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...
It's also important to recognize that as far as I know, that situation is improving. It wasn't too many years ago that the number was something closer to 50%, so if we're really down to a 15% disparity, that's significant progress. True parity would be ideal of course (people paid for the work they did regardless of their gender), but as long as that gap continues to close at a reasonable rate I don't think it's exactly a strong argument on how poorly women are treated by "the west".
There is definitely room for improvement. Tons of it. Especially while the GOP has reproductive rights (abortion) and birth control in its sights. But I imagine all things considered, I'd rather be a woman in a "Western" country than one in an "Eastern" country.
... but as a Heterosexual Caucasian Male that might just be my overwhelming levels of bias, privledge and ignorance showing. >.>
I'm pretty sure that a smaller percentage of "western" women would want to live in an "eastern" one while a larger percentage of "eastern" women would want to live in a "western" one.
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.
You've talked to the fathers, brothers, husbands? You've heard what the imams are saying to them in their segregated Friday prayer services? All on their own, you say?
I say you can't ask a battered wife if her husband is beating her, while he's standing right there.
tl;dr: [citation needed, a really good one]
spool32 on
0
Options
Apothe0sisHave you ever questioned the nature of your reality?Registered Userregular
It's also important to recognize that as far as I know, that situation is improving. It wasn't too many years ago that the number was something closer to 50%, so if we're really down to a 15% disparity, that's significant progress. True parity would be ideal of course (people paid for the work they did regardless of their gender), but as long as that gap continues to close at a reasonable rate I don't think it's exactly a strong argument on how poorly women are treated by "the west".
There is definitely room for improvement. Tons of it. Especially while the GOP has reproductive rights (abortion) and birth control in its sights. But I imagine all things considered, I'd rather be a woman in a "Western" country than one in an "Eastern" country.
... but as a Heterosexual Caucasian Male that might just be my overwhelming levels of bias, privledge and ignorance showing. >.>
I'm pretty sure that a smaller percentage of "western" women would want to live in an "eastern" one while a larger percentage of "eastern" women would want to live in a "western" one.
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.
Yet somehow the Hijab is not taking Canada by storm, where women are free to wear it (or not) regardless of how they were raised...
Apothe0sis on
0
Options
acidlacedpenguinInstitutionalizedSafe in jail.Registered Userregular
edited July 2011
I once heard a parable; I think it was in a movie so credibility might be a little questionable, but anyway it told the story of how elephants are trained while they're young by tying them to a stake that is impossible for the small elephant to move. By the time they're large enough that moving the stake would be incredibly easy, the elephant has learned that moving the stake is impossible so they don't even bother trying.
my question for this thread is: how can we even make qualitative evaluations over what people want for women's rights.
What's really mind-blowing here is that Islamic women live in conditions that western women would find appalling, and I can imagine the reverse might be true as well. I mentioned the parable because I'd like to know how we can tell whether Islamic women actually want the lifestyle they have or it is simply learned behavior?
Just for clarification we've established and can generally agree on the fact that women in the Islamic world have less rights than western women, the current argument is whether that matters to Islamic women?
I once heard a parable; I think it was in a movie so credibility might be a little questionable, but anyway it told the story of how elephants are trained while they're young by tying them to a stake that is impossible for the small elephant to move. By the time they're large enough that moving the stake would be incredibly easy, the elephant has learned that moving the stake is impossible so they don't even bother trying.
my question for this thread is: how can we even make qualitative evaluations over what people want for women's rights.
What's really mind-blowing here is that Islamic women live in conditions that western women would find appalling, and I can imagine the reverse might be true as well. I mentioned the parable because I'd like to know how we can tell whether Islamic women actually want the lifestyle they have or it is simply learned behavior?
Just for clarification we've established and can generally agree on the fact that women in the Islamic world have less rights than western women, the current argument is whether that matters to Islamic women?
If the argument is over whether it matters to Islamic women, it shouldn't be... because the real discussion should be over the fact that it doesn't matter what women in repressive Islamic societies want!
To choose a secondary societal role with limitations on movement, dress, property ownership, voting rights, education, and so forth, one must first have the ability to freely choose.
Do the veils cut down on the number of sexual assaults against women? Are they serving their intended purpose?
