CDZ Why don't American, so called, "feminists" go after the hijab...an actual symbol of oppression....

[Circe]

I know it hurts your sensibilities, but I refuse to call the apartheid state in the Levant anything but the "Zionist Entity".

I sort of like this. I mean, I'm pro-Israel myself, but what I like is people refusing to use words, or avoid words, other people demand. I do that myself: I haven't said "gay" as a descriptor for homosexuals since 1982 when I figured out that there is nothing gay about AIDS. And I try not ever to say "transgender" because that implies the answer to the argument going on: is it possible to change sex? Of course not, so transvestite is as far as I'll go.

Carry on at will.

 

[Coyote]

Hijabs are not their problem

Hijabs are a symbol, and everyone knows it. We can ignore that, or we can just admit it.

A lot of women don't feel decent or dressed without their hijab. Not everyone sees it as a sign of "control." Feminists in this country ARE concerned about women's rights globally and there are a lot of women active on that front. However, I believe the OP is using the hijab as one more opportunity to slam Islam as evil, rather than as a heartfelt concern about women's rights.

There are exceptions to everything, but I think the OP is just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy shown by many on the Left in favor of the world's most regressive religion.

There's nothing to complain about if an item of clothing is being worn purely as a matter of choice.
.

True...but the other hypocrisy - which is in the OP - is that somehow in Islam *unlike other religions* it's not a choice.

Religious freedom is under attack around the world. It should not be here

 

[Mac1958]

Hijabs are not their problem

Hijabs are a symbol, and everyone knows it. We can ignore that, or we can just admit it.

A lot of women don't feel decent or dressed without their hijab. Not everyone sees it as a sign of "control." Feminists in this country ARE concerned about women's rights globally and there are a lot of women active on that front. However, I believe the OP is using the hijab as one more opportunity to slam Islam as evil, rather than as a heartfelt concern about women's rights.

There are exceptions to everything, but I think the OP is just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy shown by many on the Left in favor of the world's most regressive religion.

There's nothing to complain about if an item of clothing is being worn purely as a matter of choice.
.

True...but the other hypocrisy - which is in the OP - is that somehow in Islam *unlike other religions* it's not a choice.

Religious freedom is under attack around the world. It should not be here

Well, that goes back to the initial point, that some women are NOT wearing them by choice, but are being REQUIRED to, under threat of punishment.

It's a pretty clear and start and obvious contrast. And it's a perfectly reasonable example to use. The fact that some here are completely ignoring the main point and cartoonishly trying to make this about fashion plays perfectly into the point made by the OP. Spin, deflect, lie, attack. For the most regressive religion on the planet.
.

 

[JoeB131]

Well, that goes back to the initial point, that some women are NOT wearing them by choice, but are being REQUIRED to, under threat of punishment.

It's a pretty clear and start and obvious contrast. And it's a perfectly reasonable example to use. The fact that some here are completely ignoring the main point and cartoonishly trying to make this about fashion plays perfectly into the point made by the OP. Spin, deflect, lie, attack. For the most regressive religion on the planet.

Well, maybe if you came to these things with a more substantive argument than a fashion choice.

Now, here's the thing, men can run around on the beach with their shirts off and ladies can't. What kind of prude culture are we that we don't let women run around the beach with their tops off?

Or we hear someone absolutely freaking out when they see a woman breast feeding in a public place.

Because we've decided as a society, the display of naked breasts on women is obscene.

 

[Coyote]

But right here Joe...you are making Mac's point for him.

Demeaning them as "Fundies"

I think they gave up the right to be called "Christians" when they all got behind Trump in his "kitty" grabbing glory.

I kind of thought they were hypocrites when they got behind Mitt Romney even though they had all called Mormonism a weird Cult, but they really amped it up when they got behind a thrice married, porn-starring, misogynist.

Here's the thing, I don't believe in God, and I don't think Jesus ever existed, but the philosophy isn't that bad. Treat others the way you'd want to be treated. Help the less fortunate. Etc.

Years ago I was very anti-Christian...but then I started to get to know real Christians as opposed to stereotypes. My coworker and boss, for example, who really changed my mind on judging people based on religion alone.

The same applies to Muslims. Take your time to know someone, find out what they really believe, not what the blogs and media tells you they believe.

Here - they are our neighbors, coworkers, teachers, students, engineers, doctors, public servents...that is who they are.

 

[Coyote]

Hijabs are not their problem

Hijabs are a symbol, and everyone knows it. We can ignore that, or we can just admit it.

A lot of women don't feel decent or dressed without their hijab. Not everyone sees it as a sign of "control." Feminists in this country ARE concerned about women's rights globally and there are a lot of women active on that front. However, I believe the OP is using the hijab as one more opportunity to slam Islam as evil, rather than as a heartfelt concern about women's rights.

