Am I missing something: Why are Somali men mad at this woman?

[Khaemwaset]

This thread is why Somalis are so cooked.
Jobless niggas spending 14 pages making gross generalisations mixed in with infidel ajnabi giving their thoughts.

Do you think women don't look into a man's finances back home? Are you people stupid? I've seen many niggas back in Djibouti working on getting their money up before their look for a girl. Why are people in this thread so pathetic

 

[geeljre49]

@Angelina and @Kisame is right. Poverty is so bad in Somalia us westerners can't fathom it. Most of my friends and relatives in their 20's want to leave any chance they get. I even knew one that used to dream about being in Europe and be happy for the rest of the day talking about it. Shit is real out there. Mummies raising kids in extreme poverty on their own. You can only appreciate what you have when you go back home and immerses yourself in their daily life.

 

[jusbrowsin]

Somali man bad ahh thread

 

[𐒋𐒖𐒆𐒔𐒖𐒕𐒈]

If someone advices a woman to marry a man who can provide for her, i.e., he is not impoverished and unable to cover her basic needs, is that person being materialistic?

That is a good question. Let me put it this way: if a wo(man) has a choice of two suitors:
a) Well-off, and
b) One of a 'good' standing, but poor.
In the material world, the one Eedo Muna is floating, where finances reign supreme, one would choose the one with the wherewithal (a); the other superseding factor is possibly good looks, reality in today's material world, but that is a different conversation. Is one being materialist? Yes, in both instances, for 'riches' outpace 'good'. At its very basic, in materialism, purse wins at every turn: fine dining, decent wheels, bespoke garb etc. The chap with the all the good attributes, yet poor, shall be left on the double-deck bus to brush shoulders with drunken tramps.

View attachment 342306



@𐒋𐒖𐒆𐒔𐒖𐒕𐒈

View attachment 342294

Please read the real Islamic position.

View attachment 342303

View attachment 342305

I also have another question that Islamweb touches upon, why does the Prophet s.a.w give a general advise for young men who can’t afford to marry to not marry and fast and wait?

I think what’s frustrating about this topic is that ones of the biggest rights I wife has in Islam is provision. Yet Somalis are raising their sons and coming up with fake hadiths about marrying and marrying without a dime and I know you heard that story from a Somali odey.

@𐒋𐒖𐒆𐒔𐒖𐒕𐒈​

I have another question, since you want to conflate not marrying very poor means marry rich, when the Prophet s.a.w advised the general masses of poor men to fast, are you going to interpret as him saying they should only marry when they have a lot of money?! Of course not!

We don’t just have the Hadith of Fatima bin Quas which we can acknowledge was only a case by case basis, but we also have a general Hadith that advises ALL men to fast if they cannot afford marriage!

Not the original text, but a reference to it; it is regarded being weak as to its authenticity in one of the sources, but is not fabricated.
إذ في سنده من لا يحتج به وهو إبراهيم بن المنذر

رتبة حديث جاء رجل إلى النبي يشكو الفاقة، فأمره أن يتزوج

تتناول هذه الصفحة موضوع حديث جاء رجل إلى النبي يشكو الفاقة، فأمره أن يتزوج، حيث يُبحث في صحة هذا الحديث ومعناه. يُذكر أن الحديث لم يُوجد بلفظه الكامل في كتب السنة، وقد وُجد بأسلوب قريب منه في تاريخ الخطيب البغدادي، لكنه يُعتبر ضعيف السند. يُشير العلماء مثل الذهبي وابن حجر إلى ضعف الراوي إبراهيم...

www.islamweb.net

Here is another reference to it; I could not vouch for the authenticity of this site.

https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/8030/did-the-prophet-suggest-to-a-poor-man-to-marry-twice-who-then-became-very-rich

Here is a hadith where the Prophet may pbuh said about a poor man 'This man is better than the entire earth filled with the likes of the other'.