Is that, stated in the very general way you did, their intended purpose? Or is their purpose restricted more?
Different questions:
If all women wore the hijab, would sexual assaults decrease in general?
If muslim women wear the hijab, are they sexually assaulted less often in mixed-religion populations?
Are male muslim sexual predators less likely to sexually assault a woman if she wears the hijab?
----
Now those would be some interesting answers, and possibly revealing as to attitudes regarding what motivates sexual assault, whether the hijab is about control rather than tradition or propriety, and whether supporters of mandatory hijab-wearing believe sexual assault on non-muslim women is less heinous than on fellow members of the umma.
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.
Anecdotal evidence, let me show you mien
By the way, TheOrange, "caste system" in the Roman Empire? WTF?
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.
And your mosque is a statistical representation of the female Muslim population in Canada?
It's also important to recognize that as far as I know, that situation is improving. It wasn't too many years ago that the number was something closer to 50%, so if we're really down to a 15% disparity, that's significant progress. True parity would be ideal of course (people paid for the work they did regardless of their gender), but as long as that gap continues to close at a reasonable rate I don't think it's exactly a strong argument on how poorly women are treated by "the west".
There is definitely room for improvement. Tons of it. Especially while the GOP has reproductive rights (abortion) and birth control in its sights. But I imagine all things considered, I'd rather be a woman in a "Western" country than one in an "Eastern" country.
... but as a Heterosexual Caucasian Male that might just be my overwhelming levels of bias, privledge and ignorance showing. >.>
I'm pretty sure that a smaller percentage of "western" women would want to live in an "eastern" one while a larger percentage of "eastern" women would want to live in a "western" one.
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.
Yet somehow the Hijab is not taking Canada by storm, where women are free to wear it (or not) regardless of how they were raised...
I think you're more wrong than you realize. Source spoilered.
Because Canada is cold!
Skoal Cat on
0
Options
acidlacedpenguinInstitutionalizedSafe in jail.Registered Userregular
I once heard a parable; I think it was in a movie so credibility might be a little questionable, but anyway it told the story of how elephants are trained while they're young by tying them to a stake that is impossible for the small elephant to move. By the time they're large enough that moving the stake would be incredibly easy, the elephant has learned that moving the stake is impossible so they don't even bother trying.
my question for this thread is: how can we even make qualitative evaluations over what people want for women's rights.
What's really mind-blowing here is that Islamic women live in conditions that western women would find appalling, and I can imagine the reverse might be true as well. I mentioned the parable because I'd like to know how we can tell whether Islamic women actually want the lifestyle they have or it is simply learned behavior?
Just for clarification we've established and can generally agree on the fact that women in the Islamic world have less rights than western women, the current argument is whether that matters to Islamic women?
If the argument is over whether it matters to Islamic women, it shouldn't be... because the real discussion should be over the fact that it doesn't matter what women in repressive Islamic societies want!
To choose a secondary societal role with limitations on movement, dress, property ownership, voting rights, education, and so forth, one must first have the ability to freely choose.
well I can certainly appreciate that some women might be perfectly happy without having the choice. Similarly I bet if you gave every person in America a million dollars (and we intentionally ignored the negative effects to the economy that would entail) there would be people who not enjoy it.
The thing that seems obvious to me from my cozy Western male privileged vantage point would be to grant all women equal rights which would allow them the freedom to choose that lifestyle if they so desired, but that elephant stake parable can swing my direction too. Is it obvious to me because it's obvious or is learned behavior making it seem obvious?
either way I'd love to hear the Islamic perspective on this discussion point. Bonus points if I get the male and female perspectives.
Your source doesn't demonstrate in any way that most Muslim women in Canada wear a hijab.
Your claim is still baseless.
If you have a source stating otherwise then please do so. I'm living with the Muslim community here in Mississauga which is quite large and from my observations of Muslim events (like the past Muslimfest of yesteryear) I can with some accuracy talk about what I'm seeing.
Of course if you have inside knowledge that I as a Muslim do not have, then please share with us.
You don't understand how burden of proof or evidence work.
Your source doesn't demonstrate in any way that most Muslim women in Canada wear a hijab.
Your claim is still baseless.
