Do the teachings of Islam promote the well-being and progress of women?

No Abrahamic religion does.

Jesus was a great liberator for women, was Muhammed?

Jesus was a great liberator for women, was Muhammed?

He was?

How so? How did Jesus liberate women? Did he stop arranged marriages for example? Don't forget that his own mother's marriage was arranged.

Did he free women from their role in society giving them freedom to vote, enter the political hierachy of the times in the Jewish community, etc? Stopping one woman from being stoned does not make him a great liberator of womanhood nor does it make him a fictional head of the feminist liberation movement.

Matt 27:55-56 "And many women who followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering to Him, were there looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee's sons."

Yes, so liberated they were basically his servants.:rolleyes:

Look how good women have it in predominantly Christian countries compared to the others, and you were saying?

Look how good women have it in predominantly Christian countries compared to the others, and you were saying?
Hey yes.

Subjugated and denied rights until only quiet recently. Ya, women have had it real good in Christian countries.:rolleyes:

Hell, in some wedding vows, women are still meant to 'obey' their husbands.

But was it Christianity that freed women in the so called "Christian countries"? Or did the women themselves have to fight tooth and nail for it? You were saying?

Old JC did supposedly cut out the stoning of women for adultery and that. But basically women had to fight for their own rights. Now, that doesn't absolve islam either, of course: and stoning isn't the same as not being allowed to vote. Anyway, I like to slag people and things.

Lets face it, religions in general have never been great for women or for women's rights.:rolleyes:

You're wearing out that stupid smilie.

Those smilies must be for people who can't express themselves, maybe you could make a whole language out of them for the illiterate.

Why aren't American and European women's groups vocal about how Islam allows women to be treated?

Those smilies must be for people who can't express themselves, maybe you could make a whole language out of them for the illiterate.

And maybe you can actually start writing in paragraphs instead of one line per post.

Why aren't American and European women's groups vocal about how Islam allows women to be treated?
Who says they aren't?

But isn't it up to the women who belong to the Islamic religion to decide their own fate? After all, who are women in the West to decide what is good for all women around the world? We chose our own path and it is up to the women in Islam to choose their own. That is what freedom is and should always be. The freedom to choose one's own path.

Are they allowed to choose their own path?

Are they allowed to choose their own path?

Women in the West weren't, but they did so anyway. Some still suffer for not being submissive (eg domestic abuse) and others are denied the right of employment, etc.

And some women in Islam do choose their own path. Maybe we should respect their abilities and their choices instead of attempting to enforce our Western ideals on them. We come from different cultures so we cannot expect them to do things as we did or continue to do. Our life experiences are different, as is our upbringing. We cannot apply our values and morals them because ours are vastly different to theirs in so many ways.

What we can do is not put them down for whatever choice they do make.

What a fair weather friend you are to your sisters who are suffering in the Muslim world.

What a fair weather friend you are to your sisters who are suffering in the Muslim world.
So you think women in the West should remove the matter of choice for women in Islam? Wouldn't we (women in the West) be as oppressive as the system they reside in currently?

How hypocritical is it for us to say 'your situation is bad and therefore you must change it, but we don't trust you to change it as we see fit, so we will do it for you and do it our way', and then falsely congratulate ourselves that we have given them 'freedom', but only freedom as we see it? After all, don't you think they should have a choice in their own self determination?

Don't you think they should be free to make their own choices and be free to ask for help as they see fit? Who are we to demand what they should demand of their world and religion when we ourselves have not got it right yet?

Why would ANY woman want to be treated as a second class citizen, what do they gain from that?

Why would ANY woman want to be treated as a second class citizen, what do they gain from that?

You tell me.

Christianity has treated women as second class citizens from its inception. Laws of countries have changed, but the religious doctrines have not.

And what of women who live in so called "Christian countries" who face constant abuse and are treated as second class citizens, who are denied the right to divorce by the Catholic Church for example (remember the words 'for better or for worse' in the wedding vows)? What of women who are abused in Christian countries and denied rights by their husbands, families, community?

Before you throw stones, remember you live in a glass house. Women don't have it so great in the West either. We may have it better, but we aren't that much better that we are in a position to dictate what others should do. We fought to get to where we are now and it is an ongoing battle. Christianity did not make it easier for women in the West. On the contrary, it made it that much harder. And the fight is not over for women in the West. But we are doing it as we see fit and I think the least we can do is allow women in Islam the same courtesy and allow them to fight their battle as they see fit. If they need help, help should be forthcoming as they desire it. It is not for us to demand when they change or how they desire the changes to be made. After all, it would hardly be a fight for freedom and equality if we attempted to dictate to them what they should be aspiring to and for.

So you think Muslim women have a relatively good life, go figure.

They get killed if they gripe too much, that's why they don't gripe, and you sit there and tell them they should do it themselves, that's disgusting.

I'm going to do something I never do. Never.

I'm going to try to make peace. :eek:

Let's say this, guys: we must do more to help liberate women oppressed under islam, while being cognizant that we have further to go ourselves. We must let women in islam decide their own course, while being free to be critical of the islamic system and offering a helping hand in their liberation.

Or one could try to start a suffragette movement.

Meh, those were terrible ideas. Bash away.

Yeh, I wanna see Gloria Steinham in Tehran, and Babs, and Rosie, and of course, The Donald.

You tell me.

And what of women who live in so called "Christian countries" who face constant abuse and are treated as second class citizens, who are denied the right to divorce by the Catholic Church for example (remember the words 'for better or for worse' in the wedding vows)? What of women who are abused in Christian countries and denied rights by their husbands, families, community?



Bells, i think that vows are stated by both parties, man and women . Let's not forget what the men are stuck to in these "western "relashionships.

And honestly, if you were a women, which maybe you are, would you rather live in a arabic country or western one?

So you think Muslim women have a relatively good life, go figure.

They get killed if they gripe too much, that's why they don't gripe, and you sit there and tell them they should do it themselves, that's disgusting.

