Dawkins blasts segregation on twitter.

[Tiberius]

What generalizations? Muslims shot a Muslim girl, am I lying about that? So the news of an innocent 14 year old Muslim girl getting shot because other Muslims were cowards who didn't want her to get an education, so that story was made up?

Generalizations occur when you blame a set of people for some action, when a subset of those people are not responsible, or a more specific set label can be used instead.

For example, whenever someone says "Muslims attacked us on 9/11", whilst it's technically correct (in that the attackers were Muslims), it is still a generalization. It is more correct (and more specific) to say "terrorists attacked us on 9/11", or even "Muslim terrorists attacked us on 9/11".

In your example above, some Muslims did indeed shoot a girl, but it's far more descriptive (and far more correct) to say that members of the Taliban shot her, especially if you are seeking to blame large portions of communities for the actions of so few.

And when did the idea of seating women behind men and making them walk behind men, when did that tradition start? Last year?No it comes out of a sexist past because of a very sexist book, just like the bible. Because in a very literal sense sexism in most cultures in antiquity was acceptable.

Right, but it's still wrong to lay the blame on Muslims who are not sexist for the Muslims who are.

Seriously since when did saying to women "You don't have to do that if you don't want to and you don't need any man's permission to do anything" please tell me why spreading that should be treated like a crime?

Where have any of us said it should be?

Do women need men's permission? If they don't then I do not see any crime telling women that. Otherwise you are coddling the insecurities of men in a very sexist tradition.

How are we coddling anyone? All we've said is that you shouldn't generalize Muslims and tell them to "clean their own house".

You want to keep women in chains and make this a label issue. I would say the same of Amish women and LDS women, they are oppressed by men too.

Fuck you. I do not want people to keep women in chains, and neither does Rayaan. You seem to think that every Muslims is responsible for the actions of every other Muslim. We're saying that is a ridiculous thing to think.

You are falsely assuming I am making broad generalizations.

I'm not making assumptions here; I've pointed out where I think you are making broad generalizations (all Muslims are responsible for violent Muslims, and in the West, women are treated equally). Both are utter bullshit.

Women have the right to sit where they want do what they want and be what they want. They don't owe any Hindu or Sikh or Jewish or Amish or Muslim man any explanation if they don't want to. I refuse to coddle the insecurities of any idiot who cant let their women make choices for themselves.

The stupid thing is, I agree with you. Women do have the right to sit where they want. I find the actions at the debate to be disgusting. However, direct your anger at the people who ran the debate; those Muslims who decided to segregate women. Do not direct your anger at the Muslims all over the world who felt the same anger that you did. They are not to blame; they are not responsible.

SO? AND does that change that there are still women who are stuck in hellholes? Don't use this "progress has been made" as an excuse to stop. Iran and India and even America still have asshole men who STILL live in the past. To deny that is foolish and a detriment to women world wide.

We're not denying any of that. We just know that the blame lies with the assholes, and not the people who follow Islam but do not try to take rights from others or impose a gender-based hierarchy.