| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Textbook 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281
|
 Posted: July 22 2010 at 19:27 |
|
I think he literally meant he couldn't understand the post because of the way in which it was written.
|
 |
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 19:35 |
Baldfriede, if you think having to walk behind a man and not being able to work or go to school is just "gender roles", be my guest. I just doubt they would like your bald head in a muslim country very much. If I were you, I'd cherish western society which allows you to express yourself.
|
|
|
|
BaldFriede
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 02 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 10266
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 19:38 |
 The T wrote:
Baldfriede, if you think having to walk behind a man and not being able to work or go to school is just "gender roles", be my guest. I just doubt they would like your bald head in a muslim country very much. If I were you, I'd cherish western society which allows you to express yourself.
|
lol, I would actually not mind walking behind a man in Western society. it means that he is the one to step into the dog sh*t
|
 BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue.
|
|
CinemaZebra
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 13 2010
Location: Ancient Rome
Status: Offline
Points: 6795
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 19:39 |
 Good point.
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 19:42 |
BaldFriede wrote:
The T wrote:
Baldfriede, if you think having to walk behind a man and not being able to work or go to school is just "gender roles", be my guest. I just doubt they would like your bald head in a muslim country very much. If I were you, I'd cherish western society which allows you to express yourself.
|
lol, I would actually not mind walking behind a man in Western society. it means that he is the one to step into the dog sh*t
|
 Point for humour for you BF...
|
|
|
|
CPicard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 03 2008
Location: Là, sui monti.
Status: Offline
Points: 10841
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 19:50 |
Textbook wrote:
I think he literally meant he couldn't understand the post because of the way in which it was written. |
Yes, that was the main problem. Because of this, I can't really "get" the points developed by BaldJean. To speak the truth, if I read the post of BJ as I started to understand it, I would begin to say that this text seems to carry some serious historical, social and cultural misconceptions.
|
|
Textbook
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 19:52 |
|
I think possibly because of who she is, BJ wants to argue for acceptance of everything. But I think others can see the problem of accepting the beliefs of a group of people who would cheerfully stone her to death.
|
|
CPicard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 03 2008
Location: Là, sui monti.
Status: Offline
Points: 10841
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 19:59 |
Textbook wrote:
I think possibly because of who she is, BJ wants to argue for acceptance of everything. But I think others can see the problem of accepting the beliefs of a group of people who would cheerfully stone her to death. |
Is this "group of people" only the "integrist" muslims (E.G. the Talibans) or the whole muslim community? You should be careful with your words.
|
|
BaldFriede
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 02 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 10266
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 20:03 |
The T wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
The T wrote:
Baldfriede, if you think having to walk behind a man and not being able to work or go to school is just "gender roles", be my guest. I just doubt they would like your bald head in a muslim country very much. If I were you, I'd cherish western society which allows you to express yourself.
|
lol, I would actually not mind walking behind a man in Western society. it means that he is the one to step into the dog sh*t
|
Point for humour for you BF... |
but what Jean's post was all about is that there are two ways of looking at it. Islamic men are not allowed to interfere in the kitchen, for example. are they therefore suppressed? no, it is only our society that says it is more important to do politics and the likes than to do the household. but it isn't actually. as any man who has ever done the household will pretty well know
|
BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue.
|
|
Textbook
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 20:06 |
|
I totally agree that woman's rights ended up backfiring for society in a way because due to capitalist pressure, what happened wasn't that women's work was respected and appreciated, but was seen as something shameful and for weaklings. Rather than mothers and homemakers being lauded for their dedication and hard work, women rushed not to be a mother or homemaker at all because capitalism teaches that if you're not making money, you're a loser. This leads to homes where neither parent is really giving their full attention to the children and the home. What we need to do is not say it is shameful to stay at home and raise children, but to respect and listen to the people who do.
|
|
stonebeard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 20:09 |
BaldFriede wrote:
The T wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
The T wrote:
Baldfriede, if you think having to walk behind a man and not being able to work or go to school is just "gender roles", be my guest. I just doubt they would like your bald head in a muslim country very much. If I were you, I'd cherish western society which allows you to express yourself.
|
lol, I would actually not mind walking behind a man in Western society. it means that he is the one to step into the dog sh*t
|
Point for humour for you BF... |
but what Jean's post was all about is that there are two ways of looking at it. Islamic men are not allowed to interfere in the kitchen, for example. are they therefore suppressed? no, it is only our society that says it is more important to do politics and the likes than to do the household. but it isn't actually. as any man who has ever done the household will pretty well know
|
It would seem then that in those Islamic countries, both men and women are less free. It may not be one gender suppressing another (though I still bet women get the worse overall deal) but a government suppressing both genders. If that's what they value...less freedom of choice and punishments for wanting simply to cook some damn food or take a class at college, then...fine. I don't really know how they justify that, though.
|
|
|
|
Textbook
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 20:10 |
|
They don't. If it's in the quran, or someone in the government says it is, case closed.
|
|
CPicard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 03 2008
Location: Là, sui monti.
