Oppressed women under Islam

Women are oppressed everywhere. boo hoo...
But it's much worse for muslim women in western countries and even worse for them in muslim countries!!!

In a truly Islamic society women have the following rights in Islam:

The right and duty to obtain education.
The right to have their own independent property.
The right to work to earn money if they need it or want it.
Equality of reward for equal deeds.
The right to participate fully in public life and have their voices heard by those in power.
The right to provisions from the husband for all her needs and more.
The right to negotiate marriage terms of her choice.
The right to obtain divorce from her husband, even on the grounds that she simply can't stand him.
The right to keep all her own money (she is not responsible to maintain any relations).
The right to get sexual satisfaction from her husband.

and more...

But they never practice what they preach now do they....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=455400&in_page_id=1879

The fact remains that a lot of Islamic women are oppressed and the ones that post on here that claim that they are liberated are in fact brain washed.. or simply like to be in bondage (A weird form of infactuation)

But there are still inequalities in the Quran ----and I'm talking about pure Islam, not the twisted obscenities that Muslims have made in the name of Islam. For example, a man can divorce his wife for any reason, but a woman needs a valid reason. A Muslim male can marry a kitabiyya, but a Muslim female may only take a Muslim husband.

The whole problem with Islam is precisely what made it so succesful in medieval times! It is so complete, it covers practically every detail of human life. In a feudal system, that made Islam wildly succesful because it was so well-adjusted. But when feudalism starts breaking down, and capitalism, democracy and free thinking attempt to emerge, Islam gets in the way.

Former Miss Canada Nazanin Afshin-Jam of Iranian origin is also on the target lists for Islamic fundamentalists.
http://www.iapm.ca/newsmanager/anmviewer.asp?a=499&z=22


Islam has many good things that I respect. But sooner or later either Islam must go, or civilizational progress must go.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Q 4: 11
Q 4: 34

'Nuff said. Literalism kills.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

There's a third alternative that people like you, who pretend such concern, overlook. That alternative is that Islam will eventually follow the road to apostasy that Christianity has undertaken. Perhaps that's what disturbs Westerners so much. Most of our Christians would, in the post-9/11 world, prefer to act like Muslims and strike back against perceived aggression. They're certainly not turning the other cheek. Add to that this flip-side, that Christians are also afraid because the modern apostasy hasn't taken hold among Muslims: the corruption that took a mere blink of an eye for Christians is harder to reproduce in the Islamic tradition. This is partially because of Islam's reactionary role, and partially because the idea captivates its subjects more effectively than Christianity ever could. Western conservatives are, to a degree, envious.

And in that sense, I think it's probably more than coincidence that the Western world is moving to ditch religion as the inefficacy of Christianity is demonstrated.

I think the question to be answered is a simple look into the future: When the only headache Muslims cause me is the occasional book banning at a PTA meeting, ballot measure against the rights of my neighbors to exist and function in society, or idiotic excuse for American foreign policy ("God told me to _____"), should I be thankful for the progress, or hate them because they're Muslims?

Frankly, Vega, it's dualistic either/or propositions that need to go. Civilization will continue, and Islam will either be a part of that progress, or not. But you won't be able to rid the world of every Muslim, and those who endure will, over the long run, necessarily adapt.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No one is arguing for the removal of every muslim, Tiassa. It would intellectually dishonest to pretend that that was Vega's point. But what is needed is reformation. It won't be complete reformation, but it needs to be substantial and soon.

 

The third way

I know. Those damned figures of speech:

It's a hell of a hyperbole, ain't it, Geoff? Using it as a background for contrast, I would hope to demonstrate the ... ahem ... "third way":

Now, there's no point in pretending you're unfamiliar with history. Just think about, in the first place, totalitarian governments in general, and, secondly, the Western world's priorities and responses.

Tyrants and dictators, almost immediately after seizing power, move to eliminate their competition. This includes political rivals, civic leaders, journalists, and any academics and intellectuals (teachers, clerics, &c) who might cause them trouble.

Without the teachers and clerics, the people start to suffer. Without the tempering effect of teachers and clerics, a suffering people radicalizes.

Now, as this is happening in the Islamic world, what are the Western world's priorities? And how does it react? Well, our priorities were the defeat of Communism and the Soviet Union, and our reaction to unstable tyrannies in the Islamic world was to shore them up, to work against the people.

Part of what the West did was to fuel the radicalization of the people. Pakistan's madrassas were set up by the Saudis and Americans. The U.S. moved against the people in Iran, supported a tyrant, and then isolated the people further when they overthrew the tyrant, leaving them to a man that we all can agree was pretty much stark bonkers. Iraq? The Palestine? What moderating influence is left in the middle of Palestine? What about Iraq, where the moderating voices we look to are radicalized clerics?

The reform can take place: there are plenty of Muslims living peacefully in the United States, and their daughters are making some progress as employees, managers, teachers, doctors, lawyers, and other capable members of society.

What I ask you to consider vis a vis the historical context is that the process is continually interrupted and exploited by others who seek different ends. Why should we blame the people exploited instead of the exploiters?

 

"Islam" doesn't correspond to "every Muslim", Tiassa. He was referring to the "complete system" of politics, life and afterlife that islam explicitly claims to have. The West has long abandoned this nonsense; it would be absurd to say that islam cannot also manage it.