Hadith on Nobility: Poor believers better than the wealthy and famous

www.abuaminaelias.com

Here is another hadith where the Prophet may pbuh speaks highly of the state of being poor.

الدرر السنية - الموسوعة الحديثية - شروح الأحاديث

dorar.net

So, when we say do not marry the poor, what are we doing? Vilifying the poor for being poor, as if it was their choice? As if we determine and decide whence Rizq comes?

 

[𐒋𐒖𐒆𐒔𐒖𐒕𐒈]

The issue is that a man that is very and I mean very poor simply cannot fulfil the rights of a wife or even children which is why they’re not encouraged to not marry and wait and fast. Even Assim mentioned this. You seem to want to by-pass this and I think whilst you acknowledge that a man must provide, you don’t seem to grasp the importance of it. Imagine if a man is amazing but he’s a pauper, where will his wife sleep, where will she give birth?

My apologies, I am a bit behind reading all the messages.
The difference walaal are here:
- Eedo Muna is proclaiming a fatwa to the ladies.
- Hadiths, and the two Sheikhs [Umal & Assam] are simply saying it is a choice, up to the individuals to choose to, or not to marry, but it is a religious directive. Eedo seems to be passing the hadith as if it is a directive. With me so far, eedo?

You’re not being rational or even talking about the reality and are going down the path of idealism rather than looking at it from a lens that’s also practical and Islam is a religion that still very much looks at the condition of human life as it is which is why madhabs hash out minimums I man must provide.

Idealism? We are a nation of, say 99% of its population is poor. Am I being an idealist?

You’re now going down the territory of lying about Edo. Edo literally spoke about the importance of character and spoke about that in detail.

Oh dear, seriously eedo? If you accuse me of lying, then I am afraid I shall have to do the gentlemanly thing, excuse myself, and take leave.

I’d like you to point out what’s flawed and what’s the major difference between her message and Assim Al Hakeem, that’s what I don’t understand?

I shall refer you to the earlier response.

 

[Journey.]

@𐒋𐒖𐒆𐒔𐒖𐒕𐒈 I think akhlaaq trumps wealth. But I also think that it's important for a man to be able to provide (at least the basics/minimum) for his wife. It's not an either-or.

 

[Angelina]

That is a good question. Let me put it this way: if a wo(man) has a choice of two suitors:
a) Well-off, and
b) One of a 'good' standing, but poor.
In the material world, the one Eedo Muna is floating, where finances reign supreme, one would choose the one with the wherewithal (a); the other superseding factor is possibly good looks, reality in today's material world, but that is a different conversation. Is one being materialist? Yes, in both instances, for 'riches' outpace 'good'. At its very basic, in materialism, purse wins at every turn: fine dining, decent wheels, bespoke garb etc. The chap with the all the good attributes, yet poor, shall be left on the double-deck bus to brush shoulders with drunken tramps.

Young man, this isn’t an either or and Edo Muna never presented that way which is why I said there was an element of dishonesty here although I do see that my comment was harsh and believe me you’re one of the posters I highly respect, so I hope I haven’t caused any offense. I enjoy our debates. Hence I will officially apologize.

Let me explain myself. Muna whilst lecturing the girls made it clear that character is of paramount importance and she also said provision is as well. But I struggle to understand why you pit character with provision? Doesn’t Allah say that men have to provide as well? Does our Quran and Sunnah pit those two concepts together or is it a case in which character is incredibly important but a man should be able to look after their womenfolk?

Also, why are you equating basic provision with riches? Again you’re relying on a polarized black and white/all or nothing approach which doesn’t even look at the issue holistically. That's incredibly unfair to Muna and goes against her underlining overall message.

