Rahaf al-Qunun: Saudi teen refugee arrives in Canada [Update Post #24]

[Tubs]

They can get the same freedoms in India or any third world Latin American country. Lets not beat around the bush. Just admit that they arent sacrificing financial stability for freedom. They take conscious, well planned decisions and pick the specific countries they want to go to.

That's obviously untrue. The most freedom is definitely in countries like UK, US, Canada, NZ, and AUS. And sure, there are other benefits to those affluent countries too, but if you want the most freedom, those are the kind of countries you want to go to.

 

[mustang]

Thailand's immigration police chief says a Saudi woman who fled her family at the weekend will be given temporary entry to the country.

Thai immigration officials had tried to return Rahaf Mohammed al-Qunun, 18, to Kuwait, where her family is.

She refused to board a flight to Kuwait City on Monday, and barricaded herself into her hotel room at Bangkok airport.

The teenager said she believed her family would kill her if she went back because she had renounced Islam.

The Thai authorities said her status would be assessed by the UN refugee agency.

"My brothers and family and the Saudi embassy will be waiting for me in Kuwait," she told Reuters.

"My life is in danger. My family threatens to kill me for the most trivial things."

Rights groups including Human Rights Watch have expressed grave concerns for Ms Mohammed al-Qunun, who arrived at Bangkok's international airport on a flight from Kuwait. She had travelled to Thailand for a connecting flight to Australia, where she hoped to seek asylum.

Thailand's chief of immigration police Surachate Hakparn said on Monday afternoon local time that the country would "protect her as best we can".

"She is now under the sovereignty of Thailand, no-one and no embassy can force her to go anywhere," he said. "We will talk to her and do whatever she requests.

"Since she escaped trouble to seek our help... we will not send anyone to their death."

An injunction filed by Thai lawyers in Bangkok criminal court to stop the deportation was dismissed earlier on Monday.

Thailand is not a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention, and provides no legal protection to asylum-seekers - although there are more than 100,000 refugees in the country.

How did the stand-off start?

Ms Mohammed al-Qunun says that when she arrived in Bangkok on Saturday, her passport was seized by a Saudi diplomat who met her coming off the flight.

On Sunday, Thailand said she was being deported because she did not meet the requirements for a Thai visa.

However, Ms Mohammed al-Qunun insists she has a visa for Australia, and never wanted to stay in Thailand.

The Saudi embassy in Bangkok said Saudi Arabia did not have the authority to hold her at the airport, and said she was stopped by Thai authorities for "violating the law".

Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director for Human Rights Watch, told the BBC: "It seems that the Thai government is manufacturing a story that she tried to apply for a visa and it was denied... in fact, she had an onward ticket to go to Australia, she didn't want to enter Thailand in the first place."

He argued that the Thai authorities had clearly co-operated with Saudi Arabia, as Saudi officials were able to meet the plane when it arrived.

How was the world alerted?

Ms Mohammed al-Qunun started attracting attention with her social media posts over the weekend. She has also given a friend access to her Twitter account, calling it a contingency in case anything should happen to her.

"I shared my story and my pictures on social media and my father is so angry because I did this... I can't study and work in my country, so I want to be free and study and work as I want," she said.

Women in Saudi Arabia are subject to male guardianship laws, which mean they need a male relative's permission to work, travel, marry, open a bank account, or even leave prison.

Ms Mohammed al-Qunun wrote on Twitter that she had decided to share her name and details because she had "nothing to lose" now.

She has asked for asylum from governments around the world.

A photo appeared of her in her room as officials reportedly stood outside, waiting to put her on a flight back to Kuwait.

Why are there fears for her welfare?

Ms Mohammed al-Qunun told the BBC that she had renounced Islam, and feared her family would kill her if she was sent back to Saudi Arabia.

Freedom of religion is not legally protected in the Islamic kingdom, and people who convert to another religion from Islam risk being charged with apostasy - or abandoning their religious beliefs.

The crime is legally punishable by death - although courts have not carried out a death sentence in recent years.

Alternatively, Ms Mohammed al-Qunun could be charged with terrorism. Saudi Arabia's counter-terrorism law and a series of related decrees are used to criminalise a wide range of acts, including insulting the country's reputation, harming public order, and "calling for atheist thought in any form".

An adult woman who does not heed her guardian can also be arrested on charges of "disobedience". If a woman is detained for any reason, the police will not release her unless her guardian comes to pick her up, even if she faces no criminal charges.

Ms Mohammed al-Qunun's case echoes that of another Saudi woman who was in transit to Australia in April 2017.

Dina Ali Lasloom, 24, was en route from Kuwait via the Philippines but was taken back to Saudi Arabia from Manila airport by her family.

She used a Canadian tourist's phone to send a message, a video of which was posted to Twitter, saying her family would kill her.