Maybe you need some lessons in reading and comprehension.

I am saying that they don't have it 'good'. But it is not for us to tell them how they should have it either because we are in no position to dictate to anyone. It is for them to choose for themselves what is good for them, as we in the West chose our own path.

Do you understand now?

Oh and IAC, some women in the West are also killed if they gripe too much. Check the domestic violence rates in the US and you might be astounded at just how "well" women are treated in the US in their very own homes. And yes, in case you failed to recognise it, that was sarcasm. Hence why I said we are hardly in a position to demand they be just like us, because we aren't perfect either.

I mean look at you for example? You support a religious doctrine that views women as second class citizens. Do you think women should be free to choose for example?

Fair weather feminist you are.

And honestly, if you were a women, which maybe you are, would you rather live in a arabic country or western one?

As a woman, I quite enjoy the freedoms of the West.

I am not saying the treatment of women should not change in Islam or anywhere else for that matter. It needs to change.

What I am saying is that it is not for me, as a Western woman, to dictate to Muslim women how that change should take place and what that change should involve. How insulting and degrading would it be for Muslim women, who are already oppressed, to be denied the choice in choosing their very freedoms and how they wish to fight it? I am not saying they don't need help or should not get it. But we should allow them to choose the help they desire as a movement and how they wish that help to be implemented.

Women don't have it so great in the West either. We may have it better, but we aren't that much better that we are in a position to dictate what others should do.
no?
women in the west (america) are a MILLION times better off than, say, pakistan where islam is the only religion.

no?
women in the west (america) are a MILLION times better off than, say, pakistan where islam is the only religion.
You ask a woman in the US who is beaten and raped daily by her husband if she is better off than a Pakistani woman suffering the same fate? Do you think she will say she is a 'million times better off'?

This is hysterical.

A bunch of men, who fail to recognise or improve the plight of women within their own culture, demanding that Islam changes how it treats women. Have you asked women in Islam what it is they want? You know, since you all seem to know so much about what freedoms these women should have, have you asked them if they want your interference? Have you asked the women in Islam if they think how the West treats women is better? Have you asked the women in Islam if they wish to be treated as the women in the West.

Do you think a woman should be free to choose to wear the hijab for example? Keep in mind, I have seen many of you demanding the hijab be banned.

Though they have some restrictions. It is good i feel

No, AK, it is not good. It is not pretty.

I think something we should keep in mind is the legality. In Pakistan, it isn't illegal to beat your wife. In the US, it is. That's something of a difference and something we should all take note of, although violations to the law are, of course, not unknown.

Oh and IAC, some women in the West are also killed if they gripe too much. Check the domestic violence rates in the US and you might be astounded at just how "well" women are treated in the US in their very own homes. And yes, in case you failed to recognise it, that was sarcasm. Hence why I said we are hardly in a position to demand they be just like us, because we aren't perfect either.



i think the focus here is on institionalised (too tired to spell right). how could you ever stop domestic abuse? and men are domestically abused too, it's not only hitting people you know.

You ask a woman in the US who is beaten and raped daily by her husband if she is better off than a Pakistani woman suffering the same fate? Do you think she will say she is a 'million times better off'?
well i was actually refering to things such as honor killings, being seen in public, being escorted by a man that isn;'t a reletive or husband, that sort of thing.

This is hysterical.
i'll agree. a womans life isn't easy no matter where they are, but it still remains that life here in the US isn't bad at all.

a womans life isn't easy no matter where they are, but it still remains that life here in the US isn't bad at all.

women in the U.S have it made, compared to men given similar circumstances.

Though they have some restrictions. It is good i feel

Oh? How so?

Why do you think women should be restricted?

I think something we should keep in mind is the legality. In Pakistan, it isn't illegal to beat your wife. In the US, it is. That's something of a difference and something we should all take note of, although violations to the law are, of course, not unknown.
And for how long has it been illegal for a man to bash or even rape his wife in the US?

That's the thing, the West took decades upon decades to change and it still needs changing. However now that we have changed, we expect other systems to change and do so immediately and while that would be ideal if it were possible, it simply is not possible.

Some women will report being beaten or raped by their husbands, and some husbands will report the same by their wives, to the police and will be ignored. The laws may be in place, but the attitudes of society takes a lot longer to change. In that, we have no place to demand Islamic women do this and that when we can't even do it for ourselves.

Do I think the system needs to change over there? Damn straight I do. And if I could I would want to force change. But I recognise that my attempting to do so would deny women in Islam the right to choose and the freedom to do so. Do they have it bad? Yes, god you'd have to be an idiot to not recognise that.

But we are in no place to demand they challenge their oppression. In doing so, we become oppressors ourselves. How do you think women in the West would have felt or would feel now if women and/or men from another culture told them that they had to change or challenge the Western system? How do you think women in the West would react today if an outsider told them that they were oppressed and must do this and that to change it and did not give them the choice on what it was they wanted for themselves?

i think the focus here is on institionalised (too tired to spell right). how could you ever stop domestic abuse? and men are domestically abused too, it's not only hitting people you know.
That's the thing. While it might be illegal to beat one's spouse, it does not stop it from happening. And just because it is illegal does not mean that men and women who commit acts of domestic abuse are punished for their crimes either. The legal system is lacking in how it treats domestic abuse cases. I have seen police officers question the validity of a woman's claims that she was domestically abused, regardless of the bruises on her face and body, asking her what she had done that might have provoked him. I mean huh? No one deserves or should ever be beaten in their own home by anyone, let alone their spouse.

So in light of the fact domestic abuse occurs and is at times overlooked by the legal system in the West, are we in a position to demand that Islamic countries implement domestic abuse laws? Keeping in mind ours are far from perfect and people still die in domestic abuse situations on a daily basis in the West?

well i was actually refering to things such as honor killings, being seen in public, being escorted by a man that isn;'t a reletive or husband, that sort of thing.
And you are right. It should all be outlawed.