There are exceptions to everything, but I think the OP is just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy shown by many on the Left in favor of the world's most regressive religion.

There's nothing to complain about if an item of clothing is being worn purely as a matter of choice.
.

True...but the other hypocrisy - which is in the OP - is that somehow in Islam *unlike other religions* it's not a choice.

Religious freedom is under attack around the world. It should not be here

Well, that goes back to the initial point, that some women are NOT wearing them by choice, but are being REQUIRED to, under threat of punishment.

It's a pretty clear and start and obvious contrast. And it's a perfectly reasonable example to use. The fact that some here are completely ignoring the main point and cartoonishly trying to make this about fashion plays perfectly into the point made by the OP. Spin, deflect, lie, attack. For the most regressive religion on the planet.
.

Yes, for some women it is. SOME. And likewise - there are SOME Amish women who are forced to wear their garb and some JEWISH women who are forced to cover their hair. In some households they can be beaten and abused for non compliance. They can also be cast out from their families, friends and communities.

But the issue isn't the garb.

 

[Circe]

A lot of women don't feel decent or dressed without their hijab. Not everyone sees it as a sign of "control." Feminists in this country ARE concerned about women's rights globally and there are a lot of women active on that front. However, I believe the OP is using the hijab as one more opportunity to slam Islam as evil, rather than as a heartfelt concern about women's rights.

Of course you are right that there is an issue of decency and dressed properly for some older women especially --- but still, I am opposed to hijabs in a way I am not opposed to Amish bonnets, and I live in an Amish area. I cannot forget that dreadful Paki man at work who sent around the photos/family news emails all over the office about the "ceremony" where his eight-year-old daughter had to forever from then on wear this horrible restricting head thing, and we were all supposed to think that was wonderful? This was before 9/11; I bet he wouldn't have publicized that after. Nobody liked it even then. I felt really sorry for the child.

If NO GIRL EVER were forced to wear it in these coercive ways with such a "ceremony" that sets them aside from all their schoolmates and makes them excluded and different, and then when they become adolescent the death threats and the sexual ownership claims start by the father and any man he wants to give her away to, or sell her -- no. None of this works for me.

I've known lapsed Amish women, and frankly, they tend to look a little peculiar in my experience because they still wear very conservative clothes, but that bonnet and bun is gone, always. And nobody kills them for it. Actually, I wear a bun myself --- the hairstyle of my avatar is too wild for me. I wouldn't feel right about going out with harpie-hair, see above left, but I COULD ---- look at Jane Sanders, and more power to her.


The whole question is whether men are forcing us to wear X, Y, or Z. In Islam, obviously they are. That needs to stop. Women need to stop it, and men need to stop killing them for stopping it.

 

[Mac1958]

Hijabs are a symbol, and everyone knows it. We can ignore that, or we can just admit it.

A lot of women don't feel decent or dressed without their hijab. Not everyone sees it as a sign of "control." Feminists in this country ARE concerned about women's rights globally and there are a lot of women active on that front. However, I believe the OP is using the hijab as one more opportunity to slam Islam as evil, rather than as a heartfelt concern about women's rights.

There are exceptions to everything, but I think the OP is just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy shown by many on the Left in favor of the world's most regressive religion.

There's nothing to complain about if an item of clothing is being worn purely as a matter of choice.
.

True...but the other hypocrisy - which is in the OP - is that somehow in Islam *unlike other religions* it's not a choice.

Religious freedom is under attack around the world. It should not be here

Well, that goes back to the initial point, that some women are NOT wearing them by choice, but are being REQUIRED to, under threat of punishment.

It's a pretty clear and start and obvious contrast. And it's a perfectly reasonable example to use. The fact that some here are completely ignoring the main point and cartoonishly trying to make this about fashion plays perfectly into the point made by the OP. Spin, deflect, lie, attack. For the most regressive religion on the planet.
.

Yes, for some women it is. SOME. And likewise - there are SOME Amish women who are forced to wear their garb and some JEWISH women who are forced to cover their hair. In some households they can be beaten and abused for non compliance. They can also be cast out from their families, friends and communities.

But the issue isn't the garb.

Well, if I thought that the Amish and Jews were nearly as oppressive with their religions as are (some) Muslims, I'd see no problem. As far as I know, those other two religions don't murder women for the crime of being raped, behead innocent people and post it on the internet, slay children, fly planes into our buildings, toss gays off of rooftops or swear to slaughter my beautiful daughters for not believing in their God. The hijab is the tiniest, simplest example of a much larger point that I suspect the OP assumed we'd all see. Or admit to seeing.

When I see those other religions come within about a thousand miles of that, I'll definitely speak up.
.

 

[OldLady]

Hijabs are not their problem

Hijabs are a symbol, and everyone knows it. We can ignore that, or we can just admit it.