Her fate on arriving back in Saudi Arabia remains unknown.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-46777848

Good for her to have escaped those barbaric oppressors. I hope more women could find the courage and means but sadly they cannot in a place like Saudi. I would contend that only inferior men would try to actively control their women in social practice - inferior since they are probably insecure about themselves and their masculinity. Men in communities that oppress women this way are not real men and are mere ***** in my opinion.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Good for her to have escaped those barbaric oppressors. I hope more women could find the courage and means but sadly they cannot in a place like Saudi. I would contend that only inferior men would try to actively control their women in social practice - inferior since they are probably insecure about themselves and their masculinity. Men in communities that oppress women this way are not real men and are mere ***** in my opinion.

The US army protects the Saudi regime and it was the British who installed these puppets.

Ironice someone who has been part of occuption can call others oppressors and barbaric

 

[mustang]

The US army protects the Saudi regime and it was the British who installed these puppets.

Ironice someone who has been part of occuption can call others oppressors and barbaric

I never condone everything my government does and not all of the US is a supporter of Trump. Again .... the topic here is about a Saudi women oppressed by her men. Her own community's inferior insecure Wahhabi men, who think that the only way they can hold onto their women is by locking them up like animals. Let's stick to the topic here - at the ways of these barbaric men and not try to distract from the core issue with yet another "whatabout" or other larger issues like international politics/diplomacy. We all know that every nation is capable of "sleeping with the devil" if it furthers their own agendas. Nobody is an angel on that front.

So, why are the Saudi men so insecure about their women that they feel a compelling need to lock them up this way? Why this inferiority regarding their own masculinity?

 

[KingKhanWC]

I never condone everything my government does and not all of the US is a supporter of Trump. Again .... the topic here is about a Saudi women oppressed by her men. Her own community's inferior insecure Wahhabi men, who think that the only way they can hold onto their women is by locking them up like animals. Let's stick to the topic here - at the ways of these barbaric men and not try to distract from the core issue with yet another "whatabout" or other larger issues like international politics/diplomacy. We all know that every nation is capable of "sleeping with the devil" if it furthers their own agendas. Nobody is an angel on that front.

So, why are the Saudi men so insecure about their women that they feel a compelling need to lock them up this way? Why this inferiority regarding their own masculinity?

You were part of occuption and one which was one of the worst attacks on a country/people in history. You lose any right to call others barbaric.

Saudi is the name of the family. The dictatorship was installed by British and now supported with the US military. They follow a version which has only been around for 200 odd years. Perhaps if the US would just leave these people alone, they would get rid of their dictator and then the type of beliefs which are held.

 

[mustang]

You were part of occuption and one which was one of the worst attacks on a country/people in history. You lose any right to call others barbaric.

Saudi is the name of the family. The dictatorship was installed by British and now supported with the US military. They follow a version which has only been around for 200 odd years. Perhaps if the US would just leave these people alone, they would get rid of their dictator and then the type of beliefs which are held.

You are basically blaming the muslim world's social evils on some external entity (always convenient to blame someone else).

So, according to you - oppression of women in Saudi Arabia all boils down to UK/US installing a puppet regime and nothing else? That is one potent Koolaid you have there and I bet it gets you high every day. Women being forced to wear burqa in Iran, Afghanistan (under Taliban), Somalia, northern Nigeria and host of other muslim entities ... do all of these also boil down to some "evil white man" installing puppet regimes? Muslim men all over are innocent of gender bias and do not oppress women?

Correlation <> causation. Saudi having a puppet regime (as you claim) is not the sole reason why Saudi and other muslim men being so insecure about their women. Asking again - why are some of these muslim men in aforementioned "women oppressing places" so insecure about their own masculinity?

 

[KingKhanWC]

You are basically blaming the muslim world's social evils on some external entity (always convenient to blame someone else).

So, according to you - oppression of women in Saudi Arabia all boils down to UK/US installing a puppet regime and nothing else? That is one potent Koolaid you have there and I bet it gets you high every day. Women being forced to wear burqa in Iran, Afghanistan (under Taliban), Somalia, northern Nigeria and host of other muslim entities ... do all of these also boil down to some "evil white man" installing puppet regimes? Muslim men all over are innocent of gender bias and do not oppress women?

Correlation <> causation. Saudi having a puppet regime (as you claim) is not the sole reason why Saudi and other muslim men being so insecure about their women. Asking again - why are the men in these places so insecure about their own masculinity?

Its a major factor. The average person living in the nation cannot even debate openly against the regime let alone try to achieve change.

Do they not teach you history in the US army? Or do they brainwash into thinking women in the Muslim world are oppressed, youre the hero who will liberate them and killing a few million of them while youre at it is ok?

 

[mustang]

Its a major factor. The average person living in the nation cannot even debate openly against the regime let alone try to achieve change.

Do they not teach you history in the US army? Or do they brainwash into thinking women in the Muslim world are oppressed, youre the hero who will liberate them and killing a few million of them while youre at it is ok?

yeah, yet again resorting to personal attacks while ignoring my question. Notice that I have not personally said anything against you while each post of yours is peppered with personal attacks. We typically resort to low blows when our logic fails us.

There are umpteen muslim nations and communities where women are forced to live like cattle. Which evil white man's puppet regime are you going to blame for those?

As I said before ... Correlation <> causation. Saudi having a puppet regime (as you claim) is not the sole reason why Saudi and other muslim men being so insecure about their women. Why are muslim men in these places so insecure about their own masculinity?