However is not synonamous with Islam. It occurs in other cultures as well. The same applies with being seen in public with other men who aren't relatives, etc.

I am not saying change is not needed. Change needs to be brought in with a sledgehammer. But we in the West cannot be that sledgehammer. Women in Islam feel and are oppressed enough as it is within their own culture. And they also feel outside pressure and oppression from the West as well. Now imagine how they would feel if Western women and men demanded they force change in their system or if we entered and forced the change ourselves. Should we confer with the women in Islam over what they wanted changed? Or would we simply assume what it is they want and deny them the right to choose? In that, we become oppressors.

It is a fine balance. To implement change, they have to want it. If they don't want it and we force it upon them, then we are no different to their current oppressors. If they want it, then help them implement it by any means available and necessary. However we cannot implement our beliefs and rights and deny them the right to choose their own autonomy. Let them tell us what it is they want and then we help them get it. That is all I am saying.

Look how good women have it in predominantly Christian countries compared to the others, and you were saying?

I think its called Democracy ans rule of Law

Old JC did supposedly cut out the stoning of women for adultery and that. But basically women had to fight for their own rights. Now, that doesn't absolve islam either, of course: and stoning isn't the same as not being allowed to vote. Anyway, I like to slag people and things.

Hey, If the woman was stoned then what happened to the man who raped her ?

Why aren't American and European women's groups vocal about how Islam allows women to be treated?

I think women should wait until they start to see Islam as the problem.

yeah. you are right GeoffP.

I think women should wait until they start to see Islam as the problem.

Is it Islam or the culture of the region? After all, honour killings occur in places like India as well as other countries.

The same applies to arranged marriages and not being seen in the company of men who are not related, etc. This is not synonamous to Islam but something that appears to be cultural.

What a fair weather friend you are to your sisters who are suffering in the Muslim world.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/womanshour/2005_13_fri_04.shtml

So you think Muslim women have a relatively good life, go figure.

They get killed if they gripe too much, that's why they don't gripe, and you sit there and tell them they should do it themselves, that's disgusting.

If they know they will be killed then they should try to kill all those who would kill before they get the chance , but then they wont , so be it.

That's the thing. While it might be illegal to beat one's spouse, it does not stop it from happening. And just because it is illegal does not mean that men and women who commit acts of domestic abuse are punished for their crimes either. The legal system is lacking in how it treats domestic abuse cases. I have seen police officers question the validity of a woman's claims that she was domestically abused, regardless of the bruises on her face and body, asking her what she had done that might have provoked him. I mean huh? No one deserves or should ever be beaten in their own home by anyone, let alone their spouse.

So in light of the fact domestic abuse occurs and is at times overlooked by the legal system in the West, are we in a position to demand that Islamic countries implement domestic abuse laws? Keeping in mind ours are far from perfect and people still die in domestic abuse situations on a daily basis in the West?

In the U.S domestic abuse is taken very serious, the days of "just an argument" etc. are long long gone. Just like DWI, making you walk home is not going to happen anymore.

As far as in Islamic countries, not referring to physical abuse, many of these women want to live that way or at least dont really have a problem with it. I guess we are in agreement there.

Personally i dont mind having a woman being the breadwinner, i would encourage it:)- go ahead take that test, wake up every morning go to work, etc. etc. and give me money when i ask for it.

So in light of the fact domestic abuse occurs and is at times overlooked by the legal system in the West, are we in a position to demand that Islamic countries implement domestic abuse laws? Keeping in mind ours are far from perfect and people still die in domestic abuse situations on a daily basis in the West?

...hmm...yes. The spirit of the law is an error area, to be sure, but the existence of those same laws have helped women.

I love how IAC looks at God. He see`s the OT as the word of God where it treats woman like shit, and then think that God all of a sudden changes his mind, and then sends Jesus to change the rule that God made in the first place.

Liberator of woman IAC? From who?

From the way women were treated in Roman times, he interacted and gave credit to women like no other ancient figure, right?

Compare what Jesus said about women to what Muhammed said about them.

I love how IAC looks at God. He see`s the OT as the word of God where it treats woman like shit, and then think that God all of a sudden changes his mind, and then sends Jesus to change the rule that God made in the first place.

That is a bit wierd, yeah. One of the things that keeps me from being religious.

History has been a progression, wouldn't you say?

But humans aren't omnipotent. God is, or supposed to be.

And you are right. It should all be outlawed.
Change needs to be brought in with a sledgehammer. But we in the West cannot be that sledgehammer.
if not us then who? i don't see any other country with the balls to take the initiative.
Women in Islam feel and are oppressed enough as it is within their own culture.
try telling them that.
And they also feel outside pressure and oppression from the West as well.
how, in the name of god, is the west oppressing the women of islam?
Now imagine how they would feel if Western women and men demanded they force change in their system or if we entered and forced the change ourselves.
didn't you just say change should be brought in with a sledgehammer?
Should we confer with the women in Islam over what they wanted changed?
more precisely the common woman, the woman in the streets
Or would we simply assume what it is they want and deny them the right to choose? In that, we become oppressors.
the only reason these islamic women wrap themselves up in burlap is because of arranged marriages. if the men had to choose a mate that tradition would bite the dust.

It is a fine balance. To implement change, they have to want it. If they don't want it and we force it upon them, then we are no different to their current oppressors.
ever hear of propaganda bells? if the women of islam hears it over and over that islamic women are supposed to be a certain way, what's going to happen?
If they want it, then help them implement it by any means available and necessary. However we cannot implement our beliefs and rights and deny them the right to choose their own autonomy. Let them tell us what it is they want and then we help them get it. That is all I am saying.
well see that's the problem, how do you, or anybody, know that what you hear is actually what the woman in the street wants.

if not us then who? i don't see any other country with the balls to take the initiative.

Interesting. So because they are oppressed, you are again denying them the right to choose their own future and way of life? So you free them from Islamic oppression and force them to endure your own and what YOU think their way of life should be?

