The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent
vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums
here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules
document is now in effect.
Turkish court bans Islamic head scarves at universities
Posts
How are radical Muslim women like the KKK? The people who must wear the headscarves are getting beaten/killed for not wearing them by an entirely different group of people who do not have to wear them!
Oh just stop already. Your tortured analogy is silly and everyone knows it. Muslim men intimidating and forcing Muslim women into wearing head scarves isn't anything at all like the treatment of blacks by whites in the post-slavery/pre-civil rights eras.
Worst analogy ever.
Huh? I originally was making an analogy about trying to protect people by removing the basis by which they're judged and attacked. I know they're not that similar. Neaden took it to another level.
So...how is removing scarves entirely going to deter radical muslim men from doing all those things?
Let us clearly identify the incredibly stupid comment made by you which we're now attacking:
That is stupid. Please stop the stupid.
The only problem is that with the ban in place, radical Muslim men are going to assume any women who went to university was willing to not wear the headscarf and react accordingly. There's a big chance that fundimentalist muslim women are simply going to stop going to university rather than take the risk.
I understand what you're getting at, but to me this seems like shoving the problem to the side. I think stronger gender-crime laws and a stronger support network for women who want to escape a fundimentalist life would be far more effective.
Sorry if I've been coming off angry by the way, ege's "WE'VE GOT TO KEEP THESE PEOPLE OUT OF THE GOVERNMENT BY ANY MEANS" wall of text just got me on edge.
He's actually lived in Turkey, due to this fact I have difficulty faulting his vehemence.
I think its the other way. If nobody who goes to university is allowed to wear headscarves the men can't tell who is a good muslim and who is not. If they start attacking eventually they will target a radical muslim woman on accident and be admonished for it in their own community.
Its also notable that the OP also lives in Turkey. I'm not saying it excuses his comments but Ege has explained why this anger towards radical muslims exists.
Well, considering how many "MEXICANS GONNA TAKE US OVER" types we have here in the US, I don't think residency neccesarily makes one correct in one's judgement of everyone else who lives there.
And yeah, I know it's been in place for 80 years. I was referring more to the general idea. Unfortunately there's no way of collecting data on whether or not the ban's removal would increse the number of educated Muslim women since it's so old. Or increase the chances of women getting killed, for that matter.
Another horrible analogy.
So you think by virtue of living in a state one is immune to any sort of bias against other ethnic groups there?
Perhaps you should stick to posting your own thoughts (avoid analogies) instead of re-interpreting the posts of others. You are shockingly bad at it, to the point of constant strawman arguments.
Members of rival Norteño and Sureño gangs commonly drive throughout the city and actively seek out targets wearing the wrong colors and attack them.
A 16-year-old was killed for wearing the color blue, according to investigators. And this weekend, a teen was killed for wearing the color red.
The man attacked was wearing red, a color associated with a rival Blood gang.
"'He walked through my territory in rival gang colors' is good enough reason to end a life," said Deanna Rodriguez, the district attorney's gang bureau chief.
A Riverside teen was gunned down outside a San Bernardino church two years ago because of his red clothing and flirtatious advances toward the girlfriend of a local gang member, a prosecutor told jurors Thursday.
He recently he went to his old neighborhood and played basketball wearing a red Kansas City Chiefs hat. He forgot that wearing the wrong color on someone else's turf can get you killed. Someone drove by and took a shot at him, he said.
His death came a day after he scuffled with several Bloods members when they spotted him in blue clothing, the color favored by the rival Crips street gang.
Would you feel it necessary to never wear red or blue in the US, based on the threat that you will be assaulted or murdered for doing so?
If we start from the beginning of that quote three, I really, really doubt that they banned scarves because
"scarves have something to do with fucking up the west".
In certain areas, if you are a young male, you'd be an absolute fool to wear gang colours. But what is your point?
That's a pretty defensible point. I saw this shit on the BBC and heard about it on NPR, and I don't recall such a clear explanation. I instinctively dislike the idea of government impinging on peoples' freedom.
It's depressing as hell if it is a valid judgment. It surely mean some of the more devout(or with devout family) won't be getting an education. If Turkey has this little control over their society--and anecdotes that they can't aren't hard to find-- then it may not be the wrong call.
many people do.
Could you go back and read Ege's original post? I mean, actually read it? Please? Specifically the part where he says that the Muslims at the university are highly organized and extremely aggressive? I mean, you're making a fool of yourself here.
This.
Nothing else needs to be said here. I mean, PIH, if you really are pro-gender equality, you should have read this sentence, realized the humongous irony in your stance, and stopped arguing.
Yes, I stand by what I said regarding how we must keep these people out of power. The reason is simple: they stand in the way of everything we perceive as modern, from democracy to freedom in religion to gender equality and beyond.
Turkey has lived right next to the horrors of Middle Eastern fundamentalist Islam for a century. Considering the risk of ending up like Iran or Saudi Arabia, I'd rather have my government go too far in their battle against the fundies, than not far enough. Because you see, if we don't go far enough, if our anti-fundamentalist measures are not strict enough, then we will have failed the legacy of modern Turkey and everything it stands for. We will end up just like the regressive and primitive cultures that we see when we look south-east of the border.
Maybe being exposed to the bullshit of these people for twenty years, seeing what they can do to people they don't see eye to eye with, and barely escaping their wrath in a couple of occasions does not make me "right." But I think it makes me far more aware of the risks they pose, not just to my country but also to its people, than you do. When I say I don't want these people in charge of my country's future, maybe I am being a bigot, and maybe that makes me a bad person. But compared to the alternative of living in a culture that requires my mother and my sister to wear headscarves and stones them if they don't, I'd rather have a couple of "human rights" trampled.