A lot of women don't feel decent or dressed without their hijab. Not everyone sees it as a sign of "control." Feminists in this country ARE concerned about women's rights globally and there are a lot of women active on that front. However, I believe the OP is using the hijab as one more opportunity to slam Islam as evil, rather than as a heartfelt concern about women's rights.

There are exceptions to everything, but I think the OP is just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy shown by many on the Left in favor of the world's most regressive religion.

There's nothing to complain about if an item of clothing is being worn purely as a matter of choice.
.

True...but the other hypocrisy - which is in the OP - is that somehow in Islam *unlike other religions* it's not a choice.

Religious freedom is under attack around the world. It should not be here

Well, that goes back to the initial point, that some women are NOT wearing them by choice, but are being REQUIRED to, under threat of punishment.

It's a pretty clear and start and obvious contrast. And it's a perfectly reasonable example to use. The fact that some here are completely ignoring the main point and cartoonishly trying to make this about fashion plays perfectly into the point made by the OP. Spin, deflect, lie, attack. For the most regressive religion on the planet.
.

It ISN'T about fashion. It's about embedded tradition in a culture. Who dismissed it as "fashion?" Maybe the pressure from the rest of the world is making inroads--some unrest in Iran, huge changes taking place in Saudi Arabia by their new prince. Slowly but surely, things will change.

 

[rightwinger]

So Orthodox Jewish women who choose to wear head coverings don't do it by choice? Amish women who choose to wear plain clothes and hair coverings don't do it by choice? Muslim women who choose to wear a hijab don't do it by choice? They are all "slaves"?

Do Jewish and Amish men throw acid in the faces of those who do not cover? Do they cut their mouths into a smiley? Do they kill them and call it "honor"?

Acid throwing is not religious. It crosses all societies. It is particularly

So Orthodox Jewish women who choose to wear head coverings don't do it by choice? Amish women who choose to wear plain clothes and hair coverings don't do it by choice? Muslim women who choose to wear a hijab don't do it by choice? They are all "slaves"?

Do Jewish and Amish men throw acid in the faces of those who do not cover? Do they cut their mouths into a smiley? Do they kill them and call it "honor"?

Acid throwing crosses all religions and societies. Did you you know that? In fact it is particularly prevalent in India among the Hindu majority. Why do you give them a free pass and only attack Muslims for it?

Equally important....there are many ways in which misogynistic cultures can attack women...is the only one that matters acid throwing? Or is it that it is necessary to move the goalposts in order to make it possible to single out Islam as an entire faith rather than a collection of cultures some of whom have a lot in common with other misogynistic cultures? Think about it....

Here is some information on acid attacks that may surprise you....
Acid throwing - Wikipedia

Do Amish and Jewish people do it? Can’t find anything specific on Amish and acid but I can find other disturbing material typical related to the abuse of women in their societies.

Pennsylvania rape case of Amish girl 'gifted' to man
Survivor Speaks Out Against Amish Rape Culture Ahead Of Sentencing | HuffPost

And among the more conservative Jewish communities.
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/one-in-four-jewish-women-suffer-abuse-in-the-home-1.21790
In Israel’s ultra-Orthodox community, abused women are finding a way out
Woman in Beit Shemesh attacked by ultra-Orthodox extremists
Mishmeret Tzniyut - Wikipedia

This leads to two questions...
If you call the hijab a symbol of oppression, why not the distinctive clothing of Amish women or the distinctive head scarves or orthodox Jewish women?

Why are those criticizing feminists for ignoring abuse in Muslim communities ignoring the same abuse in non Muslim communities?

Why don't you find me a thread where people defended these practices using the same tu quoque fallacies as you are using here? I doubt if you even know what that is, but a tu quoque fallacy is essentially "well, they do it TOO" offered as a way to distract away from the central discussion and justify the behavior in question.

Misogyny is hardwired into the very fabric of Islam, where Islamic jurisprudence treats women as lesser beings. There is just no getting around that no matter how many times you resort to these fallacious ruses in order to defend it.

The subject matter here is the way the left defends Islam despite its absolutely monstrous legacy of mistreatment of women. It is an important issue because it is so prevalent, and because there are a billion and a half Muslims. Sure, you can find small sects of others here and they by way of defending it, and you can find the behavior of people who are not motivated by religion, but the fact remains that women are considered lesser beings by Islam, as is in such copious evidence both through the behavior of Muslim men and the facts of Islamic law.

For whatever non liberal reason you have chosen, you simply defend Islam rather than critique it rationally.

It is not the lefts job to defend any religion
It is the Constitutions job

The left only stands up for Constitutional rights

If it isn't your job, then why do you do so freaking much of it?

We need to protect them from asshole Conservatives

There are so many of them

 

[OldLady]

A lot of women don't feel decent or dressed without their hijab. Not everyone sees it as a sign of "control." Feminists in this country ARE concerned about women's rights globally and there are a lot of women active on that front. However, I believe the OP is using the hijab as one more opportunity to slam Islam as evil, rather than as a heartfelt concern about women's rights.