Do you have any idea how hypocritical that is?

try telling them that.
Refer to above.

You are basing what their lives should be like by comparing to a Western view point. When they way they see things might be in complete opposition to how we see it. At least have the god damn decency to respect their wishes and decisions. You dare say they need to be freed from their oppressors, but you refuse to respect what it is they might want. In short, you also become their oppressors.

how, in the name of god, is the west oppressing the women of islam?
By trying to force our way of life down their throats and denying them the right to choose what it is THEY want. They have a right to a voice as well you know. Your disrespect of their religion is a form of oppression. Your disrespect of their choice and voice is a form of oppression. The constant pressure you put on them to want or demand change is a form of oppression. Instead of allowing them to decide for themselves, you are making the decision for them. Your arrogance with your 'if we don't who will' is a form of oppression. You have a complete lack of understanding of their culture and their religion and that too is oppressive. Akin to how you claim their religion is denying them their rights, you deny them their rights as well.

Why don't you go to Iraq, for example, and ask a woman there whether she thinks the West is oppressing her.

Nadia, 24, who trained as a schoolteacher but has not taken a job because of the risks posed by the war to women professionals, rarely leaves home.

"I don't go out. Ahmad does the shopping and runs errands for me. I am too frightened for myself and for my child. Even then I am frightened when Ahmad goes out to work," Nadia says.
Link (http://www.theage.com.au/news/parenting/babies-on-the-battlefront/2007/03/13/1173722468931.html)

Do you think Nadia is going to say 'no, the West has liberated me'? Nadia had a great time when she was expecting her baby by the way. Because of the situation and the curfew in Iraq, her husband had to drive her to stay at a friend's house who had a midwife in the home just in case she went into labour in the night. Why? Because the curfew meant she could not go to the hospital at night to have her child and her husband was terrified she and/or the baby would die if a professional was not there when she did give birth. Yes, how liberated do you think Nadia feels right now?

Ammar's fears were the same as Ahmad's: that his wife would go into labour during the curfew and be trapped at home or that they would be forced to risk driving through the dark streets dodging jumpy US patrols.
Do you think his wife would say that the US has broght her freedom from oppression? Or would she view the US patrols as oppressors if she can't even drive to the hospital to give birth because she might get shot at?

didn't you just say change should be brought in with a sledgehammer?
I said I wish it could be. But I also have the realisation that the sledgehammer can only be wielded by the women in Islam and not by the men and women in the West. For us to demand changes of and for these women, we are not only disrespecting them, but we are also oppressing them ourselves because we are demanding they now adopt a Western viewpoint to freedom and equal rights.

more precisely the common woman, the woman in the streets
Yes and? Do you think the common woman in Islam should be asked what it is she wants? Don't you think she has a right to decide? After all, we are talking about women having rights aren't we? We are talking about freeing women so they have a right to decide and to choose what it is they want, aren't we?

Don't you think every woman in Islam, be she common on the streets or not, should have a right to choose for herself? Answer yes and you get it. Answer no and you are no better then their current oppressors. That's basically what it comes down to in the end.

the only reason these islamic women wrap themselves up in burlap is because of arranged marriages. if the men had to choose a mate that tradition would bite the dust.
Again, a complete lack of understanding of their culture and their religion. What of the woman who WANTS to wear the hijab? Don't you think a woman should have the right to choose what she bloody wears? Who the hell are you, a Western man, to demand what an Islamic woman wears? Don't you think an Islamic woman should have the right to choose for herself what she deems appropriate to wear? Or are you going to further oppress them by not only denying them the right to choose their own freedom and rights, but also deny them how they dress and how they practice their religion?

What of the women who like to have arranged marriages because they think their parents know them well enough to choose someone who will make them happy, and said marriage works? Are you going to deny these women that as well? Who are YOU to tell them what is right or wrong? Don't you think they have the ability and capacity to determine their own wants and desires? God if I were an oppressed woman and I saw you coming across the horizon to supposedly free me, I'd run in the opposite direction because your so called freedom comes with further oppression because you are demanding they curb to YOUR ways when they simply might not want to. Women in Islam might just want to have freedom within their culture and religion that has nothing to do with Western notions of freedom.

ever hear of propaganda bells? if the women of islam hears it over and over that islamic women are supposed to be a certain way, what's going to happen?
So now you think the women in Islam are stupid and mindless drones?

So instead, you wish to drone into their heads what they really should be? Ermm ok. Yeah, you really want their freedom and give them rights alright.:rolleyes:

well see that's the problem, how do you, or anybody, know that what you hear is actually what the woman in the street wants.
How do you know it is not? If you listen to them and actually hear what it is they are saying and what they want, you might get it through your thick skull that they don't want to be like the West. And whether you are able to understand and respect their decision will mean the difference between you then becoming their oppressors or their freedom fighters. After all, if you refuse them their voice and demand they be a certain way, you become exactly like the oppressors they now face.

Before rights comes respect. And before you can help them fight for their rights, you must respect them, their religion and their culture, because what they want will be based on that and not on what we in the West want or think they should have. And if you can't respect them enough to allow them a voice to tell you what it is they want, then you also become their oppressors.

Interesting. So because they are oppressed, you are again denying them the right to choose their own future and way of life? So you free them from Islamic oppression and force them to endure your own and what YOU think their way of life should be?
we are talking HUMAN RIGHTS here bells, things like honor killings, arranged marriages,

Do you have any idea how hypocritical that is?
i stand by my intentions. honor killings is wrong, period. arranged marriages is wrong, period.


You are basing what their lives should be like by comparing to a Western view point. When they way they see things might be in complete opposition to how we see it.
can you spell indoctrination? what i've mentioned is wrong bells, no ifs, ands, or buts, about it.
At least have the god damn decency to respect their wishes and decisions.
i'll agree, as long as those decisions are rational.
You dare say they need to be freed from their oppressors,
what i said bells, was that they need to be treated like the rest of humanity. no woman in her right mind would want to be murdered because her choice of boyfriend doesn't fit with her parents choice.
but you refuse to respect what it is they might want.
name 5 women who want to be told at 13 they WILL marry a certain person no matter how much the female despises the idea.