Ah, that Western interference. Why, American oil consumption appears to explain every sin of politicized islam - which is to say, frankly, islam as it has always been - for the last 1400 years. How prescient of them. Still, it's best to start early.

Congratulations. This is political islam. This is the problem.

Or, more usually these days, with the tempering of teachers and clerics.

 

And this will, in some way, affect every Muslim.

See, that's what gets me. We're on basically the same point. Our primary difference seems to be whether we want this to be an issue about human beings or about blaming Islam.

I choose the human aspect.

Frankly, Geoff, I would think you're smarter than that. Of course, maybe I should know better. After all, I didn't recognize that the Western world begins and ends with the United States of America. Thanks for clearing that up.

It's also human politics.

Um ... okay. If you insist.

 

For the better. It will give them choice. But that's what the zealots are afraid of.

I partially identify that as the problem. On the other hand, I recognize that islam is not, at the core and perhaps as Mohammed intended, a peaceful religion. A mere reading of Sura 9 will identify that. I think that this can be overcome but that it should also be recognized.

Read your history, Tiassa. George Bush did not write Sura 9, nor collect the hadiths of al Buhkari.

I do; ayatollahs and all.

 

And? I'm sorry, I missed the point of that apparent non sequitur.

When does any story begin? When does it end?

Those are serious questions, Geoff. They'll help me understand your perspective.

 

You don't choose that aspect when you talk about cops, Tiassa. Don't you find that somewhat hypocritical of you.

And with that in mind, why should anyone bother reading what you write here about Muslims?

Baron Max

 

Mod Hat - Let it go

Mod Hat - Let it go ....

Let it go. If Max intends to attempt to distract another discussion, we ought to let him make that decision himself, without anyone else encouraging him either way.

Two off-topic posts are deleted. No points issued. Let's carry on, then.

 

Allow me to be plain: do you really seek to blame Western interference for the entire span of 1400 years in which non-muslims - and women, and homosexuals - have been treated as just slightly less than human by islamic law? Really? And how about in those places unoppressed by the hand of the evil Bush, where non-muslims are second-class citizens just for the heck of it? You're really going to pin the entire history of religious intolerance on the West? Be serious, man.

 

Nope. Not at all.

But I'm not going to let a Eurocentric, Christocentric, or Amerocentric telling of history cloud the question, either. In focusing strictly on the facts of Islam and Muslims, all we're doing is blaming Islam and Muslims. In considering the broader context of history, we get a chance to see how various events set back cultural development, and how as the West leapt into modernity, few places in the world had the footing to follow. In the modern era, of course, we exploit this separation, and that is its own argument. However, there's no reason to make this strictly about Islam. The phrase and tone of the questions aren't going to change much during my lifetime. I'm as comfortable with that reality as reality allows. I will not, however, escalate the tone, sharpen the phrase, and hurl even more tiny daggers across the void when the only effect of doing so will be to slow the transition, destabilize the footing, and broaden the gap to be crossed.

 

I think you'll find the same kind of oppression in countries and periods the West has not seen fit to exploit; North Africa at the turn of the Barbary period strikes me as a good one, among others. I'm not one to ignore Western influences; however, I will not permit the absolution of internal oppression on the presumption of external meddling, nor allow the generalized (and mostly inaccurate) impression of reaction to Western influence to colour the debate. I think the history of islamic law will provide a useful reminder of the slow elimination of native populations and cultures by religious outsiders, much as Western culture impressed itself on still other peoples. To ignore such would be to discuss the plight of Native Americans without reference to the entire post-Columbus period.

 

Everywhere you see muslim women wrapped from head to toe in cloth which hides their beautiful human shape. I mean come on... women were designed to look beautiful so why cover up. Men can wear whatever they like but as soon as a women is seen showing off a little skin then they want to slit her throat!!!
Yep thats equality for you. But it's okay to dress that way in your free will but never by force unless of course you are as fat and ugly like "siddiqi"

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I fail to understand any aspect of why a woman would choose the male dominance of Islam. From what I understand Muslim women are supposed to wear the veil and conver themselves according to the Koran.
They can't be "tempting" to men away from home and are also not allowed to travel by themselves, or be alone with a man who is not a relative.

They are also is supposed to avoid making eye-contact with men. I have observed that veils and burqas are becoming more common in Muslim countries with the resurgence of Islamic fundamentalism.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

*(Sura (24:31) Sura (33:59) Sura (24:31)

I also find their views on a woman's worth, beatings, rape, prostitution, divorce, adultry, polygamy, and homosexuality very interesting...

 

if islam is all the women know then they wont want anything else, if they're fathers, and brothers are stong islam followers then the women will be aswell. islam in itself is ok, but i hate when we read over there that women are getting thrown into acid baths, or they they are getting burned alive,

 

hello guys


yeah women are so oppresed under islam

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

just like my wife...............who prays 5 times a day (or there or ther abouts) and has never drank alcohol or done anything remotely dodgey

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

No honestly.....................oh i cant be bothered................

Same old same old............

thats Zak by the way

~~~~~~~~~~~~

cheers
zak

 

hot wife there zakirya

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

yeah just like this Oppressed muslim girl

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!