(August 31, 2017 at 8:24 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote: It's not only one of the many stark absences of women's rights in some muslim countries, it's also a damning self-indictment of the men. They really don't see themselves as being able to resist the allure of an elbow or an ankle or, allah-forbid, a woman's face? Are muslim men really that weak and enslaved to their biological urges that if they see a relatively 'uncovered' woman that they get all gropey or rapey or adulterous?
It's the ignoring of the verse that ordered men not to look.
Quote:Sura 24, The Quran:
( 30 ) Tell the believing men to reduce their vision and guard their private parts. That is purer for them. Indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what they do.
Men complete women, and women complete men. What Sunni/Shiite Islam does, is that it gives men a break from this deal; thus loading women with all the weight. Sexism at its best.
Because women are lesser in numbers, they got abused. I think and believe that some Muslim men know exactly that they can stop themselves from looking at women when it's needed. But it's the "acting a fool" to allow themselves to abuse others.
If they cant control it, then verse 30, sura 24 is wrong. Then Allah doesn't know them enough.
LastPoet
Quote:Imagine a muslim left alone in a nudist beach. We have some in portugal. Hell, even in a normal beach.
They do have trouble dealing with seing skin because precisely... they don't get to see that much and not used to it.
It's not healthy to treat a portion of society like the spawn of the devil or something. So hiding women from men in this fashion should indeed make both genders weird and even more prone to lust.
Catholic_Lady
Quote: Wow, completely different. They are wearing nun uniforms because they are nuns, not because they are women sex objects. And they are not required to be in uniform everytime they step out of the house or every time they are going to be seen by a man. Comparing a nun wearing her habit to Muslim women having to wear a niqab is totally ignorant and dishonest.
Quote:1 Corinthians 11:5, the Bible:
New International Version
But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head--it is the same as having her head shaved.
1 Corinthians 11:6
For if a woman does not cover her head, she might as well have her hair cut off; but if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should cover her head.
1 Corinthians 11:7
New International Version
A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man.
I would say that most Christian women don't read the Bible. Or leave religion to the nuns and priests; while enjoying life outside the Church. Only go at Sundays.
Many Muslims do it too; CL. But replace Sunday with Friday. They leave the Quran for the mosque; never thinking what the book actually says. That's how nobody questioned the Crusades until secular movements came; nobody questioned the invasion of Spain until ...IDK? Nobody questioned the Ottoman impales until they did it to Arabs, and nobody questioned secular politics until Israel and Trump came.
Brian37
Quote:To be fair to Atlass sexism was rampant in all of antiquity worldwide. Humans back then saw females as property to be bartered between families. And sexist clothing exists in every religion, even if not everyone in that label ascribes to it, many still do.
Back in antiquity worldwide, nobody had any clue that females contributed half the genes. Girls/women were viewed as fields for the man to plant the seed in. It is why even to this day worldwide a majority of the time the female adapts the man's last name. It is still a form of subjugation born out of human ignorance.
The Amish expect those girls/women to dress a certain way. LDS and Mormons too. Hindus and Sikhs also have gender role clothing too. You will also never see a female Dali Lama or female Pope.
But even in polytheism in Ancient Rome and Greece, the head gods are depicted as male, and quite often, even in their mythology, the female goddesses are seen as second class, and human females like Casandra are used as pawns to make the male Gods look good. Ajax is a polytheistic character whom is depicted as a hero, but in his exploits he also rapes women.
Point being again, Islam did not invent sexism nor does it own a patent on it. I would only say to Atlass, the same thing I say to any religion. Religion is still used, like it or not, to justify sexism, but not just his.
No; it's not sexism to say "women are different from men". That's a biological fact, even the theory of evolution teaches:
Quote:According to Joyce Benenson, a researcher at Emmanuel College in Boston, competition among women has three unique characteristics: first, because they have to protect their bodies from physical harm (so as not to interfere with present or future pregnancy and childbirth), women rely on veiled aggression towards other women (behind verbal gymnastics or under cover of the group) rather than physical confrontation.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ins...ompetition
So am I "sexist" for believing in Evolution, and that women are different than men?
But what is sexist, is the lowering of women and the denial of their rights. Both men and women have rights; messing with that balance is what produces an unbalanced conclusion, like the case of ancient Greece.