Status: Offline
Points: 10841
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 20:28 |
|
Now, it's just trolling.
Could you stop talking about "islamic countries" (or "islamic men")? It's nonsense! Say the names of the states you're talking about!
Where have you heard/read/seen "islamic men" couldn't enter a kitchen, for example? In which society? In which town? In which family?
Which governments are you talking about? Is Turkey a dictatorship? Or is it Pakistan? Indonesia? Is Bosnia a country without freedom of choice and harsh punishments?
|
|
BaldJean
Prog Reviewer
Joined: May 28 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 10387
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 20:37 |
CPicard wrote:
Now, it's just trolling.
Could you stop talking about "islamic countries" (or "islamic men")? It's nonsense! Say the names of the states you're talking about!
Where have you heard/read/seen "islamic men" couldn't enter a kitchen, for example? In which society? In which town? In which family?
Which governments are you talking about? Is Turkey a dictatorship? Or is it Pakistan? Indonesia? Is Bosnia a country without freedom of choice and harsh punishments? |
there are outspoken laws and there are non-outspoken ones. no law ever stated that a woman could not study at the university in Western countries; it was just deemed to be totally outside of the norm, and women had to fight hard to be accepted at universities
|
 A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta
|
|
CPicard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 03 2008
Location: Là, sui monti.
Status: Offline
Points: 10841
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 21:04 |
BaldJean wrote:
CPicard wrote:
Now, it's just trolling.
Could you stop talking about "islamic countries" (or "islamic men")? It's nonsense! Say the names of the states you're talking about!
Where have you heard/read/seen "islamic men" couldn't enter a kitchen, for example? In which society? In which town? In which family?
Which governments are you talking about? Is Turkey a dictatorship? Or is it Pakistan? Indonesia? Is Bosnia a country without freedom of choice and harsh punishments? |
there are outspoken laws and there are non-outspoken ones. no law ever stated that a woman could not study at the university in Western countries; it was just deemed to be totally outside of the norm, and women had to fight hard to be accepted at universities
|
So, we are not talking about "laws", but "norms". Now, if the other forumites could start to clarify their speeches and to use the right words/names...
|
|
Textbook
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 21:39 |
|
Too much trouble.
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 23:12 |
|
SAUDI ARABIA
The biggest and most important islamic country, cradle of the faith, location of most holy places for the religion.
|
|
|
|
Sean Trane
Special Collaborator
Prog Folk
Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20414
|
Posted: July 23 2010 at 04:59 |
BaldFriede wrote:
The T wrote:
A religion that treats half of the population as second-class beings is the problem. Really, the burqa is but a symptom. I think, after all, it doesn't solve anything, just will exacerbate tensions. It would be great if one could ban the entire muslim faith entire but alas, it can't be done. I guess it's better if we learnt to tolerate them, though they tolerating us is just as difficult. |
But does Islam treat women as second class beings? This is your interpretation. Let me quote this excellent post of Jean again:
|
Of course it does...
it forbidds them to to tons of stuff a free woman might want to do, like working (although Iran allows some, like female doctors and nurses), walking out of their house unaccompanied, even driving a car, studying (unless OK with the daddy in Iran), etc...
If I mention Iran, it is that besides the integrism, Iran is rather modern, having women participate more to the society.
What may not be evident to us westerners is that there are lots of muslim women that are quite content to restricted in their homemakers, not having to fight for their living. And they can complain to the Imam if their husband doesn't bring enough money to care for the household.... and believe men the Imam will indeed yell at the failing hubby, until he acts correctly for the family's sake (like all religions, they look after their future victims).
In poorer circles, women have learned to take some sort of advantages of their restricted freedoms (they basically do nothing but housechores and give birth, like many western women do), because Islam protects them in a way, despite being terribly unfair to them, denying them many basic human rights.
but It basically confines the woman to a restricted area (basically the kitchen and the laundry), but any religion bears no chance of staying if most of the women don't agree to it
---------
Just like this polygamy issue, another controversial point that westerners don't get ...
While it is a phallocracy (on top of being a theocracy), it (polygamy) is allowed by islam in order to provide a home for all women.... Contrary to western religions (christianity) having a different philosophy: you can only have one wife,, in order to allow everyone to have one >> more democratic indeed, but not necessarily successful, given the number of beaten wives and murders (although this happens in Islam just as much)
What Islam did understand is that there are roughly between 1/4 and 1/3 of the men that are incapable of being fathers, husbands, family carer, workers, "civilized" society members etc.....