Not the original text, but a reference to it; it is regarded being weak as to its authenticity in one of the sources, but is not fabricated.
إذ في سنده من لا يحتج به وهو إبراهيم بن المنذر

رتبة حديث جاء رجل إلى النبي يشكو الفاقة، فأمره أن يتزوج

تتناول هذه الصفحة موضوع حديث جاء رجل إلى النبي يشكو الفاقة، فأمره أن يتزوج، حيث يُبحث في صحة هذا الحديث ومعناه. يُذكر أن الحديث لم يُوجد بلفظه الكامل في كتب السنة، وقد وُجد بأسلوب قريب منه في تاريخ الخطيب البغدادي، لكنه يُعتبر ضعيف السند. يُشير العلماء مثل الذهبي وابن حجر إلى ضعف الراوي إبراهيم...

www.islamweb.net

Here is another reference to it; I could not vouch for the authenticity of this site.

https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/8030/did-the-prophet-suggest-to-a-poor-man-to-marry-twice-who-then-became-very-rich

My dear brother the site literally says it’s a fabrication. If you scroll down, it says it in black and white for all to see. I'm also getting the impression you don't read what I write but read to simply reply since I took a screenshot of that very site which literally says it is a fabrication, yet you didn't even acknowledge that and proceeded to use that very same site as some sort of proof?

Either way, whether it's a fabrication or incredibly weak it was evident for me from the get go it wasn't a proper hadith and it isn't something anyone can take as proof and it's weakness is evident and I was proven right straight away upon research, but this is how I knew initially:


1. Example, the weak/fabricated hadith encourages very poor men to marry despite the fact that the Islamic requirement of a second marriage is ability to provide.

2. The hadith talks about a man marrying again and gaining wealth via his wives working for him and becoming tailors. That is the antithesis of manliness from an Islamic perspective since the man cannot marry and expect a woman to provide for him. The Quran literally says:

ٱلرِّجَالُ قَوَّٰمُونَ عَلَى ٱلنِّسَآءِ بِمَا فَضَّلَ ٱللَّهُ بَعْضَهُمْ عَلَىٰ بَعْضٍۢ وَبِمَآ أَنفَقُوا۟ مِنْ أَمْوَٰلِهِمْ ۚ فَٱلصَّـٰلِحَـٰتُ قَـٰنِتَـٰتٌ حَـٰفِظَـٰتٌۭ لِّلْغَيْبِ بِمَا حَفِظَ ٱللَّهُ ۚ وَٱلَّـٰتِى تَخَافُونَ نُشُوزَهُنَّ فَعِظُوهُنَّ وَٱهْجُرُوهُنَّ فِى ٱلْمَضَاجِعِ وَٱضْرِبُوهُنَّ ۖ فَإِنْ أَطَعْنَكُمْ فَلَا تَبْغُوا۟ عَلَيْهِنَّ سَبِيلًا ۗ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ عَلِيًّۭا كَبِيرًۭا ٣٤

Men are the caretakers of women, as men have been provisioned by Allah over women and tasked with supporting them financially.

Here is another hadith where the Prophet may pbuh speaks highly of the state of being poor.

الدرر السنية - الموسوعة الحديثية - شروح الأحاديث

dorar.net

So, when we say do not marry the poor, what are we doing? Vilifying the poor for being poor, as if it was their choice? As if we determine and decide whence Rizq comes?

There is no vilification of the poor. The best of men can be poor but we’re talking about a man’s ability to provide and the actual marriage contract hinges upon that. Please read the Islamweb fatwa that illustrates this and even the Shafi guide to a man's minimum in terms of marriage.
I don’t think you’re realizing the duty of man here. He must look after his wife and kids hence if a man is in an incredibly poor state in which he can provide nothing, he is advised to fast.

 

[TekNiKo]

Somali man bad ahh thread

Look at the buzz words these people use “pick me” “beg” “Somali men bad”. Its clear this forum has certain characters pushing the evil idealogy of feminism. Thank God it will never dominate Somalia let them nafis on anonymous forums.

 

[Kisame]

Look at the buzz words these people use “pick me” “beg” “Somali men bad”. Its clear this forum has certain characters pushing the evil idealogy of feminism. Thank God it will never dominate Somalia let them nafis on anonymous forums.

