Mostly I'm just inviting NomadicCircle or anybody else to put forward a substantive argument in favor of mandatory hijab or niqab.
I'm not for the hijab/niqab at all. I'm just stating the fact that I see more Hijabs around. I am against Iran's hijab rule full force. They are an Arab thing, they aren't Turkoman nor Iranian nor Kurdish and there is no where in the Quran is the hijab is mentioned. The only restriction present is that women have to just "dress modestly" not turn yourself into an Arab. I hate it with a passion especially since the government forces our women to wear one if they go to the city. Luckly none of them want to since they face harassment from the locals since they consider us "Barbarians".
And Allah said: "ye prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the woman of the faithful to lower their vile, least they are known and harmed, god is forgiving and merciful"
Al-ahzab - 59
Yeah its in the quran alright.
The key here is least they are known, as it indicate a face cover of some kind. See, I really think Hijab was a good thing back in the day, but in down town Toronto? Who would know you, least of all harm you?
If you are as you say, not for Hijab, dosen't it follow that woman are treated worse here? Because regardless of what a "True Islamic State" would do, in most of the islamic world today, Hijab is mandatory, either by a state mandate or a Patriarchal mandate. (God I always wanted to use Patriarchal in a sentence, hope its the right context though)
As a Saudi I can tell you that this story is bullshit of the highest degree, its a story that propegated through chain emails. Now don't get me wrong, I hate these guys with a fiery passion, but I'd rather win my fights fairly.
So the BBC was given false information through emails?
Void Slayer on
He's a shy overambitious dog-catcher on the wrong side of the law. She's an orphaned psychic mercenary with the power to bend men's minds. They fight crime!
No, the Saudi Gazzet gave the BBC false information, which it in turns got from local media, local here dosen't mean offical.
Why is it hard to imagin though? I hold the BBC to a higher standard then other news agencies, so this might not be fair, but isn't there news stories that are based entierly on tweets? I can't remember which network, but that lesbain syrain activiest that turned middle aged american was taken very seriously by news before he was discovered.
News agencies are getting lazy. And people who hate the "muttaween" out number thous that like them, so its easy to propegate news that diminish them.
And OMG I hate "muttaween", I'm not defending them blindly here, but I hate unsourced news even worse.
Thats easy to solve, it is an islamic tridition that when scholars differ in opinion, the choice lies with the individual (which is why Hijab laws are wrong even islamicly).
But in this entire list of names, they all seem to cover the head (while only some cover the face), I can go over it one by one, but please, let us no resort to these kinds of arguments as they are tiring for me and will still not convince you.
Unless you have a source on that, I high doubt that. Considering most Islamic women here have gone back to their traditional way (on their own I might add, not with parental/husband/friend pressure) here in Canada and you see more Hijabs than non-Hijab muslim women and girls I doubt they want to live in the "western" way.
And you can tell who the non hijab wearing Muslim women are because...
Statistics of the mosque. You see more Hijab ones going in and coming out than the non-hijab ones. Not that one is a better Muslim than the other, my sisters and mother don't wear one and neither does my wife, but when you go, you can clearly see who's "winning" in your community.
You can see it in weddings as well, the one where I went to yesterday had more hijab wearing women than non hijab ones as well. Sure, its mostly ancedotial evidence, but since many of you don't go to the mosque or to muslim community events, its harder for you guys to see it.
Do you understand what a self-selecting group is? Muslim women who routinely go to a mosque are more likely to wear a hijab because that is a sign of piety in that setting. Not least due to the fact that there is social pressure in that environment for women to wear head-coverings.
I can do anecdotes just as easily- I know several muslim women, and none of them wear head-coverings of any kid.
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
0
Options
Apothe0sisHave you ever questioned the nature of your reality?Registered Userregular
Thats easy to solve, it is an islamic tridition that when scholars differ in opinion, the choice lies with the individual (which is why Hijab laws are wrong even islamicly).
But in this entire list of names, they all seem to cover the head (while only some cover the face), I can go over it one by one, but please, let us no resort to these kinds of arguments as they are tiring for me and will still not convince you.