Of course you are right that there is an issue of decency and dressed properly for some older women especially --- but still, I am opposed to hijabs in a way I am not opposed to Amish bonnets, and I live in an Amish area. I cannot forget that dreadful Paki man at work who sent around the photos/family news emails all over the office about the "ceremony" where his eight-year-old daughter had to forever from then on wear this horrible restricting head thing, and we were all supposed to think that was wonderful? This was before 9/11; I bet he wouldn't have publicized that after. Nobody liked it even then. I felt really sorry for the child.

If NO GIRL EVER were forced to wear it in these coercive ways with such a "ceremony" that sets them aside from all their schoolmates and makes them excluded and different, and then when they become adolescent the death threats and the sexual ownership claims start by the father and any man he wants to give her away to, or sell her -- no. None of this works for me.

I've known lapsed Amish women, and frankly, they tend to look a little peculiar in my experience because they still wear very conservative clothes, but that bonnet and bun is gone, always. And nobody kills them for it. Actually, I wear a bun myself --- the hairstyle of my avatar is too wild for me. I wouldn't feel right about going out with harpie-hair, see above left, but I COULD ---- look at Jane Sanders, and more power to her.


The whole question is whether men are forcing us to wear X, Y, or Z. In Islam, obviously they are. That needs to stop. Women need to stop it, and men need to stop killing them for stopping it.

I only know about Muslims who live in the US, since that's the only place I've been. They don't act like that here because we don't allow it or perhaps because even in other parts of the world, most Muslims are not that extreme in their faith. I worry sometimes that these arguments against female coercion are meant to color our view of Muslims in general and I so worry about the safety of Americans in our own country that happen to be Muslim.
I have to agree with Coyote, there is intolerance of religion all over the world. It should not happen here.

 

[rightwinger]

A lot of women don't feel decent or dressed without their hijab. Not everyone sees it as a sign of "control." Feminists in this country ARE concerned about women's rights globally and there are a lot of women active on that front. However, I believe the OP is using the hijab as one more opportunity to slam Islam as evil, rather than as a heartfelt concern about women's rights.

There are exceptions to everything, but I think the OP is just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy shown by many on the Left in favor of the world's most regressive religion.

There's nothing to complain about if an item of clothing is being worn purely as a matter of choice.
.

True...but the other hypocrisy - which is in the OP - is that somehow in Islam *unlike other religions* it's not a choice.

Religious freedom is under attack around the world. It should not be here

Well, that goes back to the initial point, that some women are NOT wearing them by choice, but are being REQUIRED to, under threat of punishment.

It's a pretty clear and start and obvious contrast. And it's a perfectly reasonable example to use. The fact that some here are completely ignoring the main point and cartoonishly trying to make this about fashion plays perfectly into the point made by the OP. Spin, deflect, lie, attack. For the most regressive religion on the planet.
.

Yes, for some women it is. SOME. And likewise - there are SOME Amish women who are forced to wear their garb and some JEWISH women who are forced to cover their hair. In some households they can be beaten and abused for non compliance. They can also be cast out from their families, friends and communities.

But the issue isn't the garb.

Well, if I thought that the Amish and Jews were nearly as oppressive with their religions as are (some) Muslims, I'd see no problem. As far as I know, those other two religions don't murder women for the crime of being raped, behead innocent people and post it on the internet, slay children, fly planes into our buildings, toss gays off of rooftops or swear to slaughter my beautiful daughters for not believing in their God. The hijab is the tiniest, simplest example of a much larger point that I suspect the OP assumed we'd all see. Or admit to seeing.

When I see those other religions come within about a thousand miles of that, I'll definitely speak up.
.

We can only control what happens in this country

American Muslims are well educated, law abiding and make good citizens

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Not only do you not know what a tu quote fallacy is, you do not recognize a straw man, either.

You indulge in tu quoque fallacies every time the subject is Islam, but demand people stay on topic if the subject is another ideology, and you call a simple statement of fact a straw man.

Misogyny IS hard wired into Islam. Women are given the short end of the stick by Islamic law.

You cannot argue facts, so you indulge in these ruses.

I fully recognize a Tu quoque fallacy and I am very familiar with Strawman as well since it is a common tactic here.

With every argument I make, I try to support it with facts.

Islamic law is surprisingly similar to Jewish law (no surprise since that is where much of it came from). When it exists in a society where it is not part of the secular law, there isn't a problem. In countries where it is part of the legal system it is much more of a problem. Also...like Jewish law, it is very complicated. Unfortunately it's application and interpretation is not straightforward nor standardized nor does it necessarily require any sort of certification to become an expert.