You've been active on here since 2015.
Your probably older than me.

Why do you act this way???

 

[Angelina]

My apologies, I am a bit behind reading all the messages.
The difference walaal are here:
- Eedo Muna is proclaiming a fatwa to the ladies.
- Hadiths, and the two Sheikhs [Umal & Assam] are simply saying it is a choice, up to the individuals to choose to, or not to marry, but it is a religious directive. Eedo seems to be passing the hadith as if it is a directive. With me so far, eedo?

That I get. She could have said, I advise you marry a man that can provide and kept it that way. But unfortunately something tells me she would still get backlash, but probably less so. Some one in her position needs to be careful with her language. Saying a woman should marry a man that can provide is a fact that no one can deny especially when the Quran itself outlines that husbands should provide.

Idealism? We are a nation of, say 99% of its population is poor. Am I being an idealist?

I do think its idealim because a nation that is 99% poor has different levels and despite that its a trad society in which a man does indeed have to provide. There are poor men that can provide the basics and a man that can't even provide the basics like a roof over a woman's head as no business marrying. The Prophet s.a.w was clear with his general advice to the very poor: It is to fast.

Oh dear, seriously eedo? If you accuse me of lying, then I am afraid I shall have to do the gentlemanly thing, excuse myself, and take leave.

I shall refer you to the earlier response.

Sorry.

 

[Angelina]

You've been active on here since 2015.
Your probably older than me.

Why do you act this way???

He’s a troll tbh. Funnily enough if you scroll some of his posts he admits that what I’m talking about in the context of Somalis is indeed facts. He’s seen everything I’ve outlined since he lives/lived there, hence it’s even more baffling that he’s vilifying women. So he knows that life in Somalia for women can be hell and he knows that our laws and traditions simply doesn’t hold the bad apple amongst men accountable, so for him to believe that this discussion is a product of Western ‘feminism’ rather than the actual lived experiences of our women that he has also witnessed is fascinating and shows his incredibly low levels of empathy.

@TekNiKo We’ve had an honest discussion a few posts ago, so I implore you to use your brain a little and rationalize why women will come to certain conclusions that aren’t limited to screams of Westernizations. You admitted that there a lot of bad apples and that one of the issues is that men back home are enabled by this shameless aspect our culture. If you can admit that this is is due to a cultural issue, then you’re half way there admitting that as a society we need to rethink our attitudes to the treatment of women and men’s responsibility.

 

[TekNiKo]

You've been active on here since 2015.
Your probably older than me.

Why do you act this way???

Arent you a gaal?

 

[Kisame]

Arent you a gaal?

You've interacted with gaals on here before. You've literally been here since 2015. In a lot of the older threads I've found I noticed a lot of old gaal users.

Stop acting like I'm some sort of rare Pokemon

 

[Kisame]

He’s a troll tbh. Funnily enough if you scroll some of his posts he admits that what I’m talking about in the context of Somalis is indeed facts. He’s seen everything I’ve outlined since he lives/lived there, hence it’s even more baffling that he’s vilifying women. So he knows that life in Somalia for women can be hell and he knows that our laws and traditions simply doesn’t hold the bad apple amongst men accountable, so for him to believe that this discussion is a product of Western ‘feminism’ rather than the actual lived experiences of our women that he has also witnessed is fascinating and shows his incredibly low levels of empathy.

@TekNiKo We’ve had an honest discussion a few posts ago, so I implore you to use your brain a little and rationalize why women will come to certain conclusions that aren’t limited to screams of Westernizations. You admitted that there a lot of bad apples and that one of the issues is that men back home are enabled by this shameless aspect our culture. If you can admit that this is is due to a cultural issue, then you’re half way there admitting that as a society we need to rethink our attitudes to the treatment of women and men’s responsibility.

He mentioned moving back to Africa.