Glad to know that. Thats my opinion too. The choice should always lie on the individual. Forced religion is not religion.
Didn't you say you'd punish your children for not believing Islam?
Walking around Toronto, I see plenty of women wearing full coverings, and they're often walking with friends who are wearing similar attire but without a veil, and some who just have a headscarf, and others who might as well be walking out of Forever 21.
And while I don't believe a full cover is required in all Islamic countries, we've certainly discussed a number of places where the penalties for non-compliance are vastly more severe than a simple disapproving glare from a few elders.
I don't mean this as a "hooray choice, the West is awesome, in your face!", simply that my experience in a heavily multicultural city is that shades of grey exist that might not be present in other nations. It's not just a binary "wear very modest garb or dress like a prostitute", there are a wide variety of options present, and I see countless variations just walking around the mall for lunch.
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
An inquiry into a fire at a girls' school in the Saudi Arabian city of Mecca has concluded that the education authority neglected safety measures that could have prevented the deaths of 15 girls.
The official in charge of Saudi girls' schools, Muslim cleric Ali bin Murshid el-Murshid, was dismissed on Sunday and his department merged with the Education Ministry.
Saudi hospital staff carry a victim of the girl school fire to an ambulance in Mecca
15 girls died in the blaze and more than 50 were injured
But the report - carried by most newspapers in the kingdom - absolved Saudi Arabia's powerful religious police of blame for making the death toll worse.
The report into the fire two weeks ago said that the girls' education authority had ignored warnings from the headmistress of the school that overcrowding there could cause a fatal stampede.
It also found that there were not enough fire alarms and extinguishers.
...
Many newspapers approved Mr el-Murshid's dismissal, seeing the decision as a step towards reform of the country's conservative education system.
But accusations that the religious police had prevented girls fleeing the school because they were not wearing head scarves were dismissed as "untrue".
Yesterday's edition of Arab News (Jeddah) cited a report prepared by Mecca's Civil Defense Department about the rescue effort at the school. The report noted that mutawwa'in were at the school's main gate and, "intentionally obstructed the efforts to evacuate the girls. This resulted in the increased number of casualties." The religious police reportedly tried to block the entry of Civil Defense officers into the building. "We told them that the situation was dangerous and it was not the time to discuss religious issues, but they refused and started shouting at us," Arab News quoted Civil Defense officers as saying.
On one hand we have eyewitnesses claiming that girls were blocked from fleeing, versus the official story of the Saudi government.
I doubt we'll get proof positive one way or the other, but I'm leaning very strongly on the side of Human Rights Watch here.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Well, TheNomadicOne, the literacy rate for Iran is 70%, and you're trying to tell me in your tribe everyone's educated. A pretty dubious claim.
Be careful of ecological fallacies here - some ethnic groups in Iran are going to have different cultures & heritage than others and the Turkmeni in particular seem to put notably high emphasis on literacy, based on what I've been seeing online the last couple of days. Turkmenistan itself has a literacy rate of 99/98% (male/female respectively) according to the CIA world fact book.
BTW, when looking at literacy in Islamic populations, it's useful to note that Islam in general puts a high emphasis on literacy - it's encouraged to learn Arabic so you can read the Quran yourself - but depending on the ethnic group, country, & tradition, they may emphasize that less for women. Looking at the gap between male and female literacy is a pretty good quick-and-dirty test for the status of women in any given country, and especially for Islamic countries.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Well, TheNomadicOne, the literacy rate for Iran is 70%, and you're trying to tell me in your tribe everyone's educated. A pretty dubious claim.
He wasn't discussing national statistics but rather familial/tribal ones. Of course, that makes his claims more or less meaningless since we are talking about populations as a whole, not your random neighbor down the street who happens to be Muslim and a doctor. (A doctor! And I hear he's single...)
I dont see an issue with this video. Yes maybe their data is wrong on somepoints but from my own experencies coming to Canada for university I find rights for women better in my own Turkoman tribe and others than what I see here.