If you have a source stating otherwise then please do so. I'm living with the Muslim community here in Mississauga which is quite large and from my observations of Muslim events (like the past Muslimfest of yesteryear) I can with some accuracy talk about what I'm seeing.
Of course if you have inside knowledge that I as a Muslim do not have, then please share with us.
You belonging to a Muslim community in your city does not give you insight to national statistics.
If you want to make the claim, prove that claim. Being Muslim doesn't make your claim automatically correct.
Your source doesn't demonstrate in any way that most Muslim women in Canada wear a hijab.
Your claim is still baseless.
If you have a source stating otherwise then please do so. I'm living with the Muslim community here in Mississauga which is quite large and from my observations of Muslim events (like the past Muslimfest of yesteryear) I can with some accuracy talk about what I'm seeing.
Of course if you have inside knowledge that I as a Muslim do not have, then please share with us.
A Muslim community is more likely to subscribe to stricter Muslim beliefs.
They totally have a mind-link with every other muslim within a 50mile radius.
Don't you know anything?
As a part muslim I can tell you this is true.
Can't walk into the hummus section of my grocery store.
Also I should note my Aunt who is devout as I think is humanly possible without threat of stoning doesn't wear any tradtional garments. She's not canadian though.
King Riptor on
I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
But even if Islam is growing in the Western world that proves jack shit about the status of women here versus the "Islamic World".
The argument with that is, that MUSLIM women here in the western world, are going back to what they were in their own countries and rejecting "western" values that women have here or adapting them to their own needs while rejecting some and taking in others.
Thus even here, where many Muslims come for the status of making Money and education, the status is the same as in the Islamic world. Many out right reject the western model for women BY THEIR OWN. While there are a few cases of forced into this case, the majority of the women choose on their own to do so.
First: monitoring at a mosque is a completely biased sample, unless you disagree with: "women who don't attend regularly are less likely to wear the hijab".
Second even if you are right, that doesn't show a trend like you are saying. Unless there was a time in Canada where most muslim women freely chose not to wear the hijab and now a higher % than then are, even then it would be a fairly weak trend as far as any larger significance. Unless you are luring a non-trivial number of western women into wearing one(specifically a great % than muslim women are choosing not to), you aren't showing a preference for hijabing(TM). And once again, wearing or not wearing a hijab in Canada is of no real importance to the comparison of women's status in the western vs muslim world.
Beyond that, the bolded is really the point you seem to be missing. The fact that they are choosing one way or the other is indicative of the superiority of the western situation, because its the choice that's important. In a country where wearing is required by law, there is no choice. So if you are part of the percentage that would rather not wear them, you are worse off being in Iran vs Canada. Where as if you are someone who would prefer to wear one, you are no worse off in Canada vs Iran.
tinwhiskers on
0
Options
acidlacedpenguinInstitutionalizedSafe in jail.Registered Userregular
I see that I'm debating with Non-Muslims about Muslim trends which makes it hard to discuss properly the insights into Islam and its workings.
You belonging to a Muslim community in your city does not give you insight to national trends.
Yes it does. The failure to see otherwise is a sorrowful effect of not having a larger Muslim community on this board.
the difference is these non-muslims don't make claims that they can accurately speak for the majority of all non-muslims with greater scale than simply the non-muslims they see at social events without providing some sort of statistics to back up said claims.
There's like 200 people who go to my church, the vast majority of those people are old or recent immigrants therefore all Catholics are old people and foreigners. Do you see the fallacy I just committed?
They totally have a mind-link with every other muslim within a 50mile radius.
Don't you know anything?
As a part muslim I can tell you this is true.
How can you be part-Muslim? Muslim isn't a thing, its a religion. Either you are or are not. Practicing or not it still is narrowed down to this. I'm not practicing in the least, but I still call myself Muslim.
You can be a "cultural" muslim, that is that you are part of muslim community to some degree without actually believing in the fundamentals of the Islamic religion (including being an atheist).
A part muslim would then probably just be a cross-culture child, maybe someone who has grown up in a western country&culture but with parents that are muslims or someone that live in a very religious muslim environment but is slowly working their way out of the religion subtly without upsetting friends&family.
By the way, TheNomadicCircle, what's your Turkoman tribe? I mean, from what I've gathered, 100% of people there get college degrees. I've never heard of any social group whatsoever with such a high college turnout. Care to educate me?