 

[KingKhanWC]

yeah, yet again resorting to personal attacks while ignoring my question. Notice that I have not personally said anything against you while each post of yours is peppered with personal attacks. We typically resort to low blows when our logic fails us.

There are umpteen muslim nations and communities where women are forced to live like cattle. Which evil white man's puppet regime are you going to blame for those?

As I said before ... Correlation <> causation. Saudi having a puppet regime (as you claim) is not the sole reason why Saudi and other muslim men being so insecure about their women. Why are muslim men in these places so insecure about their own masculinity?

Ive never walked around with guns invading other peoples nations and being part of barbaric murderous oppression. I think it's important to highlight this as it gives context to ones mindset.

Live like cattle? Please expand? I can see the hate is slowing coming out of your mouth.

Nobody is as insecure as your President and of course there are men like this all over the world. Either you care more about Muslim women, which I doubt you care at all or you cant see anything else in the world.

The Saudi regime is not nice at all but how can the people change this, any ideas?

 

[troodon]

You want freedom and to explore it, Middle East is not the place if you are a woman. Looks like there are hundreds of women in these Arab countries waiting for their chance to escape to West.

 

[mustang]

ABC News Documentary - Women are trying to escape Saudi Arabia, but not all of them make it

From the documentary title - "Many Saudi women are wealthy, well-educated and told they have everything, but when they disobey their male guardians, life can be more like a Handmaid’s Tale dystopia."

Imagine how many good muslim women are oppressed this way? Think about drain in knowledge and human capital in muslim communities al over. Goddamn extremist Wahhabi cuckolded idiots without any sense of masculinity or confidence in themselves as men ... pretty much inferior men I would say. These are the kinds of idiots who bring a bad rep to your own community and it is sad to see people here jumping and blindly defending them with whataboutisms.

BUT ... to those here blindly supporting only everything they believe in, constantly faulting other religions/nations/cultures, the following includes their typical response

1. Attack the messenger instead of the message to digress - whatabout your culture? whatabout your nation's military? whatabout your religion?

2. Claim this is all just fringe behavior among muslim community and not the mainstream. Really? So your accusations of American/Jewish/Zionist/Hindu whackos being mainstream is credible while something far worse in your own communities is considered very "fringe" and not worthy of discussion?

3. Concede that this is an issue after all but then pivot and blame the evil white guy's puppet government. So oppression of women among muslim communities throughout the world is all due to puppet governments and muslim men are divine angels?

Unless and until you accept the existence of a problem, you will never progress towards solving it. If you want to keep fantasizing that your community is flawless and keep making negative comments on hand picked negative news about other communities to make yourselves feel better - well, I suppose that is why you see threads discussing about muslim world falling behind in general.

 

[mustang]

ABC News Documentary - Women are trying to escape Saudi Arabia, but not all of them make it

From the documentary title - "Many Saudi women are wealthy, well-educated and told they have everything, but when they disobey their male guardians, life can be more like a Handmaid’s Tale dystopia."

Imagine how many good muslim women are oppressed this way? Think about drain in knowledge and human capital in muslim communities al over. Goddamn extremist Wahhabi cuckolded idiots without any sense of masculinity or confidence in themselves as men ... pretty much inferior men I would say. These are the kinds of idiots who bring a bad rep to your own community and it is sad to see people here jumping and blindly defending them with whataboutisms.

BUT ... to those here blindly supporting only everything they believe in, constantly faulting other religions/nations/cultures, the following includes their typical response

1. Attack the messenger instead of the message to digress - whatabout your culture? whatabout your nation's military? whatabout your religion?

2. Claim this is all just fringe behavior among muslim community and not the mainstream. Really? So your accusations of American/Jewish/Zionist/Hindu whackos being mainstream is credible while something far worse in your own communities is considered very "fringe" and not worthy of discussion?

3. Concede that this is an issue after all but then pivot and blame the evil white guy's puppet government. So oppression of women among muslim communities throughout the world is all due to puppet governments and muslim men are divine angels?

Unless and until you accept the existence of a problem, you will never progress towards solving it. If you want to keep fantasizing that your community is flawless and keep making negative comments on hand picked negative news about other communities to make yourselves feel better - well, I suppose that is why you see threads discussing about muslim world falling behind in general.

An appeal - to those looking to make attacking comments on the poster, or planning to blindly refute points in this post, or make personal attacks on me the poster as usual to deflect from flaws in your community ... I have an appeal for y'all - WATCH that youtube documentary, think about it, and then comment.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I never condone everything my government does and not all of the US is a supporter of Trump. Again .... the topic here is about a Saudi women oppressed by her men. Her own community's inferior insecure Wahhabi men, who think that the only way they can hold onto their women is by locking them up like animals. Let's stick to the topic here - at the ways of these barbaric men and not try to distract from the core issue with yet another "whatabout" or other larger issues like international politics/diplomacy. We all know that every nation is capable of "sleeping with the devil" if it furthers their own agendas. Nobody is an angel on that front.

So, why are the Saudi men so insecure about their women that they feel a compelling need to lock them up this way? Why this inferiority regarding their own masculinity?