I think he was an incel living in the west and was probably caught off guard by the degeneracy back home. He can't police naag in Africa so the only thing he can do is talk shit about the ones living in the west.

 

[TekNiKo]

You've interacted with gaals on here before. You've literally been here since 2015. In a lot of the older threads I've found I noticed a lot of old gaal users.

Stop acting like I'm some sort of rare Pokemon

You've interacted with gaals on here before. You've literally been here since 2015. In a lot of the older threads I've found I noticed a lot of old gaal users.

Stop acting like I'm some sort of rare Pokemon

يَا مُقَلِّبَ الْقُلُوبِ ثَبِّتْ قَلْبِي عَلَى دِينِكَ

 

[TekNiKo]

I went to al-Hirah and saw them (the people) prostrating themselves before a satrap of theirs, so I said: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) has most right to have prostration made before him. When I came to the Prophet (ﷺ), I said: I went to al-Hirah and saw them prostrating themselves before a satrap of theirs, but you have most right, Messenger of Allah, to have (people) prostrating themselves before you. He said: Tell me , if you were to pass my grave, would you prostrate yourself before it? I said: No. He then said: Do not do so. If I were to command anyone to make prostration before another I would command women to prostrate themselves before their husbands, because of the special right over them given to husbands by Allah.

حَدَّثَنَا عَمْرُو بْنُ عَوْنٍ، أَخْبَرَنَا إِسْحَاقُ بْنُ يُوسُفَ، عَنْ شَرِيكٍ، عَنْ حُصَيْنٍ، عَنِ الشَّعْبِيِّ، عَنْ قَيْسِ بْنِ سَعْدٍ، قَالَ أَتَيْتُ الْحِيرَةَ فَرَأَيْتُهُمْ يَسْجُدُونَ لِمَرْزُبَانٍ لَهُمْ فَقُلْتُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ أَحَقُّ أَنْ يُسْجَدَ لَهُ قَالَ فَأَتَيْتُ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقُلْتُ إِنِّي أَتَيْتُ الْحِيرَةَ فَرَأَيْتُهُمْ يَسْجُدُونَ لِمَرْزُبَانٍ لَهُمْ فَأَنْتَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ أَحَقُّ أَنْ نَسْجُدَ لَكَ ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏"‏ أَرَأَيْتَ لَوْ مَرَرْتَ بِقَبْرِي أَكُنْتَ تَسْجُدُ لَهُ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ قُلْتُ لاَ ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏"‏ فَلاَ تَفْعَلُوا لَوْ كُنْتُ آمِرًا أَحَدًا أَنْ يَسْجُدَ لأَحَدٍ لأَمَرْتُ النِّسَاءَ أَنْ يَسْجُدْنَ لأَزْوَاجِهِنَّ لِمَا جَعَلَ اللَّهُ لَهُمْ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنَ الْحَقِّ ‏"‏ ‏.‏

صحيح دون جملة القبر (الألباني)

حكم :

 

[Angelina]

I went to al-Hirah and saw them (the people) prostrating themselves before a satrap of theirs, so I said: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) has most right to have prostration made before him. When I came to the Prophet (ﷺ), I said: I went to al-Hirah and saw them prostrating themselves before a satrap of theirs, but you have most right, Messenger of Allah, to have (people) prostrating themselves before you. He said: Tell me , if you were to pass my grave, would you prostrate yourself before it? I said: No. He then said: Do not do so. If I were to command anyone to make prostration before another I would command women to prostrate themselves before their husbands, because of the special right over them given to husbands by Allah.