By trying to force our way of life down their throats and denying them the right to choose what it is THEY want. They have a right to a voice as well you know. Your disrespect of their religion is a form of oppression.
i don't mean to be crass here bells but their religion can, uh, well nevermind.


Why don't you go to Iraq, for example, and ask a woman there whether she thinks the West is oppressing her.
i would LOVE to
I said I wish it could be. But I also have the realisation that the sledgehammer can only be wielded by the women in Islam and not by the men and women in the West.
wrong.
islam is so thoroughly intgrated into their government that any objectiveness is impossible. this is exactly what we are trying to accomplish in iraq. we have completely dismantled the previous government and replaced it with members of the civilian population. idealy there will be NO islam in iraqs government.


Yes and? Do you think the common woman in Islam should be asked what it is she wants? Don't you think she has a right to decide? After all, we are talking about women having rights aren't we? We are talking about freeing women so they have a right to decide and to choose what it is they want, aren't we?
yes to all of tyhe above, under one condition, and that is she is truely free to make her decision. that means free from any religious influence.

Don't you think every woman in Islam, be she common on the streets or not, should have a right to choose for herself? Answer yes and you get it. Answer no and you are no better then their current oppressors. That's basically what it comes down to in the end.
there are differences between rich and poor bells in case you missed my meaning.


Again, a complete lack of understanding of their culture and their religion.
religion has no, none, nada, business in government, zero.
What of the woman who WANTS to wear the hijab?
then let her. she does or doesn't on her own free will.
Don't you think an Islamic woman should have the right to choose for herself what she deems appropriate to wear?
islamic woman? whats an islamic woman? islam is a religion bells.
in my mind an islamic woman is the equivilent of a nun.


What of the women who like to have arranged marriages because they think their parents know them well enough to choose someone who will make them happy, and said marriage works?
because women are not peices of property to be bartered and traded thats why.

Saddam was secular, not religious.

And a lot of women have no problem with arranged marriages, neither do a lot of men.

A Muslim woman, if not an Islamic one. And many of them prefer their own culture and follow it even when in the West and given a choice.

I know Bells was dying for me to interject here, and she shall not be disappointed.

So instead, you wish to drone into their heads what they really should be? Ermm ok. Yeah, you really want their freedom and give them rights alright

I would put it this way: I would like to see them empowered enough to be able to have their rights. Presently, they don't have much power; I don't think I need point out that I saw a show on Syrian TV about the size of the rod you can whack your wife with to imply any more strongly that they don't have much in the way of political protection. Obviously that varies place to place, and it may be that islamic women WILL empower themselves yet; I can't imagine the likes of that particular showdown, of course. And yet, many desire equality that they are unable to get. The women of Afghanistan were unable to work or go to school - they might have fought for their rights, but when one is locked up in the home (when not escorted about by male relatives, who might be less sympathetic to the plight of their female kin than would be expected elsewhere) it becomes difficult to form a popular front for one's own liberation. So...I think part of this movement should, by rights, come from those who claim a great desire for human rights and equality - Western nations, socialist or otherwise, but more than that: I think in many places it cannot come without external pressure. No one was going to release the women of Afghanistan from subjugation, and even now it isn't all that great. I think the examples illustrate the point.

So: does that settle the Bells-Leo combattre or should I fetch the bazookas? :)

Very best to both of you,

Geoff

I know Bells was dying for me to interject here, and she shall not be disappointed.



I would put it this way: I would like to see them empowered enough to be able to have their rights. Presently, they don't have much power; I don't think I need point out that I saw a show on Syrian TV about the size of the rod you can whack your wife with to imply any more strongly that they don't have much in the way of political protection. Obviously that varies place to place, and it may be that islamic women WILL empower themselves yet; I can't imagine the likes of that particular showdown, of course. And yet, many desire equality that they are unable to get. The women of Afghanistan were unable to work or go to school - they might have fought for their rights, but when one is locked up in the home (when not escorted about by male relatives, who might be less sympathetic to the plight of their female kin than would be expected elsewhere) it becomes difficult to form a popular front for one's own liberation. So...I think part of this movement should, by rights, come from those who claim a great desire for human rights and equality - Western nations, socialist or otherwise, but more than that: I think in many places it cannot come without external pressure. No one was going to release the women of Afghanistan from subjugation, and even now it isn't all that great. I think the examples illustrate the point.

So: does that settle the Bells-Leo combattre or should I fetch the bazookas? :)

Very best to both of you,

Geoff

Women were working in Afghanistan before the Taliban came to power, women were working in Iran before the democratic government was toppled, women were working in Iraq when Saddam was in power.

Saddam was secular, not religious.

And a lot of women have no problem with arranged marriages, neither do a lot of men.

A Muslim woman, if not an Islamic one. And many of them prefer their own culture and follow it even when in the West and given a choice.

First off, men are lazy.

Secondly: arranged marriages are not for everyone. In fact, when you think about it, the matter is really predicated on force: all has been "arranged". No take-backs. It's like a business arrangement for families. This is fine for some, but not for others and the entire issue of arranged marriage is the firm lockstep march to the altar (or what have you). For those comfortable with it: fine. But those that aren't - in the present, and prior to it - are pressured to conform to it, and sometimes punished if they refuse it, which is wrong.

Women were working in Afghanistan before the Taliban came to power, women were working in Iran before the democratic government was toppled, women were working in Iraq when Saddam was in power.

And not thereafter; yes, I know.

First off, men are lazy.