If the Jewish people can create a workaround for Jewish law to coexist with secular law...I see no problem for the same in Islam. In fact - it has in this country and in others. And that is a fact that you ignore. Why not support and argue for a modernization of Islam which is way overdue instead of a broadbrush demonization?

Islam is unique.

It is unique in the way it combines politics and religion. It is unique in the way it was crafted quite intentionally by a warrior seeking a way to bind his converts to him. It is unique in placing a serial rapist and mass murderer as the world,s most perfect man. It is unique in the way it calls for it's adherents to wage eternal war against all that is not Islamic. It is unique on the world stage today in the actions of it!s adherents as they seek to follow the instructions of the warlord. It is unique in the way it is so inherently supremacist and totalitarian, micromanaging people!s lives down to the iota.

It is unique in many ways.

Can you do me a solid,, though, and find one single thread where the subject was Islam and you did not defend it through false comparisons to other religions or people's? Your trying to craft this illusion that Islam is no different than any other religion is much like claiming a fish is no different than a torpedo because after all, they both travel through water.

 

[Coyote]

Not only do you not know what a tu quote fallacy is, you do not recognize a straw man, either.

You indulge in tu quoque fallacies every time the subject is Islam, but demand people stay on topic if the subject is another ideology, and you call a simple statement of fact a straw man.

Misogyny IS hard wired into Islam. Women are given the short end of the stick by Islamic law.

You cannot argue facts, so you indulge in these ruses.

I fully recognize a Tu quoque fallacy and I am very familiar with Strawman as well since it is a common tactic here.

With every argument I make, I try to support it with facts.


Islamic law is surprisingly similar to Jewish law (no surprise since that is where much of it came from). When it exists in a society where it is not part of the secular law, there isn't a problem. In countries where it is part of the legal system it is much more of a problem. Also...like Jewish law, it is very complicated. Unfortunately it's application and interpretation is not straightforward nor standardized nor does it necessarily require any sort of certification to become an expert.

If the Jewish people can create a workaround for Jewish law to coexist with secular law...I see no problem for the same in Islam. In fact - it has in this country and in others. And that is a fact that you ignore. Why not support and argue for a modernization of Islam which is way overdue instead of a broadbrush demonization?

Islam is unique.

It is unique in the way it combines politics and religion. It is unique in the way it was crafted quite intentionally by a warrior seeking a way to bind his converts to him. It is unique in placing a serial rapist and mass murderer as the world,s most perfect man. It is unique in the way it calls for it's adherents to wage eternal war against all that is not Islamic. It is unique on the world stage today in the actions of it!s adherents as they seek to follow the instructions of the warlord. It is unique in the way it is so inherently supremacist and totalitarian, micromanaging people!s lives down to the iota.

It is unique in many ways.

Can you do me a solid,, though, and find one single thread where the subject was Islam and you did not defend it through false comparisons to other religions or people's? Your trying to craft this illusion that Islam is no different than any other religion is much like claiming a fish is no different than a torpedo because after all, they both travel through water.

Islam varies hugely in how it is followed around the world. For example Pakistan and the US.

Historically - Mohammed was far more complex then you describe - both in terms of peace, war, rules concerning war, being persecuted, and finally fighting back. It's a religion that sprang out of bad conditions and it contains a lot of rules - codes of conduct. Part of the problem though, is some people only focus on parts and that includes it's followers. I don't see much point in going into it. People aren't interested in actual history so this will lead to just a running battle of quotes and verses.

Your remark "do me a solid" is childish. Find a quote by me anywhere, where I've defended the religiously inspired abuses of Islam.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

A lot of women don't feel decent or dressed without their hijab. Not everyone sees it as a sign of "control." Feminists in this country ARE concerned about women's rights globally and there are a lot of women active on that front. However, I believe the OP is using the hijab as one more opportunity to slam Islam as evil, rather than as a heartfelt concern about women's rights.

There are exceptions to everything, but I think the OP is just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy shown by many on the Left in favor of the world's most regressive religion.

There's nothing to complain about if an item of clothing is being worn purely as a matter of choice.
.

True...but the other hypocrisy - which is in the OP - is that somehow in Islam *unlike other religions* it's not a choice.

Religious freedom is under attack around the world. It should not be here

Well, that goes back to the initial point, that some women are NOT wearing them by choice, but are being REQUIRED to, under threat of punishment.

It's a pretty clear and start and obvious contrast. And it's a perfectly reasonable example to use. The fact that some here are completely ignoring the main point and cartoonishly trying to make this about fashion plays perfectly into the point made by the OP. Spin, deflect, lie, attack. For the most regressive religion on the planet.
.

Yes, for some women it is. SOME. And likewise - there are SOME Amish women who are forced to wear their garb and some JEWISH women who are forced to cover their hair. In some households they can be beaten and abused for non compliance. They can also be cast out from their families, friends and communities.