So in order for them (women) to have a chance to raise a family, they (islam) allow some men that are generally successful to take more than one wife, as long as he's able to afford to offer them the comfort they deserve (this means their own homes).... this is of course only reserved for the rich class.... the poor can't afford it.
Hopefully this post proves to those that doubt an atheist doesn't know religions, that I know as much of islam than I do of christianity or Atheism.
The T wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
The T wrote:
Baldfriede, if you think having to walk behind a man and not being able to work or go to school is just "gender roles", be my guest. I just doubt they would like your bald head in a muslim country very much. If I were you, I'd cherish western society which allows you to express yourself.
|
lol, I would actually not mind walking behind a man in Western society. it means that he is the one to step into the dog sh*t
|
Point for humour for you BF... |
Funny indeed
BUT, now that the male smeared it all over the sidewalk, it makes all the more difficult to avoid the poop 
Edited by Sean Trane - July 23 2010 at 08:22
|
|
let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword
|
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
|
Posted: July 23 2010 at 05:16 |
BaldFriede wrote:
The T wrote:
A religion that treats half of the population as second-class beings is the problem. Really, the burqa is but a symptom. I think, after all, it doesn't solve anything, just will exacerbate tensions. It would be great if one could ban the entire muslim faith entire but alas, it can't be done. I guess it's better if we learnt to tolerate them, though they tolerating us is just as difficult. |
But does Islam treat women as second class beings? This is your interpretation. Let me quote this excellent post of Jean again:
BaldJean wrote:
all this talk about suppression is quite interesting and amusing. I
think almost everyone will agree that women had been suppressed in the
Western world too and that only through years of fighting women finally
god rid of this suppression. but actually all of this is complete
nonsense, which can quite easily be proven. let me suggest the following
scenario:
at the beginning of the industrial age a law was made
in Germany that all profits from big companies down to the single
craftsman had to be shared equally with the whole population. other
countries soon followed that example. as the result of that the work of
men suddenly lost its importance as income source, but of course they
still had to work to keep the factories going. hence their status
deteriorated, and they tried to regain it by taking over territory that
had so far completely been reserved to women. they wanted to cook, they
wanted to do the washing, they wanted to clean the house and so on.
the
women felt their domain crumble and did all they could to hold the men
back, but they finally had to succumb to their struggle for freedom.
soon some men started complaining about the double strain they were
under and demanded that women should take care in political
affairs too and should vote and pick up duties in parliament. need I
continue?
no, the real problem was not that women had been
suppressed but that with the upcoming capitalistic system only money
started to count and all of what they did lost its value. women had not
been suppressed, and neither had men be suppressed, they just had their
own gender roles, and that was fine. as long as it worked out.
today
gender roles become less and less important, and both sexes behave and
are being treated more or less equally. and that is considered to be
"right", though why this is right no-one can tell. I prophecy that in a
thousand years men and women will almost look alike, and the only real
difference will be in their sexual organs. but they will no longer be
used for proliferation; women would not want to undergo the
discriminating pregnancy, so children will be bred in test-tubes, and we
will have a real better world. I am grateful I will not be alive then.
nothing
is wrong with having different roles at all; it only becomes wrong when
one role is deemed to be more important than the other. and this is
what happened at the beginning of the industrial age, and this is why we
had the so-called "emancipation of women".
"but women were
suppressed then" some may answer. "it was for example impossible for
them to enter a university". right, and it was equally impossible that a
man would have interfered with the cooking, for example.
the
deterioration of the female domain actually started before the
industrial age, when men suddenly discovered an interest in children in
the romantic age. this was the beginning of the landslide which finally
started the so-called "female emancipation".
and before someone
calls me completely outdated: hey, I am a successful business woman
myself. but I use my brain, and it always pays to question values that
are being taken for granted. it is a good and healthy mental exercise.
it
is also a good mental exercise to take the side of the opponent in an
argument for a change and defend their case with all you can; it helps
you understand the opposite side a lot. and it certainly cures you of
taking your position as granted and the right one. in the case of the
burka this means: put yourself into the mind of someone who is pro-burka
and defend your position as best as you can. it is the best way to get
rid of misconceptions and prejudices. Friede and I often take the
"wrong" position in discussions where everyone else is of the same
opinion and play advocatus diaboli for some case. it makes people
furious at you for your stupidity and is great fun, and it definitely
expands your mind
|
|
What does her post have to do with the role of women in Islam? And of course Islam treats women as second class beings. It would be foolish to argue otherwise - which of course doesn't keep people from attempting to, even some Muslim women. But IMO they're doing their sisters and daughters a grave disservice.
|
|
Icarium
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34083
|
Posted: July 23 2010 at 09:05 |
|
and muslims in Europe tends to be more conservative and stick to old strickt trafitions, those that are not followed in muslim countries, the Pakistanis in Norway are more strickt about thier faith then their "cuisins" in the homeland.
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
French approve ban on burqas...