Secondly: arranged marriages are not for everyone. In fact, when you think about it, the matter is really predicated on force: all has been "arranged". No take-backs. It's like a business arrangement for families. This is fine for some, but not for others and the entire issue of arranged marriage is the firm lockstep march to the altar (or what have you). For those comfortable with it: fine. But those that aren't - in the present, and prior to it - are pressured to conform to it, and sometimes punished if they refuse it, which is wrong.

The culture is different, the idea of family and marriage is not a Western one. Marriage is about children, community and a stable mutual relationship based on trust and shared expectations.

In Islam marriage is a contract, conducted like a business, with all clauses related to the marriage, and all monetary arrangements clearly laid out before marriage and in the event of a divorce (which is permitted). A woman can remarry within 90 days of a divorce or widowhood, has the option of maintaining complete sole control of her finances and has her children provided for.

And not thereafter; yes, I know.

Exactly. Before they were liberated from communists, democrats and WMDs.

And a lot of women have no problem with arranged marriages, neither do a lot of men.
doesn't women in the middle east have any brains? aren't they intelligent enough to choose for themselves? do they really feel like pieces of prperty?
this was the exact same conditions in japan before the americans took over.
no america has left japan, do you see them going back to where they were?

A Muslim woman, if not an Islamic one.
they are women, no islam, christianity, hinduism, buddhism, no religious connotations at all.

The culture is different, the idea of family and marriage is not a Western one. Marriage is about children, community and a stable mutual relationship based on trust and shared expectations.

In Islam marriage is a contract, conducted like a business, with all clauses related to the marriage, and all monetary arrangements clearly laid out before marriage and in the event of a divorce (which is permitted). A woman can remarry within 90 days of a divorce or widowhood, has the option of maintaining complete sole control of her finances and has her children provided for.

But this is what I'm saying: what about those who don't want that? There's a lot of pressure there and as the evilly evilness of Westernism creeps into the minds of these impressionable youngsters, some are going to balk. What then? The carrot or the spurs?

doesn't women in the middle east have any brains? aren't they intelligent enough to choose for themselves? do they really feel like pieces of prperty?
this was the exact same conditions in japan before the americans took over.
no america has left japan, do you see them going back to where they were?


they are women, no islam, christianity, hinduism, buddhism, no religious connotations at all.

Shows your complete ignorance of Muslim women and their culture.

But this is what I'm saying: what about those who don't want that? There's a lot of pressure there and as the evilly evilness of Westernism creeps into the minds of these impressionable youngsters, some are going to balk. What then? The carrot or the spurs?

There are a lot of women who choose the men they want to marry. No one ever said the woman have no say in arranging their marriages.

In all arranged marriages there is a period of engagement when the couple meet and decide if they want to get married. Its only the uneducated who treat the women as if their opinion does not count and that has no cultural barriers anywhere.:rolleyes:

Shows your complete ignorance of Muslim women and their culture.
i believe it shows INSURGENTS are your problem sam, you know, propaganda?

on the islands of japan it was easy to keep the insurgents out untill we could make the change.

think about it sam, give it some serious thought.

i believe it shows INSURGENTS are your problem sam, you know, propaganda?

on the islands of japan it was easy to keep the insurgents out untill we could make the change.

think about it sam, give it some serious thought.

This thread is about women you know?

This thread is about women you know?
just give it some thought sam, you aren't stupid.

Exactly. Before they were liberated from communists, democrats and WMDs.

And thank goodness for that.

Look, I'm not denying that the US in particular has stuck its nose into the affairs of the ME. Both the superpower blocks did it all through the 20th century, unless one supposes Saddam bought all his T-72s from K-Mart. If the Soviets had won the Cold War, we'd be having the convo in reverse, almost: my name would be Ivan, and we're argue about the relative merits of rigid, authoritarian Soviet-style communism vs. those of rigid, authoritarian Taliban-style political islam. Is it a particular political failing of the West? No: but of the entire conflict.

The regrettable thing is that the people in all the nations in between got caught up in it as pawns on one side and then the other. There's not much to say about that, save that it shouldn't have happened. Unfortunately, neither side was going to back down, and true to ideology they didn't. What I'm interested in is salvaging what might be salvaged from the mess that is the end-20th century crossover: Saddam shouldn't have been allowed to buy nukes, or else the torture factories (and not the ones with the panties on the head) and the execution of dissidents would have gone on a lot longer. Would the body count have been as high? Who knows. I did think the invasion was...bad...and good...at the same time. They got rid of Saddam. All right, that's something. But unfortunately other parties have stepped in to fill the gap. So it goes. Were the Americans going to steal all Iraq's oil? I don't know - it depends on where the money was going to be going, and how much a barrel, and what the money would end up used for. Maybe they were going to rob the Iraqis blind; hell, Annan was. But the sectarian violence - and that's what it is - doesn't help.

Anyway, I'm off topic, and I'm done. Field is yours.

There are a lot of women who choose the men they want to marry. No one ever said the woman have no say in arranging their marriages.

In all arranged marriages there is a period of engagement when the couple meet and decide if they want to get married. Its only the uneducated who treat the women as if their opinion does not count and that has no cultural barriers anywhere.:rolleyes:

Well, I'd argue that it creates a climate under which women can indeed be exploited; but as I said, I'm out.

And thank goodness for that.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

But as long as its Muslims walking that road...its all worth it.

Well, I'd argue that it creates a climate under which women can indeed be exploited; but as I said, I'm out.

Not really, women are cared for much more in such cultures. I see more sexism in the workplace in the US than I did in Saudi Arabia. And they feel more like a person than a sex object. I find women in the West have a lot of pressure on them to prove themselves and feel guilty regardless of the choices they make. Their support systems are weaker and the relationships demanding and made up of unrealistic expectations. Life is much simpler and easier, family ties closer, children better looked after and marriages less subject to strain in Islamic households. Its a completely different world.

Yeh, but how do they treat non Muslims, ahahahaha.

we are talking HUMAN RIGHTS here bells, things like honor killings, arranged marriages,


i stand by my intentions. honor killings is wrong, period. arranged marriages is wrong, period.