But the issue isn't the garb.

Well, if I thought that the Amish and Jews were nearly as oppressive with their religions as are (some) Muslims, I'd see no problem. As far as I know, those other two religions don't murder women for the crime of being raped, behead innocent people and post it on the internet, slay children, fly planes into our buildings, toss gays off of rooftops or swear to slaughter my beautiful daughters for not believing in their God. The hijab is the tiniest, simplest example of a much larger point that I suspect the OP assumed we'd all see. Or admit to seeing.

When I see those other religions come within about a thousand miles of that, I'll definitely speak up.
.

Those who defend it do so KNOWING this is true. That is why they work so feverishly trying to compare it to Christianity.

They inevitably resort to four different ruses.

Ruse 1 involves finding an attitude or action very common in Islam and comparing it to something similar quite rare in Christianity.

ruse number 2 involves a truly egregious attitude or action in Islam and comparing it to an attitude or action in Christianity that is merely irritating

Ruse number 3 involves comparing an action or attitude directly motivated by Islam and comparing it to an attitude or action that actually represents an abandonment of Christian values.

Ruse number 4 involves the temporal sleight of hand by comparing attitudes and actions incurrent day Islam with those in christianity's distant past.


In all cases, the intent is dishonest because the intent is to defend Islam NO MATTER WHAT. These illiberal people have conditioned each other to do so and that is all that really matters.

 

[Coyote]

A lot of women don't feel decent or dressed without their hijab. Not everyone sees it as a sign of "control." Feminists in this country ARE concerned about women's rights globally and there are a lot of women active on that front. However, I believe the OP is using the hijab as one more opportunity to slam Islam as evil, rather than as a heartfelt concern about women's rights.

Of course you are right that there is an issue of decency and dressed properly for some older women especially --- but still, I am opposed to hijabs in a way I am not opposed to Amish bonnets, and I live in an Amish area. I cannot forget that dreadful Paki man at work who sent around the photos/family news emails all over the office about the "ceremony" where his eight-year-old daughter had to forever from then on wear this horrible restricting head thing, and we were all supposed to think that was wonderful? This was before 9/11; I bet he wouldn't have publicized that after. Nobody liked it even then. I felt really sorry for the child.

If NO GIRL EVER were forced to wear it in these coercive ways with such a "ceremony" that sets them aside from all their schoolmates and makes them excluded and different, and then when they become adolescent the death threats and the sexual ownership claims start by the father and any man he wants to give her away to, or sell her -- no. None of this works for me.

I've known lapsed Amish women, and frankly, they tend to look a little peculiar in my experience because they still wear very conservative clothes, but that bonnet and bun is gone, always. And nobody kills them for it. Actually, I wear a bun myself --- the hairstyle of my avatar is too wild for me. I wouldn't feel right about going out with harpie-hair, see above left, but I COULD ---- look at Jane Sanders, and more power to her.


The whole question is whether men are forcing us to wear X, Y, or Z. In Islam, obviously they are. That needs to stop. Women need to stop it, and men need to stop killing them for stopping it.

I only know about Muslims who live in the US, since that's the only place I've been. They don't act like that here because we don't allow it or perhaps because even in other parts of the world, most Muslims are not that extreme in their faith. I worry sometimes that these arguments against female coercion are meant to color our view of Muslims in general and I so worry about the safety of Americans in our own country that happen to be Muslim.
I have to agree with Coyote, there is intolerance of religion all over the world. It should not happen here.

Quite often, the more educated a people are, the more exposed they are to other peoples - the less religiousity. That is why reform usually happens in urban areas and struggles so in rural villages. The other things is - most world religions have managed to make peace with a modern society - to find a good medium between religious belief and constitutional law. To make it work. Islam in America, Canada has certainly done so.

 

[Coyote]

There are exceptions to everything, but I think the OP is just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy shown by many on the Left in favor of the world's most regressive religion.

There's nothing to complain about if an item of clothing is being worn purely as a matter of choice.
.

True...but the other hypocrisy - which is in the OP - is that somehow in Islam *unlike other religions* it's not a choice.

Religious freedom is under attack around the world. It should not be here

Well, that goes back to the initial point, that some women are NOT wearing them by choice, but are being REQUIRED to, under threat of punishment.

It's a pretty clear and start and obvious contrast. And it's a perfectly reasonable example to use. The fact that some here are completely ignoring the main point and cartoonishly trying to make this about fashion plays perfectly into the point made by the OP. Spin, deflect, lie, attack. For the most regressive religion on the planet.
.

Yes, for some women it is. SOME. And likewise - there are SOME Amish women who are forced to wear their garb and some JEWISH women who are forced to cover their hair. In some households they can be beaten and abused for non compliance. They can also be cast out from their families, friends and communities.

But the issue isn't the garb.