Intriguing!
Can you elaborate? Canada seemed for the most part a nice place to be a lady. Lots of ladies seemed to be having a nice time there while I was at University.
My native Rhode Island had few restrictions on women beyond 'everyone needs to maintain annoying at pretty high levels, you too ladies'.
For one equal education does not exist. I have the same rights to education as women in Islam (at least the version we follow) while here some women do not further their own education. They are deprived due to monetary funds while we pool of resources to send everyone to further their minds.
...umm, universal education has existed in Canada since the 19th century. In fact, it's compulsory.
In what way is Canadian education/education policies discriminatory on the basis of sex or gender?
Well, TheNomadicOne, the literacy rate for Iran is 70%, and you're trying to tell me in your tribe everyone's educated. A pretty dubious claim.
He wasn't discussing national statistics but rather familial/tribal ones. Of course, that makes his claims more or less meaningless since we are talking about populations as a whole
We might be overvaluing national boundaries and undervaluing ethnic heritage in comparison to other regions. We might want to compare, say, Iran to Turkmenistan; where it might make more sense to compare Persians to Turkmeni.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Well, TheNomadicOne, the literacy rate for Iran is 70%, and you're trying to tell me in your tribe everyone's educated. A pretty dubious claim.
He wasn't discussing national statistics but rather familial/tribal ones. Of course, that makes his claims more or less meaningless since we are talking about populations as a whole
We might be overvaluing national boundaries and undervaluing ethnic heritage in comparison to other regions. We might want to compare, say, Iran to Turkmenistan; where it might make more sense to compare Persians to Turkmeni.
Very true. As I said in my first post there's a massive amount of variety in the 'Muslim World' since we're talking about ~23% of humanity. However, the same can be said of 'the West' as well. Old Yankee stock may put a higher value on this, that, or some other thing which is less stressed in the Plains or South, let alone an ocean away. At some point you gotta dance with the girl that brung ya and accept that statistics and data will be inherently limited and biased in some way. "All language is but a poor translation." -Kafka We can still debate and/or discourse things, though, regardless.
Walking around Toronto, I see plenty of women wearing full coverings, and they're often walking with friends who are wearing similar attire but without a veil, and some who just have a headscarf, and others who might as well be walking out of Forever 21.
And while I don't believe a full cover is required in all Islamic countries, we've certainly discussed a number of places where the penalties for non-compliance are vastly more severe than a simple disapproving glare from a few elders.
I don't mean this as a "hooray choice, the West is awesome, in your face!", simply that my experience in a heavily multicultural city is that shades of grey exist that might not be present in other nations. It's not just a binary "wear very modest garb or dress like a prostitute", there are a wide variety of options present, and I see countless variations just walking around the mall for lunch.
Of course, you also have places in the west that take away choice, such as France, Turkey, and that cold place with all the white people. I actually remember a quote from The Places In Between, where the rural Afghan said that he fought the soviets because they stopped his town's wives and daughters from wearing headscarves and took away his donkeys and he fought the Taliban because they forced his town's wives and daughters to wear the burqa and took away his donkeys.
Well, TheNomadicOne, the literacy rate for Iran is 70%, and you're trying to tell me in your tribe everyone's educated. A pretty dubious claim.
He wasn't discussing national statistics but rather familial/tribal ones. Of course, that makes his claims more or less meaningless since we are talking about populations as a whole
We might be overvaluing national boundaries and undervaluing ethnic heritage in comparison to other regions. We might want to compare, say, Iran to Turkmenistan; where it might make more sense to compare Persians to Turkmeni.
Very true. As I said in my first post there's a massive amount of variety in the 'Muslim World' since we're talking about ~23% of humanity. However, the same can be said of 'the West' as well. Old Yankee stock may put a higher value on this, that, or some other thing which is less stressed in the Plains or South, let alone an ocean away. At some point you gotta dance with the girl that brung ya and accept that statistics and data will be inherently limited and biased in some way. "All language is but a poor translation." -Kafka We can still debate and/or discourse things, though, regardless.
