When my friend was 15, her father left her mother for another woman. She was away at boarding school, and every month all he gave her was RM10 as pocket money. No, this was not in the 1950's; we're very much talking about RM10 in this day and age. It was her mother who worked hard to keep her younger siblings clothed, fed and schooled, and to line her pockets with more than just that solitary red piece of paper. Her father was too busy with his new family, he had mouths to feed to, he said, couldn't anyone understand as he sped off in his 5-series Beemer.

During the nuptials last week, my 'newly acquired' brother-in-law had to read the takliq statement, which in effect meant that should he perform certain actions (or fail to), my sister would be allowed to seek divorce. It was a sobering moment at such a joyous occasion, a stark reminder that marriage is about responsibility and compromise; and that sometimes, that responsibility transcends the life of the marital tie itself, especially when there is offspring involved.

Social accounting

It scares me sometimes to think about that much responsibility. Once the festivities have subsided, the henna on the fingers all faded there is a very real life waiting to be lived, and that life is no longer one where you fend just for yourself. There is another person who's welfare you are responsible for, regardless of whether you are the husband or the wife; and in due time, that number may well multiply.

And I think I'm not the only one who feels overwhelmed by that R word. Because with responsibility comes accountability, and as a Muslim accountability doesn't end with just this life you carry it onwards into the next. It is the prospect of being made accountable for abdicating your responsibilities that makes the whole thing quite a daunting prospect at least for me.

Which is why I found the proposal and subsequent debate of the nikah misyar issue very interesting indeed. Interesting, on a few counts. Firstly, its attractive feature: abdication of responsibility without the threat of being made accountable for it. Imagine a marriage where all you are accountable for are a few shags here and there as needs be. A f**k-buddy with an akad. It's all about the pleasure, with no repercussions whatsoever. It's like having a credit card with a limitless credit limit, which you never have to repay, ever. Almost like a friends-with-benefits arrangement, but within the laws of Islam. You could see how this would appeal to men they get to keep a non-misyar wife who tends to their every need; and then up to three extra kept women to whom all they owe is sex. Having their cake and eating it too, it seems.

You could also see how this would offend women, from one perspective, especially in regions of the world where marriage is seen as less of an equal partnership, but a mechanism that ensures women are protected (how much protected, and to what extent, is fodder for another chinwag) and cared for. When you view marriage as an institution where a woman is to be cared for and cherished by her spouse, the very idea that men are given the right to enter into an arrangement that absconds him of all the associated responsibility is a slap in the face. Furthermore, the focus on mainly the sexual relations would offend many women in general refuse to be seen as merely objects for a man's sexual satisfaction: which in essence is what many see the nikah misyar arrangement reduces the woman to.

But what if it was the woman's choice? What if the woman wanted such an arrangement? If you were financially secure enough to not depend on others for your needs and wants; and all you cared for was that your sexual relations were within the bounds of Islamic legalities, the nikah misyar arrangement would be right up your street. If the arrangements were predominantly short term, then the woman could potentially have multiple partners in her lifetime, without ever incurring the wrath of God! Now how's that for female empowerment?

But that's on paper. There are many practicalities that will render such a union suboptimal. For starters, what if the woman becomes pregnant? Under who's care would the child fall under? Would the father be responsible for costs associated with bringing up the child? In the event of a divorce, what would be the associated legalities? Then there are matters of the heart. Really, truly, ask yourself, whether you are male or female, to what extent do things remain at 'just sex'?

Oh please

Then there's the media spin on the issue, which pretty much irked me. Nikah misyar was touted as a way to 'make sure moral related problems associated with unwed women could be solved'. Excuse me, what social ills and moral issues? Could you be more specific? Any statistics anywhere, which would enable us to compare the 'problems' brought upon by unwed women vs. unwed men? Is the market for male escort services bigger than that for prostitution, one wonders, so much so that such a statement is warranted? In my most humble of opinions, it is unfair to lay the cause of social ills as the doorstep of any gender. If it's a problem, then deal with it there is no need to be making demeaning statements.

Which really underlines the chauvinist tone that underscores this country in particular. Women are the source of all evil. Men rape women not because they have violent needs and tendencies to hurt, but because women dress skimpily. There are unwed mothers who throw away babies, but that's the woman's fault too. It's never their fault, always ours. You can see why a marriage that absolves the male of all his responsibilities would appeal to many.

I remember the comment by an MP earlier this year, who described divorced women as loose and gatal. I couldn't help but think about my friend's mother whom I talked about earlier, who juggled a job and a part time university course so that she could secure a better future for her kids, no thanks to their father. Gatal? She had no time to even think about the meaning of the word. But again... there you go. Chauvinism lives on.

As a sidenote, you could also see how the general outlook on women would render the hijabbed Akademi Fantasia contestant's aspirations useless. Men can use their religious image to hoist themselves upwards and onwards in showbiz; but not women. Pious men can sing to their hearts content and date starlets while going fishing. Pious women should never be seen or heard.

That aside, what do I personally think of nikah misyar? In theory I think it could work if the power lay in the hands of the woman, and she herself is fully aware of her rights and what she is giving up. In practise, I think it has the potential to be misused, because we don't live in a female friendly society. I think men will use it as a get-out clause for themselves rather than allowing independent women to enjoy a lifestyle of their own without being at risk for going against religion.

But I also think it is a blight on the sanctity of marriage itself a holy union under the eyes of God, ripped to shreds in the name of sex. Then again maybe I'm just too much of a romantic, eh?

IDLAN ZAKARIA proudly endorses black, sugarless coffee administered via an IV drip for the upcoming World Cup all-nighters.