Cyberman
Quote: Why the "radical" qualifier and the "-ism" suffix only for Islam? That's rather a one-sided equation, essentially imposing on me a position I haven't advanced. What were you saying about ignorant and dishonest, again?
To be honest; it's all about the economical power. If a Christian nation had oil like Saudi Arabia, I'm sure that the scene would differ to Christian opinions more and more.
Right now, it's more of a victory for secularism over religion. Christian institutions know this, and so they remain silent and advocate peace.
They don't have oil like the Sauds who pushed Wahhabism with Trillions over the past century.
When Christianity had the gold; they annihilated a whole continent. And when Vlad fought the Muslims; he earned the title of "the Impaler".
Khemikal
Quote:
If the purpose is to reduce attraction and perversion, then it fails on grounds of rule 34. Niqab pron exists..hilariously, it's the only thing the girls -are- wearing. Good job Islam!
It's not exactly surprising, these body coverings for "modesty" make it easier to objectify a person due to the lack of idiosyncratic and humanizing features common to human faces and bodies. The blindfold is for the executioner, not the condemned. They also make it easier to fanatasize about a person without all the nagging detail of..well...detail. Taken together, and along with the observation that taboo breeds perversions - nothing about the whole sorry state of bodybags and their variants in islam is remarkable in the least.
That is one great conclusion. Truly.
In ancient Arabic language, there's a phrase called "The Virgin in her veil". The concept is that the culture favors young, virgin, shy girls who are covered totally for all their lives; until the "man" comes and "knock their virginity out".
It makes the man feel dominant, and to feel that the woman must be crushed.
Disgusting. And it has its marks in the Hadith.
Catholic_Lady
Quote: You're literally equating habit uniforms worn by regular nuns for their vocation, with the niqabs as required attire for women in the Middle East if they are going to be seen by any man other than family. That's radical Islam, and you're equating that with mainstream Christianity by posting a picture of nuns, in church, wearing their nun uniform. It's dishonest to try to say the 2 are the same on any level, and you know it. You're a smart man.
It's not mandatory by all; for many it's a freedom of outfit ( check Iraqi girls or Egyptian girls; Lebanese too).
Saudi Arabia on the other hand favor it a lot. But still some girls don't even consider it.
You have Afghanistan, but I don't know if I should blame the foreign Mujahedeen or somebody else.
Brian37
Quote:None of what you just argued changes a thing I said.
"Islam this"
"The Koran says"
Yea, so what? You are not doing anything differently that a Christian does in pointing to the bible. You are not doing anything differently that a Jew does in pointing to the OT and Torah and Talmud. You are not doing anything differently than when Hindus point to the Bhaghavad Gita or Vedas. You are not doing anything differently than when Buddhist point to Buddha.
I think it is fantastic that you reject the violent extremists that use the same Koran you do. But it is still the same Koran. Just like the bible that Martin Luther King used is the same bible that the KKK and Neo Nazis use.
And all of these religions also forget, there was no written religion 200,000 years ago, much less any nations in any case.
How about you consider that your sense of compassion and empathy is not being handed to you from above nor does it come out of an old book. Maybe the reason you are non violent is because of your own evolutionary empathy.
Maybe the reason Stalin was an atheist and a monster, and I am an atheist but not a monster, es because of our own individual personalities? I am capable of the same non violence and empathy for others you are, I simply don't assign it to your religion in the same way you don't assign your goodness to the Bible or Vedas or Buddha.
Islam did not invent violence no, but they also don't own a patent on goodness either. You as an individual matter to me, not the book you point to. If you are a good person, I value you, but I don't have to agree with you as to where your morality is coming from.
Please don't start sounding romantic like Mystic did. I find you far more reasonable and far less dreamy eyed. Think for yourself, don't let an old book do the thinking for you.
It totally depends on the understanding of the content. Books mean different thing depending on the context.
Just like nuclear technology can be used to produce electricity or death.
Living in denial and twisting words is depending on the person; all I can say is that these hideous versions of Islam would not have been produced unless with sick personalities behind it.
The book I believe in is a mere portion in the arsenal of a Sunni or a Shiite. Without the other books of Hadith, the Quran won't mean anything to Sunnies and Shiites. Humans can find millions of ways to make a text fit their narrative & ideas.
I remember myself before being into religion, and I learned a lot. At least to treat others like humans and respect the laws of this life.
It's less about dreams for me, and more about logic.