You keep referring to Arab lack of confidence in their masculinity ( three separate posts), just wondering, what is your definition of masculinity?

 

[mustang]

You keep referring to Arab lack of confidence in their masculinity ( three separate posts), just wondering, what is your definition of masculinity?

I refer to lack of masculinity among muslim men within the context of this specific thread, be it from anywhere in the muslim world.

My (and any free thinking western person's) definition of masculinity - real men are those that are confident in giving full independence to women and see them as peers. A society in which men as a group create a system wherein women are treated inferior to men, women's freedom of expression being controlled etc - it is easy to see that these men are inferior, have no confidence in their own masculinity and their compelling need to "cage" women in their communities arises from their own insecurities that their women will leave them if they do not hold onto them this way.

All communities are guilty of this in a certain gray scale of course. But I notice that muslim communities (among major religions of the world) do this to a perverse+pervasive scale. There seem to be legal+religious+social systems in place that control women's freedom of expression. No other major group in the world does it to this extent. Some of you will get into "whataboutism" as usual to deflect from the core topic and make yourselves feel better, but as you can see - no other major religious community "cages" women to the extent as countries in the Islamic world do - legal+religious+social.

So yeah, I'm saying it for the 4th time and I know the reality of my statement hurts the egos of some of you - muslim men (in these women controlling communities) do have inferior masculinity. I wonder what makes them feel so insecure and inferior about themselves as men.

See that entire video I posted above (especially the second half) and your own conscience will agree with my statement.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I refer to lack of masculinity among muslim men within the context of this specific thread, be it from anywhere in the muslim world.

My (and any free thinking western person's) definition of masculinity - real men are those that are confident in giving full independence to women and see them as peers. A society in which men as a group create a system wherein women are treated inferior to men, women's freedom of expression being controlled etc - it is easy to see that these men are inferior, have no confidence in their own masculinity and their compelling need to "cage" women in their communities arises from their own insecurities that their women will leave them if they do not hold onto them this way.

All communities are guilty of this in a certain gray scale of course. But I notice that muslim communities (among major religions of the world) do this to a perverse+pervasive scale. There seem to be legal+religious+social systems in place that control women's freedom of expression. No other major group in the world does it to this extent. Some of you will get into "whataboutism" as usual to deflect from the core topic and make yourselves feel better, but as you can see - no other major religious community "cages" women to the extent as countries in the Islamic world do - legal+religious+social.

So yeah, I'm saying it for the 4th time and I know the reality of my statement hurts the egos of some of you - muslim men (in these women controlling communities) do have inferior masculinity. I wonder what makes them feel so insecure and inferior about themselves as men.

See that entire video I posted above (especially the second half) and your own conscience will agree with my statement.

Interesting that you are already getting defensive about whataboutism before I said anything. What...did you think I was going to call into question Indian masculinity or something?

Don't worry my friend, it just seemed you were really keen to tie this treatment of women in Islam with Muslim masculinity. I don't think that's the case, it's more that in Islam there is codified separation of roles even in the Quran, and this has been compounded by traditions which seem medieval now. Muslims seem to consider these traditions as non-negotiable and I think that is where the issues lie. Whereas in other societies people have moved beyond the narrow defined roles of women, Muslims seem to think these old traditions are sacrosanct.

 

[mustang]

Interesting that you are already getting defensive about whataboutism before I said anything. What...did you think I was going to call into question Indian masculinity or something?

Don't worry my friend, it just seemed you were really keen to tie this treatment of women in Islam with Muslim masculinity. I don't think that's the case, it's more that in Islam there is codified separation of roles even in the Quran, and this has been compounded by traditions which seem medieval now. Muslims seem to consider these traditions as non-negotiable and I think that is where the issues lie. Whereas in other societies people have moved beyond the narrow defined roles of women, Muslims seem to think these old traditions are sacrosanct.

Haha nice attempt to deflect things with an opening statement. I'm only part Indian and I care a hoot about any perceived insults about Indian men. They are also bad IMO but no community seems to be as pervasively guilty at this as the Islamic one - legal+religious+social when it comes to oppression of women.

To your bolded statement - I think it is. Oppression of any section of society by another comes out of insecurity by the oppressors. Be it caste groups in India, or white men in the American South back in the day (bulk of segregation laws in the South came out of the impression that black men are more virile in bed because they are animalistic and may take white women away - I'm not making this up).

I know you are biased against Indian people in general (you went to the extent of calling Indians as butlers to white men which thankfully was deleted by the mods). I do not want to stoop to that level and do not intend to call all muslim men as inferior men. But certainly the ones who control women to this extent (legal+religious+social) do seem to be inferior men who are probably not confident in their "abilities" to hold onto their women. Which is very sad for those muslim women.

We all know that I am not making up the problem here. Just look up any datapoint for women's freedom/progress by religion and you can clearly see Islam way behind other religions.

 

[Khan12]

Haha nice attempt to deflect things with an opening statement. I'm only part Indian and I care a hoot about any perceived insults about Indian men. They are also bad IMO but no community seems to be as pervasively guilty at this as the Islamic one - legal+religious+social when it comes to oppression of women.