Well, if I thought that the Amish and Jews were nearly as oppressive with their religions as are (some) Muslims, I'd see no problem. As far as I know, those other two religions don't murder women for the crime of being raped, behead innocent people and post it on the internet, slay children, fly planes into our buildings, toss gays off of rooftops or swear to slaughter my beautiful daughters for not believing in their God. The hijab is the tiniest, simplest example of a much larger point that I suspect the OP assumed we'd all see. Or admit to seeing.

When I see those other religions come within about a thousand miles of that, I'll definitely speak up.
.

Those who defend it do so KNOWING this is true. That is why they work so feverishly trying to compare it to Christianity.

They inevitably resort to four different ruses.

Ruse 1 involves finding an attitude or action very common in Islam and comparing it to something similar quite rare in Christianity.

ruse number 2 involves a truly egregious attitude or action in Islam and comparing it to an attitude or action in Christianity that is merely irritating

Ruse number 3 involves comparing an action or attitude directly motivated by Islam and comparing it to an attitude or action that actually represents an abandonment of Christian values.

Ruse number 4 involves the temporal sleight of hand by comparing attitudes and actions incurrent day Islam with those in christianity's distant past.


In all cases, the intent is dishonest because the intent is to defend Islam NO MATTER WHAT. These illiberal people have conditioned each other to do so and that is all that really matters.

Ruse 5 - taking an action that is cultural and calling it religious.

Ruse 6 - taking an action that occurs in some Islamic societies and tarring the entire faith with it.

Did I miss any ruses?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Not only do you not know what a tu quote fallacy is, you do not recognize a straw man, either.

You indulge in tu quoque fallacies every time the subject is Islam, but demand people stay on topic if the subject is another ideology, and you call a simple statement of fact a straw man.

Misogyny IS hard wired into Islam. Women are given the short end of the stick by Islamic law.

You cannot argue facts, so you indulge in these ruses.

I fully recognize a Tu quoque fallacy and I am very familiar with Strawman as well since it is a common tactic here.

With every argument I make, I try to support it with facts.


Islamic law is surprisingly similar to Jewish law (no surprise since that is where much of it came from). When it exists in a society where it is not part of the secular law, there isn't a problem. In countries where it is part of the legal system it is much more of a problem. Also...like Jewish law, it is very complicated. Unfortunately it's application and interpretation is not straightforward nor standardized nor does it necessarily require any sort of certification to become an expert.

If the Jewish people can create a workaround for Jewish law to coexist with secular law...I see no problem for the same in Islam. In fact - it has in this country and in others. And that is a fact that you ignore. Why not support and argue for a modernization of Islam which is way overdue instead of a broadbrush demonization?

Islam is unique.

It is unique in the way it combines politics and religion. It is unique in the way it was crafted quite intentionally by a warrior seeking a way to bind his converts to him. It is unique in placing a serial rapist and mass murderer as the world,s most perfect man. It is unique in the way it calls for it's adherents to wage eternal war against all that is not Islamic. It is unique on the world stage today in the actions of it!s adherents as they seek to follow the instructions of the warlord. It is unique in the way it is so inherently supremacist and totalitarian, micromanaging people!s lives down to the iota.

It is unique in many ways.

Can you do me a solid,, though, and find one single thread where the subject was Islam and you did not defend it through false comparisons to other religions or people's? Your trying to craft this illusion that Islam is no different than any other religion is much like claiming a fish is no different than a torpedo because after all, they both travel through water.

Islam varies hugely in how it is followed around the world. For example Pakistan and the US.

Historically - Mohammed was far more complex then you describe - both in terms of peace, war, rules concerning war, being persecuted, and finally fighting back. It's a religion that sprang out of bad conditions and it contains a lot of rules - codes of conduct. Part of the problem though, is some people only focus on parts and that includes it's followers. I don't see much point in going into it. People aren't interested in actual history so this will lead to just a running battle of quotes and verses.

Your remark "do me a solid" is childish. Find a quote by me anywhere, where I've defended the religiously inspired abuses of Islam.

So you cannot find a single thread where you didn't defend Islam by indulging in false equivalences to Christianity.

Duly noted.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

True...but the other hypocrisy - which is in the OP - is that somehow in Islam *unlike other religions* it's not a choice.

Religious freedom is under attack around the world. It should not be here

Well, that goes back to the initial point, that some women are NOT wearing them by choice, but are being REQUIRED to, under threat of punishment.

It's a pretty clear and start and obvious contrast. And it's a perfectly reasonable example to use. The fact that some here are completely ignoring the main point and cartoonishly trying to make this about fashion plays perfectly into the point made by the OP. Spin, deflect, lie, attack. For the most regressive religion on the planet.
.

