spree. Its not about the title .. its certainly not about Qataris alone … this subject is certainly not isolated to Qatar … its certainly not about religion … its about domestic abuse !! A man who beats a woman or a woman who beats a man !! Its not about if the title is sensationalized … its not about if the title is suggestive … it certainly isn’t. Its about someone using physical violence on another person. Can we stop being extroverts or introverts for that matter and start debating about how we can reduce the percentage ? Religion and religions have their own interpretations depending on who you speak to and in my view might even be outdated on many subjects. There have been Fatwas which no longer apply today which were issued in the past. Could the teachings also be outdated since many women of today are not dependent on men for their livelihood ? Instead of finding a solution…here we have people debating to justify beatings or blaming a community due to their religious belief and scriptures and have made a parallel between a religion and such beatings. That is just ludicrous and dumb !! If one beats a woman..he does so because it is his wish … people should stop using religion to justify their own actions that runs contrary to acceptable manners of behaviour at this time and age. People should stop passing the buck to religion or religions for their own demented sense of power over someone who is weaker. if you commit the crime…pay for your own crime … stop passing the buck to God !!

      • Islam promotes rape? Sorry this is not true. Can you share with us the verse or Hadith that says (Oh Ye Believers Rape Your Wives)?
        Islam promotes slavery? Definitely false. It actually promotes freeing slaves whenever possible. It even makes freeing slaves one of the most important and rewardful actions a Muslim can do.
        Islam promotes misogyny? May be by Western standards. We, Muslims, believe that men and women, though created equal, have different roles and responsibilities in life, and therefore different rights and duties.

        • I think the word you are looking for is not western but human standards. It is not an east v west issue it is treating everyone with same level of human standards.

          By owning slaves that is promotion that it is acceptable and your phrase, ‘It actually promotes freeing slaves whenever possible’. If I beleived in any religion I would want to believe in one that says it is unacceptable not to own another human being, not one that says free them if possible. Let’s not forget Prophet Mohd was a slave owner himself.

          • It is a typical thing to think that Western standards are Human Standards and that anything else must be certainly wrong or may be totally barbaric. That’s actually how many people supported the colonization of African countries (to civilize them). As for the Prophet himself owning a slave, that is not true. He had a male helper and I think at some point also a female helper, but not a slave. Islam stopped short of banning slavery because of the environment at that time (it was a pillar of the local economy in pretty much every part of the world, east and west).

            • To be honest I would have been surprised if he was not a slave owner during those times, it was practised by the Romans and the Persians as well as the Arabs.
              However some of the hadiths do not support your position, not only did he posses slaves according to Islamic tradition, he bought and sold them as well as approving of punishments.

              Narrated Ali ibn AbuTalib: A slave-girl belonging to the house of the
              Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) committed fornication. He (the Prophet)
              said: Rush up, Ali, and inflict the prescribed punishment on her. I then
              hurried up, and saw that blood was flowing from her, and did not stop. So I
              came to him and he said: Have you finished inflicting (punishment on her)? I
              said: I went to her while her blood was flowing. He said: Leave her alone till
              her bleeding stops; then inflict the prescribed punishment on her. And inflict
              the prescribed punishment on those whom your right hands possess (i.e. slaves).

              — Sunan Abu Dawood, 38:4458

          • Slavery was a reality that existed before Islam; you honestly think if Islam outlawed slavery it would have stopped? Even today, slavery has taken different forms; be it women trafficked to rich Western country to be used as prostitutes, or laborers who are tricked into debut with the hope of good paying job, only to end up in places like Qatar with a job less than what was promised, and no option but to take it.

            As for the Prophet (SAW) owning a slave, let me ask you this; are you 100% sure that if you lived back in those days, or even 200-400 years ago, and you were wealthy, you wouldn’t have owned a slave yourself?

    11. I’m surprised it’s that low, to be honest. That means 80% of men don’t believe in beating their wives.

      To get 80% of any population to do anything sensible is a pretty good sign.

    12. It is a question that comes up?
      Does a man that not associating with girls and women through adolescence, know enough about the woman he will marry, and what she expects of him?
      Does a lady know enought to marry, and understand the man she will live with?
      Although it stend in the Quran that everything to be attached contract, there is no detailed knowledge of each other, when a couple starts living together!
      It’s written thousands of books, to understand a man and a woman, and how to live together in love, understanding and see each other’s needs!
      We often live on each planet, and misunderstanding, jealousy, oppression and evil can easy grow.
      It’s more interesting how to develop marriage couple!
      Courses before and after the wedding, so the challenges that arise can be handled in a good way!
      Quran stands for goodness not devilry!
      No one can hide behind the Quran, for to use violence, and to clean their violence with it!


    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here

    All countries
    Total confirmed cases
    Updated on August 8, 2020 11:38 pm

    Related Articles

    - Advertisment -

    Most Read

    Culture minister: Vocal critics welcome in Qatar

    Culture Minister Hamad Bin Abdulaziz Al Kuwari said the only off-limit subjects are those that “offend” Islamic values, according to a statement carried by the government-run Qatar News Agency (QNA).

    Subscribe to our newsletter

    To be updated with all the latest news, offers and special announcements.