Who said they weren't wrong?

But is it something that is practiced only in Islam? What about honour killings in Africa, India and elsewhere? Honour killing is not religious. It is more a cultural phenomenon. And some women even partake in the disgusting practice.

can you spell indoctrination? what i've mentioned is wrong bells, no ifs, ands, or buts, about it.
And some anti-feminists in the West will also say that women in the West are indoctrinated into believing they actually have rights. Read some of Baron's posts as a prime example.

i'll agree, as long as those decisions are rational.
My my, aren't you the big man!

You'll agree so long as it is rational by YOUR standard. Who's to say your standards are even correct? Don't you think women in Islam and elsewhere are able to make rational decisions on their very own? Or do you think we all need big men like you to ensure what we want is rational?

what i said bells, was that they need to be treated like the rest of humanity. no woman in her right mind would want to be murdered because her choice of boyfriend doesn't fit with her parents choice.
No. You are saying they need to be given human rights, so long as said rights are deemed rational by your standards. You say they are indoctrinated, but then say that if their choices aren't up to your standard, then what they want will be over-ridden and replaced by what YOU deem is right.

How about this Leo. How about you butt out until they tell you to butt in? How about you stop bombing their homes, telling them their religion is evil and should be wiped off the map? How about you respect their right to practice whatever religion they so choose without judging them? How about you, like their religion, stops demanding they curb to ideals that aren't their own and actually allow them to make up their own minds? You know, give them the rights afforded to them by their humanity to determine their own existence?

name 5 women who want to be told at 13 they WILL marry a certain person no matter how much the female despises the idea.
Some of them might. Have you asked them? Or are you basing it on what you think is good or not?

You have 13 year old girls in the US pledging their virginity to their fathers in ceremonies that are akin to marriage ceremonies. Yet no one is saying these girls are being indoctrinated by their religion and families into making such choices and decisions. They are free to do it aren't they?Link (http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21446570-2,00.html)

How about, a girl of 13 has a choice to refuse an arranged marriage and tell her parents she'd rather wait and see for herself who she will marry and have her family and community respect her decision? How about she also has a right and a choice to accept her parents decision if she so chooses?

And again, arranged marriages are not solely in the domain of Islam. They also exist elsewhere. Even in some religious sects in the West as well. Maybe instead of attacking the religion, you concentrate on the cultures that encourage such things to occur. How about, as Geoff correctly pointed out, you empower the woman to make up her own mind instead of trying to make it up for her?

i don't mean to be crass here bells but their religion can, uh, well nevermind.

Well that is not for you to decide now is it? Or are you now going to be the so called 'freedom fighter' that denies them even the right to practice the religion of their choice?

Gee, you're not really giving them lots of human rights there are you leo? You are denying them the right to make choices in their culture, how they dress (hijab) and now you're also denying them the right to practice the religion of their choice.

wrong.
islam is so thoroughly intgrated into their government that any objectiveness is impossible. this is exactly what we are trying to accomplish in iraq. we have completely dismantled the previous government and replaced it with members of the civilian population. idealy there will be NO islam in iraqs government.

And Christianity is not entrenched in the politics of the US? Ermm ok. So I guess they have reviewed the decision to not teach evolution in many US schools then, for example?

Oh and Saddam, as much of a sick SOB he might have been, practiced a secular form of Government.

yes to all of tyhe above, under one condition, and that is she is truely free to make her decision. that means free from any religious influence.
And if it is her choice to make her decision based on her religious beliefs, then you would deny her the right to self expression and freedom to live her life as she so chooses?

Don't you get it yet?

You are not the one to place any condition on her or any other woman. For goodness sake, you're carrying on about giving her human rights and the right to her own humanity, but you are placing conditions on how she does it.

Do you still not see how hypocritical you are? How warped your notion of freedom and rights are? If she is to be truly free to make up her own mind, it is to be done without ANY condition from you or anyone else.

there are differences between rich and poor bells in case you missed my meaning
So only one group should have the right to choose what she wants based on the amount of money she may have?

religion has no, none, nada, business in government, zero.
No it does not. But if she wishes it to be, who are you to tell her no? If you tell her no and deny her that right, aren't you also then an oppressor?

Hence why I said to let the women in Islam choose for themselves what it is THEY want. This is not about you. It is about them and their 'human right' to choose.

islamic woman? whats an islamic woman? islam is a religion bells.
in my mind an islamic woman is the equivilent of a nun.
Again. Who are YOU again? And what right do YOU have to make decisions about their religion? Don't you think they are capable enough to make up their own minds about their religion? Why don't you just butt out of their religion and allow them to decide what it is they want from it?

because women are not peices of property to be bartered and traded thats why.
So if a woman wants her parents to arrange her marriage, you'd deny her that right? Again, who are YOU to say what she should want or not? In doing so, aren't you also her oppressor?

You cannot fight for someone's freedom and human rights if you place conditions on said rights. They need to be free of you and the rest of us to decide what it is they truly want.

----------------------------------------------------------------

I would put it this way: I would like to see them empowered enough to be able to have their rights. Presently, they don't have much power; I don't think I need point out that I saw a show on Syrian TV about the size of the rod you can whack your wife with to imply any more strongly that they don't have much in the way of political protection. Obviously that varies place to place, and it may be that islamic women WILL empower themselves yet; I can't imagine the likes of that particular showdown, of course. And yet, many desire equality that they are unable to get. The women of Afghanistan were unable to work or go to school - they might have fought for their rights, but when one is locked up in the home (when not escorted about by male relatives, who might be less sympathetic to the plight of their female kin than would be expected elsewhere) it becomes difficult to form a popular front for one's own liberation. So...I think part of this movement should, by rights, come from those who claim a great desire for human rights and equality - Western nations, socialist or otherwise, but more than that: I think in many places it cannot come without external pressure. No one was going to release the women of Afghanistan from subjugation, and even now it isn't all that great. I think the examples illustrate the point.
I agree with what you are saying. The women's movement in the West was not given to us. Women fought tooth and nail to be granted the freedoms they have today. And the battle is ongoing. Christianity did not give women the rights they have in the West. Women did.