To your bolded statement - I think it is. Oppression of any section of society by another comes out of insecurity by the oppressors. Be it caste groups in India, or white men in the American South back in the day (bulk of segregation laws in the South came out of the impression that black men are more virile in bed because they are animalistic and may take white women away - I'm not making this up).

I know you are biased against Indian people in general (you went to the extent of calling Indians as butlers to white men which thankfully was deleted by the mods). I do not want to stoop to that level and do not intend to call all muslim men as inferior men. But certainly the ones who control women to this extent (legal+religious+social) do seem to be inferior men who are probably not confident in their "abilities" to hold onto their women. Which is very sad for those muslim women.

We all know that I am not making up the problem here. Just look up any datapoint for women's freedom/progress by religion and you can clearly see Islam way behind other religions.

Oh yes that's why India has one of the most the rape cases in the world.

 

[mustang]

Oh yes that's why India has one of the most the rape cases in the world.

What a stupid irrelevant comment reeking of whataboutism! I have no affinity to India so your attempt at personal attacks instead of sticking to topic is pathetic. I have no intention of getting into a logical discourse regarding your post since you are only resorting to personal attacks because the truth in my statements is hitting your nerve.

As I said before - WATCH that youtube documentary especially the second half, think about it, and then comment.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Haha nice attempt to deflect things with an opening statement. I'm only part Indian and I care a hoot about any perceived insults about Indian men. They are also bad IMO but no community seems to be as pervasively guilty at this as the Islamic one - legal+religious+social when it comes to oppression of women.

To your bolded statement - I think it is. Oppression of any section of society by another comes out of insecurity by the oppressors. Be it caste groups in India, or white men in the American South back in the day (bulk of segregation laws in the South came out of the impression that black men are more virile in bed because they are animalistic and may take white women away - I'm not making this up).

I know you are biased against Indian people in general (you went to the extent of calling Indians as butlers to white men which thankfully was deleted by the mods). I do not want to stoop to that level and do not intend to call all muslim men as inferior men. But certainly the ones who control women to this extent (legal+religious+social) do seem to be inferior men who are probably not confident in their "abilities" to hold onto their women. Which is very sad for those muslim women.

We all know that I am not making up the problem here. Just look up any datapoint for women's freedom/progress by religion and you can clearly see Islam way behind other religions.

My dear chum, I gave you a an answer as to your assertion about Muslim subjugation of women, but for some reason you seemed to want to complain about my bias against Indians with irrelevant stuff about butlers from I don't know how long ago. Interesting that you were quite ok to deflect to white men being insecure about blacks being more virile in bed, but when you referred to Indians you decided to talk about caste instead of virility.

Anyway, you want to discuss masculinity in these terms and you are entitled to your views, but if you want to go down that route and mention other races or religions, then I would suggest you don't complain prematurely re whataboutism.

 

[mustang]

My dear chum, I gave you a an answer as to your assertion about Muslim subjugation of women, but for some reason you seemed to want to complain about my bias against Indians with irrelevant stuff about butlers from I don't know how long ago. Interesting that you were quite ok to deflect to white men being insecure about blacks being more virile in bed, but when you referred to Indians you decided to talk about caste instead of virility.

Anyway, you want to discuss masculinity in these terms and you are entitled to your views, but if you want to go down that route and mention other races or religions, then I would suggest you don't complain prematurely re whataboutism.

I gave you comparable data points where other societies subjugated certain sections thanks to their insecurities since you were questioning that assertion. That is not whataboutism or deflecting. Since some of y'all seem to think anything/anyone questioning your religion/nation/community/religion has to be some Israeli/American/Indian agent, I quoted historical data points for my logical inference from other communities.

It seems you are uncomfortable talking about negatives of your own community but will happily indulge when talking about negatives of others. I question the virility of any man/men involved in systematic subjugation of the opposite gender. The need to create artificial religious/social/legal laws to hold onto women comes from self-perceived lack of virility - is what it boils down to. This is true for anyone.

So ... why are some muslim men lacking virility to such a high extent that they have to hold onto their women through religious+social+legal systems? No other community in the world seems desperate enough to hold onto women through all 3 systems as these men. Why are your messages only deflecting onto me instead of addressing the issue at hand? is the reality of my statement making you uncomfortable?

Did you watch that video in its entirety? Or are you deflecting and sweeping real issues of your community under the rug as usual by attacking the messenger?

I care a damn about any insults against Indians especially from prejudiced folks like yourself. A smaller mix of me is Indian but I very much identify with another ethnic group courtesy of the environment I grew up in. Not that is matters - since you know very well about your message calling Indians as butlers to white men a month ago in another thread. Pretty ironic when you claim "We Brits, Us Brits" time and again to keep pretending to be "neutral" when you ain't one.

Sooo ... getting back to topic, your response was also inadequate. Claiming gender separation thanks to sticking to scriptures does not explain separate laws and social standards for men and women. Why is that pervasive in many muslim communities? What drives the insecurity among muslim men?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I gave you comparable data points where other societies subjugated certain sections thanks to their insecurities since you were questioning that assertion. That is not whataboutism or deflecting. Since some of y'all seem to think anything/anyone questioning your religion/nation/community/religion has to be some Israeli/American/Indian agent, I quoted historical data points for my logical inference from other communities.