Totally. And either way, hard numbers are preferable to 'well, this is what I see at my mosque...'
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Well, TheNomadicOne, the literacy rate for Iran is 70%, and you're trying to tell me in your tribe everyone's educated. A pretty dubious claim.
He wasn't discussing national statistics but rather familial/tribal ones. Of course, that makes his claims more or less meaningless since we are talking about populations as a whole
We might be overvaluing national boundaries and undervaluing ethnic heritage in comparison to other regions. We might want to compare, say, Iran to Turkmenistan; where it might make more sense to compare Persians to Turkmeni.
Very true. As I said in my first post there's a massive amount of variety in the 'Muslim World' since we're talking about ~23% of humanity. However, the same can be said of 'the West' as well. Old Yankee stock may put a higher value on this, that, or some other thing which is less stressed in the Plains or South, let alone an ocean away. At some point you gotta dance with the girl that brung ya and accept that statistics and data will be inherently limited and biased in some way. "All language is but a poor translation." -Kafka We can still debate and/or discourse things, though, regardless.
From the perspective of a Westerner, it feels like the "Muslim World" isn't doing very much to convince us that there's not really a "Muslim World". We hear about the two major divisions in religion, Sunnis and Shiites, but all any of us know about even that is their political origins and current natures as divisive forces. Anything else (besides perhaps Osama's particular sect)? Absolutely nothing.
And I don't think it's just ignorance. When 9/11 happened, Muslims were quick to assert that "Islam is a religion of peace", essentially asserting that there is only a single Islam that the terrorists happened to get wrong, rather than a variety of Islams that vary widely across cultures. Then there's Sharia law, which is seen by us as a belief that there is a single perfect culture, and that deviating from it is inherently un-Islamic. If a Muslim refuses to outright condemn Sharia law in principle, which I assume that most Muslims would never do, that's sending a signal that they still believe in that uniform culture, merely acknowledging that it is not always viable.
We're just not getting any messages at all that there's any sort of real diversity. Islamic societies are projecting themselves as a uniform blob of culture that would really like to achieve hegemony, at the expense of any other cultures that stand in its path. If they want to stop being seen as something scary, they really need better P.R.
From the perspective of a Westerner, it feels like the "Muslim World" isn't doing very much to convince us that there's not really a "Muslim World". We hear about the two major divisions in religion, Sunnis and Shiites, but all any of us know about even that is their political origins and current natures as divisive forces. Anything else (besides perhaps Osama's particular sect)? Absolutely nothing.
And I don't think it's just ignorance. When 9/11 happened, Muslims were quick to assert that "Islam is a religion of peace", essentially asserting that there is only a single Islam that the terrorists happened to get wrong, rather than a variety of Islams that vary widely across cultures. Then there's Sharia law, which is seen by us as a belief that there is a single perfect culture, and that deviating from it is inherently un-Islamic. If a Muslim refuses to outright condemn Sharia law in principle, which I assume that most Muslims would never do, that's sending a signal that they still believe in that uniform culture, merely acknowledging that it is not always viable.
We're just not getting any messages at all that there's any sort of real diversity. Islamic societies are projecting themselves as a uniform blob of culture that would really like to achieve hegemony, at the expense of any other cultures that stand in its path. If they want to stop being seen as something scary, they really need better P.R.
It's very comparable to the militant Evangelism running through right-wing politics in the US today. "Evangelical" isn't a denomination, it's a shorthand to describe a wide swath of similar beliefs and practices. But those beliefs are generally kept by a handful of specific denominations, predominantly Baptist, Church of Christ, Pentecostal, Assemblies of God, and the A.E.M., all of whom have slightly differing stances on certain dogmatic aspects. As well, the Mormon church and Catholics overlap a great deal into that territory.
As with Islam, Christianity is a religion of tolerance and love. As with Islam, many of its most vocal proponents are thoroughly awful, evil people.