حَدَّثَنَا عَمْرُو بْنُ عَوْنٍ، أَخْبَرَنَا إِسْحَاقُ بْنُ يُوسُفَ، عَنْ شَرِيكٍ، عَنْ حُصَيْنٍ، عَنِ الشَّعْبِيِّ، عَنْ قَيْسِ بْنِ سَعْدٍ، قَالَ أَتَيْتُ الْحِيرَةَ فَرَأَيْتُهُمْ يَسْجُدُونَ لِمَرْزُبَانٍ لَهُمْ فَقُلْتُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ أَحَقُّ أَنْ يُسْجَدَ لَهُ قَالَ فَأَتَيْتُ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقُلْتُ إِنِّي أَتَيْتُ الْحِيرَةَ فَرَأَيْتُهُمْ يَسْجُدُونَ لِمَرْزُبَانٍ لَهُمْ فَأَنْتَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ أَحَقُّ أَنْ نَسْجُدَ لَكَ ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏"‏ أَرَأَيْتَ لَوْ مَرَرْتَ بِقَبْرِي أَكُنْتَ تَسْجُدُ لَهُ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ قُلْتُ لاَ ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏"‏ فَلاَ تَفْعَلُوا لَوْ كُنْتُ آمِرًا أَحَدًا أَنْ يَسْجُدَ لأَحَدٍ لأَمَرْتُ النِّسَاءَ أَنْ يَسْجُدْنَ لأَزْوَاجِهِنَّ لِمَا جَعَلَ اللَّهُ لَهُمْ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنَ الْحَقِّ ‏"‏ ‏.‏

صحيح دون جملة القبر (الألباني)

حكم :

What does that have to do with a woman marrying a man that can provide?

Also, I never knew you were Salafi? So now you’re a believer in Sh. Albani when it comes to the grading of Hadith as he was the one that graded it Sahih, but on any other occasion you bash Salafis.

Lol TekNIko you’re a fantastic troll!

 

[𐒋𐒖𐒆𐒔𐒖𐒕𐒈]

@𐒋𐒖𐒆𐒔𐒖𐒕𐒈 I think akhlaaq trumps wealth. But I also think that it's important for a man to be able to provide (at least the basics/minimum) for his wife. It's not an either-or.

We are in agreement on both. Did I fail to make that clear in my earlier responses? Or come across as if arguing for otherwise?

Young man, this isn’t an either or and Edo Muna never presented that way which is why I said there was an element of dishonesty here although I do see that my comment was harsh and believe me you’re one of the posters I highly respect, so I hope I haven’t caused any offense. I enjoy our debates. Hence I will officially apologize.

Walaalo, in principle, we are mostly in agreement on core issues, but differ the path Eedo Muna is charting in what 'appears' to me a proclamation on the issue of the poor. The rest of her message is sound, spot on, and I think to have made that clear from the onset more than once. Let us agree to disagree on that front, shall we?

No offence taken walaal, I just want us to debate the issues at hand, for when one questions the character of another, or bring it into question, it just derails the discourse. Masha'Allah you are a brilliant egg, a prolific debater, and a pleasure to cross swords with.​

Also, why are you equating basic provision with riches? Again you’re relying on a polarized black and white/all or nothing approach which doesn’t even look at the issue holistically. That's incredibly unfair to Muna and goes against her underlining overall message.

I am using the term 'riches' as the opposite of poor, and to differentiate it from being 'wealthy'. Do you think I was being unfair to Eedo Muna in that respect?

My dear brother the site literally says it’s a fabrication. If you scroll down, it says it in black and white for all to see. I'm also getting the impression you don't read what I write but read to simply reply since I took a screenshot of that very site which literally says it is a fabrication, yet you didn't even acknowledge that and proceeded to use that very same site as some sort of proof?

I was drawing a distinction between 'weak', where its chain of transmission is questionable, as is the case of Ibrahim ibn al Mundhir suspected of being unreliable, and 'fabrication', where it has no basis, or is wholly manufactured. True, in the Shafi3i madhab, the judgement is rather different from other madhabs.

