An Insta Triple Talaq

All’s well that ends well – and so we might breathe a sigh of relief with Sheikha Mahra’s latest post: 

Dear Father,[1] Thank you for your support. Thank you for your love. Thank you for marking an era that justifies that there is justice for everyone. My respect and love, Mahra [2] (Instagram, August 20, 2024)

This seemed to signify, in so many words, His Highness’s support of his daughter’s triple talaq [3] – “I divorce you, I divorce you, and I Divorce You” – an Instagram message this Dubai princess posted to her husband, and the world, just over a month ago.  Her initial post struck like lightning – what an éclat!  Not only is the triple talaq to end marriage considered reprehensible, not only has this unilateral exit been outlawed in numerous countries, but it belongs exclusively to men. What irreverence for a woman to speak those words!

And what inventiveness!  For many, especially the 674,000 likes (as of today), this social media missive was seen to speak truth to power, calling malarkey to the patriarchy and outing the emperor’s old clothes. To be sure, the triple talaq is toxic. It is a salient and unambiguous piece of misogyny. It casts the holy bonds of matrimony into a ploy for male convenience and utility. And it leaves women utterly vulnerable and powerless – and surely in many cases devastated and destitute. How breathtaking, then, to see it flaming in the hands of a proclaimed ex-wife on Insta.

Here is the Sheikha, a celebrity figure, beauty icon, glamour spouse, and new mother, poking at this rule, turning it on its head, challenging the dogma, and proclaiming her right to justice and equality. Jaws dropped around the world. You could hear both supporters and detractors hold their breath for the response.

Okay, I exaggerate. Watching elite Arab royals flaunt their flamboyant lifestyles is not everyone’s sport. As many commenters made clear, including many women, they should best keep their dirty linen to themselves. Other comments were hilarious, but more were harsh, especially from men. Women, they seemed to be saying, should just play their roles as commodities, not complainers.

It is thus no small thing that her father supports her. Despite the risks, Sheikha Mahra is not being punished for her audacity.[4] Presumably, if the grand Sheikh supports his daughter, the husband will accept the divorce. And this is how new case law is made. As one commenter said: “We were aware of the triple divorce law but couldn’t even imagine a woman doing it back then. Thank you for your inspirational landmark for Muslim women.” No matter the facts of this case, justice or justified,[5] people are seeing things they have not seen before. Wait – why don't we hold the cards and get the pass and the power??

So, what does this all have to do with Sayyida Salme? I have no desire to equate her experience almost two centuries ago with a PR-savvy princess in a media-frenzied age. However, as with so many topics, Sayyida Salme’s story – as she wrote it and lived it – is instructive here, too. Indeed, Sayyida Salme wrote a whole chapter on “Arab Matrimony” as part of her effort to “dispel the distorted and incorrect views that prevail in Europe about the position of an Arab woman in relation to her husband.” (Memoirs, p. 107) What she described was a system of relatively complex customs and codes that differentiated rights and roles between men and women, much as is still the case under Sharia today. These differences may have been justified historically – as she says, for example, by “the isolation of women” (Memoirs, p. 123) – but are they still justified today? As with the triple talaq, are we able to see inequalities for what they are?

If we consider Sheikha Mahra's case, we can also see that, for all the jubilation, the positive result still depended on a nod from her old man. Sayyida Salme indicated that in her time, too, much depended on the generosity and goodwill of the father. It was why she emphasized that her own Sultan father “maintained his sense of justice and laid the fate of his children in their own hands“ when it came to marriage. And this is why she added that “only a despotic and callous father decides unilaterally, without first ascertaining his daughter’s approval or disapproval.” (Memoirs, p. 124) But can society count on this kind of benevolence? Sheikha Mahra’s Insta features plenty of other reactions like “The father is always the strength, the fever, and the first force towards change for the better.” Yes, a happy family is always good, especially if your head of household is also head of the emirate and leader of the country, but we should not mistake paternal blessings for equal justice. If not the husband, then the father; there is that patriarchy again, rearing its head.

We can close with a few last words from Sayyida Salme to add some 19th-century spice to the mix:

It is a myth that Arab husbands treat their wives worse than here [in Europe]. Religion is a major factor in that it encourages male protection, as though for a helpless child. A faithful, god-fearing Muslim man is as humane as any refined and well-mannered European man. The former is perhaps even stricter with himself, always mindful of the ubiquity of the Lord, as the author of those commandments, and believing firmly until his dying breath in the just accounting for his good and bad deeds.

Of course, alongside its noble characters, Zanzibar also has its share of tyrants, just as we do here, who demonstrate neither the appropriate kindness nor respect that is due their better halves. And yet, I can in good conscience state that I have heard more here [in Europe] about gentle husbands beating their wives than in my homeland. …

A wife [in Zanzibar] is, moreover, in no way subject to her husband’s every whim. If she ever encounters behavior by her husband that she is unwilling to accept, she can always get protection from her relatives, or she has the right to take her complaint personally to the kadi if she has no one else to turn to. Often she helps herself. (Memoirs, p. 110)

How much of this still pertains today? It may be that family and community are still the best support and refuge for women navigating their roles and relationships. And for all the challenges women continue to face, it may also be that a more cohesive society in the past took better care of its own. Even if a woman might help herself by wielding the triple talaq, it seems that true justice and equality will have to come from elsewhere.

Let history surprise you, let her story inspire you – and let her authentic voice speak to you.

Andrea Emily Stumpf

August 27, 2024

[1] This is Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al Maktoum, the ruler of Dubai and prime minister of the UAE, with a net worth estimated at US$ 18 billion, who lives an outsized life. He is no stranger to matrimony himself, having married half a dozen times, now with two dozen grandchildren.

[2] This is Sheikha Mahra bint Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, who married Sheikh Mana bin Mohammed bin Rashid bin Mana Al Maktoum with a lavish wedding ceremony on May 27, 2023.

[3] Primarily practiced under Sunni Islam, more recent views have hardened against the use of the triple talaq, which requires no reason or mutual agreement to divorce. Even where it is not banned, many courts and communities encourage reconciliation and other less unilateral approaches. India’s long history of recognizing triple talaq was cut short by legislation in 2019 that not only banned, but also criminalized the practice. This is apparently the first time an act of divorce could land someone in jail.

[4] Calling her “brave” and “suicidal,” commenters were no doubt thinking of Sheikh Mohammed’s treatment of his daughters, Sheikha Shamsa in 2000 (never seen again), and Sheikha Latifa in 2018 (now asking for privacy), and the plight of his sixth wife, Sheikha Haya bint Hussein (who sought asylum in 2019).

[5] Although Sheikha Mahra claimed infidelity, as in “you are occupied with other companions,” and presumably appealed to her father on those grounds, the traditional triple talaq requires no justification.