It seems you are uncomfortable talking about negatives of your own community but will happily indulge when talking about negatives of others. I question the virility of any man/men involved in systematic subjugation of the opposite gender. The need to create artificial religious/social/legal laws to hold onto women comes from self-perceived lack of virility - is what it boils down to. This is true for anyone.

So ... why are some muslim men lacking virility to such a high extent that they have to hold onto their women through religious+social+legal systems? No other community in the world seems desperate enough to hold onto women through all 3 systems as these men. Why are your messages only deflecting onto me instead of addressing the issue at hand? is the reality of my statement making you uncomfortable?

Did you watch that video in its entirety? Or are you deflecting and sweeping real issues of your community under the rug as usual by attacking the messenger?

I care a damn about any insults against Indians especially from prejudiced folks like yourself. A smaller mix of me is Indian but I very much identify with another ethnic group courtesy of the environment I grew up in. Not that is matters - since you know very well about your message calling Indians as butlers to white men a month ago in another thread. Pretty ironic when you claim "We Brits, Us Brits" time and again to keep pretending to be "neutral" when you ain't one.

Sooo ... getting back to topic, your response was also inadequate. Claiming gender separation thanks to sticking to scriptures does not explain separate laws and social standards for men and women. Why is that pervasive in many muslim communities? What drives the insecurity among muslim men?

I will certainly tell you what drives the insecurity of Muslim men with regards to your querying their masculinity, but since you have gone there, first I will need to know if this is a genuine question, and it troubles me that you have raised this issue while promptly denying your own Indian heritage. "Ooh, I'm only part Indian don't you know!" Well okay, so it's only a little part of you that is Indian, but I wasn't talking about you personally.

You want to know why some muslim men lack virility, then I would suggest that this thesis doesn't match up with the other one where it is feared that they are breeding like rabbits and popping out kids like there is no tomorrow. So which one are you going for and we can take it from there.

 

[mustang]

I will certainly tell you what drives the insecurity of Muslim men with regards to your querying their masculinity, but since you have gone there, first I will need to know if this is a genuine question, and it troubles me that you have raised this issue while promptly denying your own Indian heritage. "Ooh, I'm only part Indian don't you know!" Well okay, so it's only a little part of you that is Indian, but I wasn't talking about you personally.

You want to know why some muslim men lack virility, then I would suggest that this thesis doesn't match up with the other one where it is feared that they are breeding like rabbits and popping out kids like there is no tomorrow. So which one are you going for and we can take it from there.

Not denying anything about my heritage at all but just explaining that such personal attacks upon me is not accurate. I identify with my non-Indian side simply because I grew up and was raised more by my non-Indian family. I set out to learn more about my Indian side only since adulthood.

If you were truly not intending your statements to be a personal attack - why make a point about Indians when the topic and OP is nothing about Indians? Unless of course you thought I identify myself as Indian? I care less about personal insults in general but do care when people only use that to respond instead of talking about the topic at hand. Case in point this interaction - do you see me anywhere talking about YOUR background/family uninitiated? But somehow each response of yours has a part touching on my background instead of the topic at hand.

To your actual response in bold - I think I should clarify and perhaps it was confusing since I did use virility myself. I actually meant masculinity and being confident as a man. Virility and breeding like rats means nothing - cage/chain up a woman and have intercourse than any man can be virile. Masculinity means everything and by that I mean being confident enough to give women the freedom as equals and not be insecure that they would leave the said men. I hope you understand the difference between the 2.

The muslim men in question may be biologically virile (as the 3 Billion other men) but based on their insecurities leading to caging their own women - I find them lacking in masculinity and self confidence. Why are these muslim men doubting their own abilities in holding onto their women if they do give those women the deserved freedom?

Just confirming - did you see the full video I posted?

 

[KingKhanWC]

Not denying anything about my heritage at all but just explaining that such personal attacks upon me is not accurate. I identify with my non-Indian side simply because I grew up and was raised more by my non-Indian family. I set out to learn more about my Indian side only since adulthood.

If you were truly not intending your statements to be a personal attack - why make a point about Indians when the topic and OP is nothing about Indians? Unless of course you thought I identify myself as Indian? I care less about personal insults in general but do care when people only use that to respond instead of talking about the topic at hand. Case in point this interaction - do you see me anywhere talking about YOUR background/family uninitiated? But somehow each response of yours has a part touching on my background instead of the topic at hand.

To your actual response in bold - I think I should clarify and perhaps it was confusing since I did use virility myself. I actually meant masculinity and being confident as a man. Virility and breeding like rats means nothing - cage/chain up a woman and have intercourse than any man can be virile. Masculinity means everything and by that I mean being confident enough to give women the freedom as equals and not be insecure that they would leave the said men. I hope you understand the difference between the 2.

The muslim men in question may be biologically virile (as the 3 Billion other men) but based on their insecurities leading to caging their own women - I find them lacking in masculinity and self confidence. Why are these muslim men doubting their own abilities in holding onto their women if they do give those women the deserved freedom?