These lines suffice:
وقد وردت بعض الآثار تدل على نفس المعنى عن بعض الصحابة كعمر وعائشة وابن مسعود وابن عباس وغيرهم، وبعضها صح موقوفاً وبعضها لم يصح، قال ابن كثير رحمه الله: وفي القرآن غنية عنه. يريد قوله تعالى: وَأَنْكِحُوا الْأَيَامَى مِنْكُمْ وَالصَّالِحِينَ مِنْ عِبَادِكُمْ وَإِمَائِكُمْ إِنْ يَكُونُوا فُقَرَاءَ يُغْنِهِمُ اللَّهُ مِنْ فَضْلِهِ وَاللَّهُ وَاسِعٌ عَلِيمٌ {النور: 32}.

Either way, whether it's a fabrication or incredibly weak it was evident for me from the get go it wasn't a proper hadith and it isn't something anyone can take as proof and it's weakness is evident and I was proven right straight away upon research, but this is how I knew initially:

1. Example, the weak/fabricated hadith encourages very poor men to marry despite the fact that the Islamic requirement of a second marriage is ability to provide.

2. The hadith talks about a man marrying again and gaining wealth via his wives working for him and becoming tailors. That is the antithesis of manliness from an Islamic perspective since the man cannot marry and expect a woman to provide for him. The Quran literally says:

ٱلرِّجَالُ قَوَّٰمُونَ عَلَى ٱلنِّسَآءِ بِمَا فَضَّلَ ٱللَّهُ بَعْضَهُمْ عَلَىٰ بَعْضٍۢ وَبِمَآ أَنفَقُوا۟ مِنْ أَمْوَٰلِهِمْ ۚ فَٱلصَّـٰلِحَـٰتُ قَـٰنِتَـٰتٌ حَـٰفِظَـٰتٌۭ لِّلْغَيْبِ بِمَا حَفِظَ ٱللَّهُ ۚ وَٱلَّـٰتِى تَخَافُونَ نُشُوزَهُنَّ فَعِظُوهُنَّ وَٱهْجُرُوهُنَّ فِى ٱلْمَضَاجِعِ وَٱضْرِبُوهُنَّ ۖ فَإِنْ أَطَعْنَكُمْ فَلَا تَبْغُوا۟ عَلَيْهِنَّ سَبِيلًا ۗ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ عَلِيًّۭا كَبِيرًۭا ٣٤

Men are the caretakers of women, as men have been provisioned by Allah over women and tasked with supporting them financially.

On the issue of providing for one's family, again we are in agreement a man MUST provide, care, look after, and be any and all for his family. I even go one step further, and argue men MUST care for their friends, community, neighbours etc. I even recall your lambasting me for it in a previous conversation.

There is no vilification of the poor. The best of men can be poor but we’re talking about a man’s ability to provide and the actual marriage contract hinges upon that. Please read the Islamweb fatwa that illustrates this and even the Shafi guide to a man's minimum in terms of marriage.
I don’t think you’re realizing the duty of man here. He must look after his wife and kids hence if a man is in an incredibly poor state in which he can provide nothing, he is advised to fast.

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

I shall reflect on the issue of egalitarianism at time permits.

 

[𐒋𐒖𐒆𐒔𐒖𐒕𐒈]

That I get. She could have said, I advise you marry a man that can provide and kept it that way. But unfortunately something tells me she would still get backlash, but probably less so. Some one in her position needs to be careful with her language. Saying a woman should marry a man that can provide is a fact that no one can deny especially when the Quran itself outlines that husbands should provide.

I like Eedo Muna, as she reminds me of my aunties, wish her to continue on her activism, and I think as she sharpens her rhetoric, and refines her message, she shall be a force for good. In time, right-thinking men shall be on her side.

 

[Journey.]

We are in agreement on both. Did I fail to make that clear in my earlier responses? Or come across as if arguing for otherwise?

I had the impression you were arguing that if a man has good akhlaaq his inability to be a provider should be overlooked. And that being hung up on the provider aspect was materialism. It was a strange argument tbh and seems like we were misunderstanding each other's points. It seems that by "poor" you meant a man of limited means but still able to provide the basics, and @Angelina and I meant a man who isn't even able cover the basics.