We're just not getting any messages at all that there's any sort of real diversity. Islamic societies are projecting themselves as a uniform blob of culture that would really like to achieve hegemony, at the expense of any other cultures that stand in its path.
Well, first off I don't really agree with the generalization that "Islamic societies are projecting themselves" as anything in particular.
That said, I don't think it's the responsibility of non-western cultures to break orientalist stereotypes. Our media may gloss over the differences between, say, the branches of Shia, but that's a failure of the media (or a failure of ourselves to do our own research). We shouldn't expect non-twelver Shiites to climb over obstacles to educate us.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Posts
Which you've yet to actually substantiate with anything beyond what you see at your mosque. Which isn't really an ideal sample in the slightest.
Ah, I misunderstood then. Sorry.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
قوله تعالى: {يأَيُّهَا النَّبِىُّ قُل لأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَـاتِكَ وَنِسَآءِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِن جَلَابِيبِهِنَّ ذلِكَ أَدْنَى أَن يُعْرَفْنَ فَلاَ يُؤْذَيْنَ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ غَفُوراً رَّحِيماً }. (الأحزاب: 59).
And Allah said: "ye prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the woman of the faithful to lower their vile, least they are known and harmed, god is forgiving and merciful"
Al-ahzab - 59
Yeah its in the quran alright.
The key here is least they are known, as it indicate a face cover of some kind. See, I really think Hijab was a good thing back in the day, but in down town Toronto? Who would know you, least of all harm you?
If you are as you say, not for Hijab, dosen't it follow that woman are treated worse here? Because regardless of what a "True Islamic State" would do, in most of the islamic world today, Hijab is mandatory, either by a state mandate or a Patriarchal mandate. (God I always wanted to use Patriarchal in a sentence, hope its the right context though)
Until then, no.
SteamID: devCharles
twitter: https://twitter.com/charlesewise
As a Saudi I can tell you that this story is bullshit of the highest degree, its a story that propegated through chain emails. Now don't get me wrong, I hate these guys with a fiery passion, but I'd rather win my fights fairly.
Why is it hard to imagin though? I hold the BBC to a higher standard then other news agencies, so this might not be fair, but isn't there news stories that are based entierly on tweets? I can't remember which network, but that lesbain syrain activiest that turned middle aged american was taken very seriously by news before he was discovered.
News agencies are getting lazy. And people who hate the "muttaween" out number thous that like them, so its easy to propegate news that diminish them.
And OMG I hate "muttaween", I'm not defending them blindly here, but I hate unsourced news even worse.
But in this entire list of names, they all seem to cover the head (while only some cover the face), I can go over it one by one, but please, let us no resort to these kinds of arguments as they are tiring for me and will still not convince you.
I can do anecdotes just as easily- I know several muslim women, and none of them wear head-coverings of any kid.
Rigorous Scholarship
Didn't you say you'd punish your children for not believing Islam?
And while I don't believe a full cover is required in all Islamic countries, we've certainly discussed a number of places where the penalties for non-compliance are vastly more severe than a simple disapproving glare from a few elders.
I don't mean this as a "hooray choice, the West is awesome, in your face!", simply that my experience in a heavily multicultural city is that shades of grey exist that might not be present in other nations. It's not just a binary "wear very modest garb or dress like a prostitute", there are a wide variety of options present, and I see countless variations just walking around the mall for lunch.
It's not hard to imagine but I'd want to see something more substantial before rejecting the BBC. A follow-up search found this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1893349.stm
On the other hand... http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2002/03/14/saudi-arabia-religious-police-role-school-fire-criticized
On one hand we have eyewitnesses claiming that girls were blocked from fleeing, versus the official story of the Saudi government.
I doubt we'll get proof positive one way or the other, but I'm leaning very strongly on the side of Human Rights Watch here.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Be careful of ecological fallacies here - some ethnic groups in Iran are going to have different cultures & heritage than others and the Turkmeni in particular seem to put notably high emphasis on literacy, based on what I've been seeing online the last couple of days. Turkmenistan itself has a literacy rate of 99/98% (male/female respectively) according to the CIA world fact book.