Just confirming - did you see the full video I posted?

The topic is also not about Muslim mens masculinity.

You make another idiotic generalisation. In your world are all Muslim men the same? How mascular are you? Do you think invading other peoples lands, walking around with a gun and abusing the locals made you masculine?

 

[mustang]

The topic is also not about Muslim mens masculinity.

You make another idiotic generalisation. In your world are all Muslim men the same? How mascular are you? Do you think invading other peoples lands, walking around with a gun and abusing the locals made you masculine?

So long as we are using labels, I believe your logical inference is idiotic. Where in my posts did you see me mention ALL muslim men? No need to get unnecessarily defensive or talk about some macro world politics if you cannot address the topic at hand. My question is very valid since it is directly aimed at the perpetrator of the said victim mentioned by OP. I have also attached a directly related video about the victim mentioned by the OP. How is all of that unrelated? If anything your rants about some global political/military stuff is unrelated since you are desperately trying to tie some attacking rant to the person asking you about uncomfortable realities in your own community.

Let's see if you can respond without any name calling or personally attacking the poster - lack of it shows lack of intelligence/reasoning on your part.

1. Did you see the full video I posted?

2. Why are these muslim men doubting their own abilities in holding onto their women once they do give those women their deserved freedom?

 

[KingKhanWC]

So long as we are using labels, I believe your logical inference is idiotic. Where in my posts did you see me mention ALL muslim men? No need to get unnecessarily defensive or talk about some macro world politics if you cannot address the topic at hand. My question is very valid since it is directly aimed at the perpetrator of the said victim mentioned by OP. I have also attached a directly related video about the victim mentioned by the OP. How is all of that unrelated? If anything your rants about some global political/military stuff is unrelated since you are desperately trying to tie some attacking rant to the person asking you about uncomfortable realities in your own community.

Let's see if you can respond without any name calling or personally attacking the poster - lack of it shows lack of intelligence/reasoning on your part.

1. Did you see the full video I posted?

2. Why are these muslim men doubting their own abilities in holding onto their women once they do give those women their deserved freedom?

You wrote

"The muslim men in question may be biologically virile (as the 3 Billion other men) but based on their insecurities leading to caging their own women - I find them lacking in masculinity and self confidence. Why are these muslim men doubting their own abilities in holding onto their women if they do give those women the deserved freedom? "

You didn't write all as you didn't need to and you never wrote some/few etc. No need to bracktrack now.

I would accept my lack of intelligence if I thought I was hero while oppressing people and while my team were out there torturing, raping and killing. How can you question anyone elses intelligence if you thought there were WMDs in Iraq? lol

No I haven't watched the video.

Muslim men are no different to any other men, unless you can prove otherwise.

 

[mustang]

You wrote

"The muslim men in question may be biologically virile (as the 3 Billion other men) but based on their insecurities leading to caging their own women - I find them lacking in masculinity and self confidence. Why are these muslim men doubting their own abilities in holding onto their women if they do give those women the deserved freedom? "

You didn't write all as you didn't need to and you never wrote some/few etc. No need to bracktrack now.

I would accept my lack of intelligence if I thought I was hero while oppressing people and while my team were out there torturing, raping and killing. How can you question anyone elses intelligence if you thought there were WMDs in Iraq? lol

No I haven't watched the video.

Muslim men are no different to any other men, unless you can prove otherwise.

Well first watch the video before you start spouting opinions.

Second I said muslim men in question - which refers to the muslim men who are the actual perps and not ALL muslim men. I highlighted that in red in my quoted statement here as well for your convenience - you are welcome!

Stick to the discussion topic if your intelligence allows you to do so.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Well first watch the video before you start spouting opinions.

Second I said muslim men in question - which refers to the muslim men who are the actual perps and not ALL muslim men. I highlighted that in red in my quoted statement here as well for your convenience - you are welcome!

Stick to the discussion topic if your intelligence allows you to do so.

Why not men in question? Why is their religion significant? Youve shown nothing to justify using their religious background in this discussion.

 

[mustang]

Why not men in question? Why is their religion significant? Youve shown nothing to justify using their religious background in this discussion.

Well before you point your fingers at me, why don't you first acknowledge your mistake that you wrongly assumed that I was pointing at ALL muslim men (which I have clearly shown that I did not). Interesting that the likes of you gloss over your mistakes and only try to anchor discussions on others to avoid spotlight on your side.

Their religion is significant and we say muslim men in question because the systematic control of women is achieved through laws woven through their socio-religious fabric. The unholy trinity here - legal+social+religious combination of rules and systems to subjugate women is present only in Islamic communities and hence muslim men.

That being said - can you actually see the entire video before only questioning the other person? That way your opinions here could come off as more informed.

Once you have seen the entire video - Can you share why the muslim men in question are so insecure about their own masculinity? Are they not confident that their women will stay with them once they give the said women full liberty?

 

[KingKhanWC]

Well before you point your fingers at me, why don't you first acknowledge your mistake that you wrongly assumed that I was pointing at ALL muslim men (which I have clearly shown that I did not). Interesting that the likes of you gloss over your mistakes and only try to anchor discussions on others to avoid spotlight on your side.