They totally have a mind-link with every other muslim within a 50mile radius.
Don't you know anything?
As a part muslim I can tell you this is true.
How can you be part-Muslim? Muslim isn't a thing, its a religion. Either you are or are not. Practicing or not it still is narrowed down to this. I'm not practicing in the least, but I still call myself Muslim.
You can be a "cultural" muslim, that is that you are part of muslim community to some degree without actually believing in the fundamentals of the Islamic religion (including being an atheist).
A part muslim would then probably just be a cross-culture child, maybe someone who has grown up in a western country&culture but with parents that are muslims or someone that live in a very religious muslim environment but is slowly working their way out of the religion subtly without upsetting friends&family.
This basically. My father is muslim I've been raised with aspects of the religion and culture my entire life. I guess technically I'm part Arab but really that covers what? 90% of the muslim world so I'm pretty sure I'm right anyway.
I'm catholic for the record. Its always funny meeting a friend of my grandfather's or something and seeing their face when I say that. Like I shot their dog .
King Riptor on
I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
The fact that they are choosing one way or the other is indicative of the superiority of the western situation, because its the choice that's important. In a country where wearing is required by law, there is no choice. So if you are part of the percentage that would rather not wear them, you are worse off being in Iran vs Canada. Where as if you are someone who would prefer to wear one, you are no worse off in Canada vs Iran.
This is what I was going to post while reading the previous page. I think it settles this side debate rather nicely.
The fact that they are choosing one way or the other is indicative of the superiority of the western situation, because its the choice that's important.
I think the point under contention is that having a choice isn't necessarily superior.
There's a nugget of truth to that: there's a whole lot of unintuitive and contradictory-appearing research on the psychology of choice; notably that in some situations having a choice made for you can actually make you happier than making the choice yourself.
And of course there are plenty of situations where everybody making the best individual choice results in an overall worse outcome for the population at large: community action problems, prisoner's dilemmas, and so forth.
But all that means is that it is possible that curtailing some individual choice in some situations results in more well-being. That does not intrinsically justify all curtailing of individual choice. Nobody's given a substantive argument why curtailing a given choice - say, the choice not to wear a hijab outside - is better than allowing that choice. I'd be happy to hear such an argument, if it were presented.
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.
The fact that they are choosing one way or the other is indicative of the superiority of the western situation, because its the choice that's important.
I think the point under contention is that having a choice isn't necessarily superior.
There's a nugget of truth to that: there's a whole lot of unintuitive and contradictory-appearing research on the psychology of choice; notably that in some situations having a choice made for you can actually make you happier than making the choice yourself.
And of course there are plenty of situations where everybody making the best individual choice results in an overall worse outcome for the population at large: community action problems, prisoner's dilemmas, and so forth.
But all that means is that it is possible that curtailing some individual choice in some situations results in more well-being. That does not intrinsically justify all curtailing of individual choice. Nobody's given a substantive argument why curtailing a given choice - say, the choice not to wear a hijab outside - is better than allowing that choice. I'd be happy to hear such an argument, if it were presented.
1) A women may derive some amount of pleasure from not wearing one, since there is no societal cost to her not wearing one, pure utilitarianism says let her not wear one.
2)With that as an acceptable position(show me why not to curtail the choice), there are far more intrusive positions that could be rationally argued for. ie: All teenage girls should have IUDs implanted at age 14. The risks are relatively minor, and the consequence both individually and socially of teenage pregnancy are enormous.
The starting point of being free from interference is necessary to mount a challenge against any number of intrusions(Roe v Wade was settle on privacy grounds remember, I'm sure there's a number of useful things the government could do with unlimited access to everyone's medical records...).
If "to free you from the burden of choice" is a sufficient reason to ban/require something, all choices may be banned/required. One must then go around justifying every freedom(of which there are a nearly infinite number), and there are many that have substantially stronger arguments against them than just "no burden to choose".
We should ban all drinks that aren't: milk, water, or natural fruit juice. Many of the other options carry health risks, and more choices are confusing.
or how about "Milk should only come in 2%, excepting whole milk for babies only", it saves you from having to choose doesn't it?