External pressure can only be applied if it is desired by the oppressed. For example, lets say the women in Afghanistan tell the West to butt out and let them handle it in their own time and way. We can't then say, 'well that's not good enough, we demand you have such and such a rights now'. It is not for us to tell them what they need and want. It is for them to determine for themselves and then it is for us to help them get it if they want us to.

And again, we can't expect what took us a couple of hundred years to happen in the course of a few months in Islam. The woman's movement in the West was not an external movement, but an internal one.. as in the women in the West decided what it was they wanted and fought for it. Why don't we allow the women in Islam the same dignity and respect to make their own choices? Doing so is the empowerment that they need and want. Instead of telling them what they want or need, why don't we let them make up their own minds and then help them to achieve their goals once they have done so? Fight for their freedom to have a voice, yes. But don't tell them what that voice should be. That is what I am saying.

Yeh, but how do they treat non Muslims, ahahahaha.

Well none of them are kidnapped by the muttawas and sent to Guantanamo.

Nice dodge, sneaky dickens.

Nice dodge, sneaky dickens.

Thank you, Ice Ice baby.

It's refreshing that you admit you're a sneaky dickens, let your guard down?

It's refreshing that you admit you're a sneaky dickens, let your guard down?

I confess, I'm a sneaky, opinionated BITCH.:)

My my, aren't you the big man!

You'll agree so long as it is rational by YOUR standard.

okay, you win. let 'em murder each other cause boyfriends skin isn't white or black enough and trade their women like so many bales of hay. no problem.

Wow Sam, does Allah like that?

Not really, women are cared for much more in such cultures.

Ha! :D

Well none of them are kidnapped by the muttawas and sent to Guantanamo.

Instead, if they're lippy, they're kidnapped by the religious police and sent to live underground.

Anywhere up to about six feet or so, I understand.

What did Jejus say about Rapists ?

Ha! :D

I come from a culture like that.:rolleyes:

the arguement goes as follows
"my shitty delusional religion is way better than your shitty delusional religion"

when in fact, they are basically the same. just different languages, characters, and a different name for the tooth fairy.

did you know people have ACTUALLY SEEN the flying spaghetti monster?
FSMism is like, way more true. :D

Who do you think wrote the Gospels Huwy?

I come from a culture like that.:rolleyes:

Yes. Cared for and taken care of, if they step out of line. Let me take note of that. :rolleyes: (not in all cases, of course: but the trend is there nonetheless)


Anyway, that's not the point of me writing in. Bells, whom all will agree is a fundamental element of this thread, is taking some time off for reasons of reproductive biology**. I suggest - indeed, I declare in all my Lizardoid-Mossad-CIA-FBI-KGB-Armenian-given power and subterfugial might - that we must postpone the thread until such time as she returns, and I call upon the powers of Y-w-h and God and Allah and Myuu and even the secret powers of that secret and profane being, the Mawd-er-a'Tor, to close the thread until she does. It may be a couple of weeks, or a month, or longer, but as we wait in eternal hope of the coming of the Redeemer and also the Pizza Guy, let it be so.

All in? Then all out. Let's wish our best to Bells - maybe the more thoughtful of you could send her a PM perhaps? - and wait in joyful expectation of her imminent return.

Best to one and all.

(Except Spurious, who is profane in the sight of Myuu)

Geoff






** Now you may ask yourself: How does Geoff know this about Bells?
And you may ask yourself : What makes him so damn smart?
And you may tell yourself: Geoff is not a Lizardoid Illuminati.
And you may tell yourself: He does not have a secret lair and an electroshock 'therapy' chair.

And I answer: there is water at the bottom of the ocean.
And Geoff knows its name.
Let the water hold you down.

All hail Myuu.

Geoff

Who Myuu?

He was?

How so? How did Jesus liberate women? Did he stop arranged marriages for example? [/INDENT]

One could almost call her a rape victim.


Yes, so liberated they were basically his servants.:rolleyes:

Not once did Jesus speak out against slavery.
How did he miss that one?
(Oh, and in case it isn't obvious, I agree with you in general. Jesus by his social activities might have lightened up some of the judgements of women who had sex, but his followers have turned this into an example of how loving and open he was, rather than as a reason to reduce judging)

All right, let's call halt here. Bells is out for a bit, so let's all ease off the accelerator. We wait until she returns.

Yes. Cared for and taken care of, if they step out of line. Let me take note of that. :rolleyes: (not in all cases, of course: but the trend is there nonetheless)




The "trend" is related to the level of education; most of us are brought up with a great deal of love and attention.:)

Chill down Guys.

Arranged marriages are not forced marriages. Infact they can be better than Love marriages.

In love one is force by his attraction to marry a person. But in arranged marriages the guy will be exactly as wanted.

Again: let's call halt to the thread until Bells gets back.

Shoot, call her out with a new thread.

The "trend" is related to the level of education; most of us are brought up with a great deal of love and attention.:)

OH Sam, that wa the most beautiful thing i've ever read.


Chill down Guys.

yeah chill down.


In love one is force by his attraction to marry a person. But in arranged marriages the guy will be exactly as wanted.

Gee, me thinky you got it backwards.

OH Sam, that wa the most beautiful thing i've ever read.
:confused:

Gee, me thinky you got it backwards.

It doesn't matter whether it is a love/arranged marriage; the expectations are lower in arranged marriages but then the basis for the marriage is entirely different.

It doesn't matter whether it is a love/arranged marriage; the expectations are lower in arranged marriages but then the basis for the marriage is entirely different.
yes indeedy it's different. it's called state sanctioned discrimination. no wonder you don't want to change.

do you realize sam how many times you've pulled the race card on this board?