BTW, when looking at literacy in Islamic populations, it's useful to note that Islam in general puts a high emphasis on literacy - it's encouraged to learn Arabic so you can read the Quran yourself - but depending on the ethnic group, country, & tradition, they may emphasize that less for women. Looking at the gap between male and female literacy is a pretty good quick-and-dirty test for the status of women in any given country, and especially for Islamic countries.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
He wasn't discussing national statistics but rather familial/tribal ones. Of course, that makes his claims more or less meaningless since we are talking about populations as a whole, not your random neighbor down the street who happens to be Muslim and a doctor. (A doctor! And I hear he's single...)
Also, Nomadic, you have still not addressed this:
In what way is Canadian education/education policies discriminatory on the basis of sex or gender?
We might be overvaluing national boundaries and undervaluing ethnic heritage in comparison to other regions. We might want to compare, say, Iran to Turkmenistan; where it might make more sense to compare Persians to Turkmeni.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Very true. As I said in my first post there's a massive amount of variety in the 'Muslim World' since we're talking about ~23% of humanity. However, the same can be said of 'the West' as well. Old Yankee stock may put a higher value on this, that, or some other thing which is less stressed in the Plains or South, let alone an ocean away. At some point you gotta dance with the girl that brung ya and accept that statistics and data will be inherently limited and biased in some way. "All language is but a poor translation." -Kafka We can still debate and/or discourse things, though, regardless.
Of course, you also have places in the west that take away choice, such as France, Turkey, and that cold place with all the white people. I actually remember a quote from The Places In Between, where the rural Afghan said that he fought the soviets because they stopped his town's wives and daughters from wearing headscarves and took away his donkeys and he fought the Taliban because they forced his town's wives and daughters to wear the burqa and took away his donkeys.
Totally. And either way, hard numbers are preferable to 'well, this is what I see at my mosque...'
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
From the perspective of a Westerner, it feels like the "Muslim World" isn't doing very much to convince us that there's not really a "Muslim World". We hear about the two major divisions in religion, Sunnis and Shiites, but all any of us know about even that is their political origins and current natures as divisive forces. Anything else (besides perhaps Osama's particular sect)? Absolutely nothing.
And I don't think it's just ignorance. When 9/11 happened, Muslims were quick to assert that "Islam is a religion of peace", essentially asserting that there is only a single Islam that the terrorists happened to get wrong, rather than a variety of Islams that vary widely across cultures. Then there's Sharia law, which is seen by us as a belief that there is a single perfect culture, and that deviating from it is inherently un-Islamic. If a Muslim refuses to outright condemn Sharia law in principle, which I assume that most Muslims would never do, that's sending a signal that they still believe in that uniform culture, merely acknowledging that it is not always viable.
We're just not getting any messages at all that there's any sort of real diversity. Islamic societies are projecting themselves as a uniform blob of culture that would really like to achieve hegemony, at the expense of any other cultures that stand in its path. If they want to stop being seen as something scary, they really need better P.R.
...it's not their job to?
It's very comparable to the militant Evangelism running through right-wing politics in the US today. "Evangelical" isn't a denomination, it's a shorthand to describe a wide swath of similar beliefs and practices. But those beliefs are generally kept by a handful of specific denominations, predominantly Baptist, Church of Christ, Pentecostal, Assemblies of God, and the A.E.M., all of whom have slightly differing stances on certain dogmatic aspects. As well, the Mormon church and Catholics overlap a great deal into that territory.
As with Islam, Christianity is a religion of tolerance and love. As with Islam, many of its most vocal proponents are thoroughly awful, evil people.
Well, first off I don't really agree with the generalization that "Islamic societies are projecting themselves" as anything in particular.
That said, I don't think it's the responsibility of non-western cultures to break orientalist stereotypes. Our media may gloss over the differences between, say, the branches of Shia, but that's a failure of the media (or a failure of ourselves to do our own research). We shouldn't expect non-twelver Shiites to climb over obstacles to educate us.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.