3) Mills, John Stuart, really I think the whole liberty vs authority thing is pretty well hashed over by now.
Yep, I'm a classic libertarian, too. ('Libertarian' in the sense of valuing liberty like Locke and Mills and Rawls... not in the minarchist sense of Novick, Ayn Rand, Chicago School of Economics, etc.)
Ultimately we agree that "to free you from the burden of choice" is not sufficient reason to ban or require something.
Mostly I'm just inviting NomadicCircle or anybody else to put forward a substantive argument in favor of mandatory hijab or niqab.
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.
I'm also offering a suggestion that the value we place on liberty for its own sake should not be held as an axiom when discussing the differences between Islamic and non-Islamic culture.
The idea that 'as ye harm none, do what ye will*' (* - with necessarily minimal restrictions) is a safe assumption among Americans and Western Europeans, not necessarily so for other cultures.
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
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
And you can tell who the non hijab wearing Muslim women are because...
You've talked to the fathers, brothers, husbands? You've heard what the imams are saying to them in their segregated Friday prayer services? All on their own, you say?
I say you can't ask a battered wife if her husband is beating her, while he's standing right there.
tl;dr: [citation needed, a really good one]
my question for this thread is: how can we even make qualitative evaluations over what people want for women's rights.
What's really mind-blowing here is that Islamic women live in conditions that western women would find appalling, and I can imagine the reverse might be true as well. I mentioned the parable because I'd like to know how we can tell whether Islamic women actually want the lifestyle they have or it is simply learned behavior?
Just for clarification we've established and can generally agree on the fact that women in the Islamic world have less rights than western women, the current argument is whether that matters to Islamic women?
If the argument is over whether it matters to Islamic women, it shouldn't be... because the real discussion should be over the fact that it doesn't matter what women in repressive Islamic societies want!
To choose a secondary societal role with limitations on movement, dress, property ownership, voting rights, education, and so forth, one must first have the ability to freely choose.
Is that, stated in the very general way you did, their intended purpose? Or is their purpose restricted more?
Different questions:
If all women wore the hijab, would sexual assaults decrease in general?
If muslim women wear the hijab, are they sexually assaulted less often in mixed-religion populations?
Are male muslim sexual predators less likely to sexually assault a woman if she wears the hijab?
----
Now those would be some interesting answers, and possibly revealing as to attitudes regarding what motivates sexual assault, whether the hijab is about control rather than tradition or propriety, and whether supporters of mandatory hijab-wearing believe sexual assault on non-muslim women is less heinous than on fellow members of the umma.
Anecdotal evidence, let me show you mien
By the way, TheOrange, "caste system" in the Roman Empire? WTF?
And your mosque is a statistical representation of the female Muslim population in Canada?
I think you're more wrong than you realize. Source spoilered.
Because Canada is cold!
well I can certainly appreciate that some women might be perfectly happy without having the choice. Similarly I bet if you gave every person in America a million dollars (and we intentionally ignored the negative effects to the economy that would entail) there would be people who not enjoy it.
The thing that seems obvious to me from my cozy Western male privileged vantage point would be to grant all women equal rights which would allow them the freedom to choose that lifestyle if they so desired, but that elephant stake parable can swing my direction too. Is it obvious to me because it's obvious or is learned behavior making it seem obvious?
either way I'd love to hear the Islamic perspective on this discussion point. Bonus points if I get the male and female perspectives.
Your claim is still baseless.
Or, for that matter, the huge education divide you claimed existed.
You don't understand how burden of proof or evidence work.
They totally have a mind-link with every other muslim within a 50mile radius.
Don't you know anything?
You belonging to a Muslim community in your city does not give you insight to national statistics.
If you want to make the claim, prove that claim. Being Muslim doesn't make your claim automatically correct.
A Muslim community is more likely to subscribe to stricter Muslim beliefs.
Really?
Tell me about the Muslim community in Yellowknife. You know all about them, right?
As a part muslim I can tell you this is true.
Can't walk into the hummus section of my grocery store.
Also I should note my Aunt who is devout as I think is humanly possible without threat of stoning doesn't wear any tradtional garments. She's not canadian though.
First: monitoring at a mosque is a completely biased sample, unless you disagree with: "women who don't attend regularly are less likely to wear the hijab".