Go ahead and do it.
After all we were just speaking of people passing judgments on people and issues they know next to nothing about from the comfort of their keyboards. If what one of the founders of your country said a couple of centuries ago is going to put weight on your judgments, all the better!
The whole 'but it's different here' meme is not making my panties wet. It's not my fault all your arguments sound like the typical bigoted excuses of racists, sexists, and homophobes.
That's just how it is.
Nuh uh nuh uh that's not how it is!
:roll:
Are you going to address the specific points I made, or are you done here?
What points did you make? That organized groups of crazies are trying to subvert the government? Yeah, that's unique. That some Muslim radicals in Europe want to impose Sharia? Well shit that must go for all of them! That somehow allowing headscarves in college will magically make the police unable to arrest people who harass anyone who doesn't? Yeah I totally see that.
Yes yes I know, 'but teh Muslims want to kill everyone'. Ever think by oppressing Muslim radicals you're only sowing the seeds of violence in the future? That maybe by discriminating against all Muslims you're going to alienate the moderates to the point where they become the radicals you fear too?
Are you going to throw out a fact because it's not... uh, unique? Are you interested in actually discussing, or just dismissing because you have already made up your mind?
Nice strawman, and a completely irrelevant one at that. To be honest though I didn't expect much else.
Yeah, I totally see these people calling the police because their peers harassed them at school. :roll:
I also see them testifying! :roll:
More proof that you not only have any idea as to the extent of the situation in Turkey, but you haven't really read anything I've read in a receptive manner. You just read it and were like, "hmm let's see, what can I outright dismiss here? Oh yeah, so many things!"
Never said that.
Sure, there's that risk. But then every decision carries a risk. Nothing new there.
Well, at least you do know that you don't know the real situation in Turkey.
We are done until you go educate yourself.
--
Bottom line is, Kagera, I believe I have made some very valid points and a lot of people agreed. Here are a few excerpts:
* Fundies are gaming the system to get themselves in positions of power in order to eventually sabotage it.
* There is a massive, organized underground fundie movement that is actively or passively attacking non-fundies (these include moderates by the way, so good luck having them unite in any way or form)
* The amount of manipulation and harassment currently going on in universities is unbelievable.
* The headscarf is a oppression tool used against Muslim women, and thus any argument made in support of it is, by definition, anti-gender equality.
What you're doing here is dismissing the entirety of my argument on the basis that it is not unique enough, that you have "heard it all before." Well, that's nice. Too bad it doesn't get anywhere.
I'm not going to apologize because I find the idea of a blanket law discriminating against a whole religion sounds like, discrimination or that the rhetoric you present is the type of fear mongering I hear on a daily basis from fundamentalists here.
If Turkey is truly that messed up that you need to have laws like this then I'm sure there are bigger issues than what my opinion about it is.
Yes, we have a law discriminating against a practice that is in actuality a tool for oppressing women.
How evil of us.
No one is denying that.
I'm sure that's the only reason a Muslim woman wears a head scarf, ever.
Fix the system? If we fix the system it is no longer a democracy. They're using the fundamental tenet of democracy to get themselves elected to positions of power where they have permission to change the legislation to eventually convert the country into a theocracy.
It's the small things that you can't really prove, or would get laughed at if you made a big deal out of. I mean I can't explain it enough, and I don't mean this in a condescending manner when I say you have to experience it first-hand to understand. It really is weird and fucked-up.
See above.
Well then we're at an impasse, aren't we? I mean, technically speaking, believing that women who sleep with other men should be stoned is a religious belief too. If we argue against that are we arguing against religious freedom?
Or let's pick something somewhat less harmless. Let's pick headscarves, and the fact that the Islam religion first came up with headscarves in order to sexually oppress women (to make them unidentifiable as women so as to not turn on men). When we argue against this sexual oppression, are we arguing against religious freedom?
More importantly, when the concepts of religious freedom and modern standards such as gender equality conflict, which comes first?
Given that the muslim theocrats in government are already abusing their power, and discriminating against women for not wearing headscarves, it becomes understandable how so many secularists in Turkey are treating this piece of legislature as a kind of frontline against the theocrats, and justifiably so, I think.
It's a very precarious situation, to say the least.
Could one argue that, given the nature, reasons for and history of, the headscarf, that it should be deemed as being in the same category as the Swastika, or the Confederate flag, or other symbols of oppression? And in the example of the Swastika, that they could take a similar course that post-WW2 Germany has taken, with similar justifications?
Well, I mean, if it's stuff like students getting refused from Muslim study groups or something I'm not really sure what you can do or if it's really that big a deal. Is it impossible for secular counterparts to exist?
Discrimination by Islamic groups entrenched in various sectors of society can be combated somehow. You guys don't like the analogy to U.S. civil rights movements, but here we are again.
That is of course assuming that I'm not way off base from what you're hinting at, but I'm just going with what I have. Stoning women and allowing them to wear scarves is different. The whole "your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins" thing.
I realize that the scarves are a tool of oppression, but mandating a scarf or mandating against the scarf are both restricting liberty.
I still contend that if enforcing the secular system on all other fronts is so hopeless, that enforcing this ban is equally so.
No, its because its socially unacceptable for a devout Muslim not to wear a headscarve. Or, you know, tradition.
You think that Muhammad would have demanded that all women wear one, but nope, just his wives.