Yes, for some women it is. SOME. And likewise - there are SOME Amish women who are forced to wear their garb and some JEWISH women who are forced to cover their hair. In some households they can be beaten and abused for non compliance. They can also be cast out from their families, friends and communities.

But the issue isn't the garb.

Well, if I thought that the Amish and Jews were nearly as oppressive with their religions as are (some) Muslims, I'd see no problem. As far as I know, those other two religions don't murder women for the crime of being raped, behead innocent people and post it on the internet, slay children, fly planes into our buildings, toss gays off of rooftops or swear to slaughter my beautiful daughters for not believing in their God. The hijab is the tiniest, simplest example of a much larger point that I suspect the OP assumed we'd all see. Or admit to seeing.

When I see those other religions come within about a thousand miles of that, I'll definitely speak up.
.

Those who defend it do so KNOWING this is true. That is why they work so feverishly trying to compare it to Christianity.

They inevitably resort to four different ruses.

Ruse 1 involves finding an attitude or action very common in Islam and comparing it to something similar quite rare in Christianity.

ruse number 2 involves a truly egregious attitude or action in Islam and comparing it to an attitude or action in Christianity that is merely irritating

Ruse number 3 involves comparing an action or attitude directly motivated by Islam and comparing it to an attitude or action that actually represents an abandonment of Christian values.

Ruse number 4 involves the temporal sleight of hand by comparing attitudes and actions incurrent day Islam with those in christianity's distant past.


In all cases, the intent is dishonest because the intent is to defend Islam NO MATTER WHAT. These illiberal people have conditioned each other to do so and that is all that really matters.

Ruse 5 - taking an action that is cultural and calling it religious.

Ruse 6 - taking an action that occurs in some Islamic societies and tarring the entire faith with it.

Did I miss any ruses?

Cultural?

Islam IS the basis for the misogynistic culture.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Do Jewish and Amish men throw acid in the faces of those who do not cover? Do they cut their mouths into a smiley? Do they kill them and call it "honor"?

Acid throwing is not religious. It crosses all societies. It is particularly

Do Jewish and Amish men throw acid in the faces of those who do not cover? Do they cut their mouths into a smiley? Do they kill them and call it "honor"?

Acid throwing crosses all religions and societies. Did you you know that? In fact it is particularly prevalent in India among the Hindu majority. Why do you give them a free pass and only attack Muslims for it?

Equally important....there are many ways in which misogynistic cultures can attack women...is the only one that matters acid throwing? Or is it that it is necessary to move the goalposts in order to make it possible to single out Islam as an entire faith rather than a collection of cultures some of whom have a lot in common with other misogynistic cultures? Think about it....

Here is some information on acid attacks that may surprise you....
Acid throwing - Wikipedia

Do Amish and Jewish people do it? Can’t find anything specific on Amish and acid but I can find other disturbing material typical related to the abuse of women in their societies.

Pennsylvania rape case of Amish girl 'gifted' to man
Survivor Speaks Out Against Amish Rape Culture Ahead Of Sentencing | HuffPost

And among the more conservative Jewish communities.
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/one-in-four-jewish-women-suffer-abuse-in-the-home-1.21790
In Israel’s ultra-Orthodox community, abused women are finding a way out
Woman in Beit Shemesh attacked by ultra-Orthodox extremists
Mishmeret Tzniyut - Wikipedia

This leads to two questions...
If you call the hijab a symbol of oppression, why not the distinctive clothing of Amish women or the distinctive head scarves or orthodox Jewish women?

Why are those criticizing feminists for ignoring abuse in Muslim communities ignoring the same abuse in non Muslim communities?

Why don't you find me a thread where people defended these practices using the same tu quoque fallacies as you are using here? I doubt if you even know what that is, but a tu quoque fallacy is essentially "well, they do it TOO" offered as a way to distract away from the central discussion and justify the behavior in question.

Misogyny is hardwired into the very fabric of Islam, where Islamic jurisprudence treats women as lesser beings. There is just no getting around that no matter how many times you resort to these fallacious ruses in order to defend it.

The subject matter here is the way the left defends Islam despite its absolutely monstrous legacy of mistreatment of women. It is an important issue because it is so prevalent, and because there are a billion and a half Muslims. Sure, you can find small sects of others here and they by way of defending it, and you can find the behavior of people who are not motivated by religion, but the fact remains that women are considered lesser beings by Islam, as is in such copious evidence both through the behavior of Muslim men and the facts of Islamic law.

For whatever non liberal reason you have chosen, you simply defend Islam rather than critique it rationally.

It is not the lefts job to defend any religion
It is the Constitutions job

The left only stands up for Constitutional rights

If it isn't your job, then why do you do so freaking much of it?

We need to protect them from asshole Conservatives

There are so many of them

There you have it, folks.

You support Islam only because you have no actual ideology other than opposing what you characterize as conservative, and what you define as conservative is simply anything not in solidarity with Islam.