Second even if you are right, that doesn't show a trend like you are saying. Unless there was a time in Canada where most muslim women freely chose not to wear the hijab and now a higher % than then are, even then it would be a fairly weak trend as far as any larger significance. Unless you are luring a non-trivial number of western women into wearing one(specifically a great % than muslim women are choosing not to), you aren't showing a preference for hijabing(TM). And once again, wearing or not wearing a hijab in Canada is of no real importance to the comparison of women's status in the western vs muslim world.
Beyond that, the bolded is really the point you seem to be missing. The fact that they are choosing one way or the other is indicative of the superiority of the western situation, because its the choice that's important. In a country where wearing is required by law, there is no choice. So if you are part of the percentage that would rather not wear them, you are worse off being in Iran vs Canada. Where as if you are someone who would prefer to wear one, you are no worse off in Canada vs Iran.
the difference is these non-muslims don't make claims that they can accurately speak for the majority of all non-muslims with greater scale than simply the non-muslims they see at social events without providing some sort of statistics to back up said claims.
There's like 200 people who go to my church, the vast majority of those people are old or recent immigrants therefore all Catholics are old people and foreigners. Do you see the fallacy I just committed?
You can be a "cultural" muslim, that is that you are part of muslim community to some degree without actually believing in the fundamentals of the Islamic religion (including being an atheist).
A part muslim would then probably just be a cross-culture child, maybe someone who has grown up in a western country&culture but with parents that are muslims or someone that live in a very religious muslim environment but is slowly working their way out of the religion subtly without upsetting friends&family.
This basically. My father is muslim I've been raised with aspects of the religion and culture my entire life. I guess technically I'm part Arab but really that covers what? 90% of the muslim world so I'm pretty sure I'm right anyway.
I'm catholic for the record. Its always funny meeting a friend of my grandfather's or something and seeing their face when I say that. Like I shot their dog .
This is what I was going to post while reading the previous page. I think it settles this side debate rather nicely.
I think the point under contention is that having a choice isn't necessarily superior.
There's a nugget of truth to that: there's a whole lot of unintuitive and contradictory-appearing research on the psychology of choice; notably that in some situations having a choice made for you can actually make you happier than making the choice yourself.
And of course there are plenty of situations where everybody making the best individual choice results in an overall worse outcome for the population at large: community action problems, prisoner's dilemmas, and so forth.
But all that means is that it is possible that curtailing some individual choice in some situations results in more well-being. That does not intrinsically justify all curtailing of individual choice. Nobody's given a substantive argument why curtailing a given choice - say, the choice not to wear a hijab outside - is better than allowing that choice. I'd be happy to hear such an argument, if it were presented.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
1) A women may derive some amount of pleasure from not wearing one, since there is no societal cost to her not wearing one, pure utilitarianism says let her not wear one.
2)With that as an acceptable position(show me why not to curtail the choice), there are far more intrusive positions that could be rationally argued for. ie: All teenage girls should have IUDs implanted at age 14. The risks are relatively minor, and the consequence both individually and socially of teenage pregnancy are enormous.
The starting point of being free from interference is necessary to mount a challenge against any number of intrusions(Roe v Wade was settle on privacy grounds remember, I'm sure there's a number of useful things the government could do with unlimited access to everyone's medical records...).
If "to free you from the burden of choice" is a sufficient reason to ban/require something, all choices may be banned/required. One must then go around justifying every freedom(of which there are a nearly infinite number), and there are many that have substantially stronger arguments against them than just "no burden to choose".
We should ban all drinks that aren't: milk, water, or natural fruit juice. Many of the other options carry health risks, and more choices are confusing.
or how about "Milk should only come in 2%, excepting whole milk for babies only", it saves you from having to choose doesn't it?
3) Mills, John Stuart, really I think the whole liberty vs authority thing is pretty well hashed over by now.
Ultimately we agree that "to free you from the burden of choice" is not sufficient reason to ban or require something.
Mostly I'm just inviting NomadicCircle or anybody else to put forward a substantive argument in favor of mandatory hijab or niqab.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
The idea that 'as ye harm none, do what ye will*' (* - with necessarily minimal restrictions) is a safe assumption among Americans and Western Europeans, not necessarily so for other cultures.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.