Their religion is significant and we say muslim men in question because the systematic control of women is achieved through laws woven through their socio-religious fabric. The unholy trinity here - legal+social+religious combination of rules and systems to subjugate women is present only in Islamic communities and hence muslim men.

That being said - can you actually see the entire video before only questioning the other person? That way your opinions here could come off as more informed.

Once you have seen the entire video - Can you share why the muslim men in question are so insecure about their own masculinity? Are they not confident that their women will stay with them once they give the said women full liberty?

No mistake. One slight change of tone doesn't take away your other generalistions.

Earlier you wrote "But I notice that muslim communities (among major religions of the world) do this to a perverse+pervasive scale. There seem to be legal+religious+social systems in place that control women's freedom of expression. No other major group in the world does it to this extent."

So yes you have generalised. I advise you to keep in mind you are not debating with some poor village farmer in Iraq.

You are now struggling to justify the use of religious identity. You need to show how Muslim men are different to other other men and such issues are not visible in Hindu, Jewish, Christian and Secular communties.

I have a list of things to watch and until you start proving why Muslim men or some Muslim men or Muslim communties are different to others, I wont be wasting my time watching something you have recommonened.

 

[mustang]

No mistake. One slight change of tone doesn't take away your other generalistions.

Earlier you wrote "But I notice that muslim communities (among major religions of the world) do this to a perverse+pervasive scale. There seem to be legal+religious+social systems in place that control women's freedom of expression. No other major group in the world does it to this extent."

So yes you have generalised. I advise you to keep in mind you are not debating with some poor village farmer in Iraq.

You are now struggling to justify the use of religious identity. You need to show how Muslim men are different to other other men and such issues are not visible in Hindu, Jewish, Christian and Secular communties.

I have a list of things to watch and until you start proving why Muslim men or some Muslim men or Muslim communties are different to others, I wont be wasting my time watching something you have recommonened.

I ain't struggling for nothin' because I know what I meant and there are no generalizations unless you want to take things out of context to distract from the main topic. Unlike yourself, I make zero assumptions about you, your family, your education or your background, or your intentions. I'm only here to debate FACTS. Unless you have actual responses instead of only personal attacks to digress from the topic at hand, I have nothing more to say to you.

Did you watch the entire video?

Can you share why the muslim men in question are so insecure about their own masculinity?

 

[KingKhanWC]

I ain't struggling for nothin' because I know what I meant and there are no generalizations unless you want to take things out of context to distract from the main topic. Unlike yourself, I make zero assumptions about you, your family, your education or your background, or your intentions. I'm only here to debate FACTS. Unless you have actual responses instead of only personal attacks to digress from the topic at hand, I have nothing more to say to you.


Did you watch the entire video?

Can you share why the muslim men in question are so insecure about their own masculinity?

You generalised Muslim communities and then stated there is no other major group etc..

Yet you have no ability to show how they are different to other communites. Come on give it a go? If you can show me then I will watch the video.

 

[mustang]

You generalised Muslim communities and then stated there is no other major group etc..

Yet you have no ability to show how they are different to other communites. Come on give it a go? If you can show me then I will watch the video.

I did multiple times but you have refused to read or are pretending not to have noticed it. Muslim communities are the only ones which have all 3 systems - legal+religious+social systems - in place to subjugate women.

Now go watch the video to ask informed questions instead of stubbornly trying to be in denial by not watching it and only questioning the poster. Until then, I am politely refusing to engage with you so long as you choose to be deliberately uninformed. Seems like all you want to do is keep posting more trivial questions just to have the last word.

Question to others who can hopefully watch the content and engage in an informed manner, my open question for the Nth time -- Why are the muslim men in question are so insecure about their own masculinity?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Not denying anything about my heritage at all but just explaining that such personal attacks upon me is not accurate. I identify with my non-Indian side simply because I grew up and was raised more by my non-Indian family. I set out to learn more about my Indian side only since adulthood.

If you were truly not intending your statements to be a personal attack - why make a point about Indians when the topic and OP is nothing about Indians? Unless of course you thought I identify myself as Indian? I care less about personal insults in general but do care when people only use that to respond instead of talking about the topic at hand. Case in point this interaction - do you see me anywhere talking about YOUR background/family uninitiated? But somehow each response of yours has a part touching on my background instead of the topic at hand.

To your actual response in bold - I think I should clarify and perhaps it was confusing since I did use virility myself. I actually meant masculinity and being confident as a man. Virility and breeding like rats means nothing - cage/chain up a woman and have intercourse than any man can be virile. Masculinity means everything and by that I mean being confident enough to give women the freedom as equals and not be insecure that they would leave the said men. I hope you understand the difference between the 2.

The muslim men in question may be biologically virile (as the 3 Billion other men) but based on their insecurities leading to caging their own women - I find them lacking in masculinity and self confidence. Why are these muslim men doubting their own abilities in holding onto their women if they do give those women the deserved freedom?

Just confirming - did you see the full video I posted?

If you are going to troll by questioning Muslim masculinity or virility, then you should be prepared to be answered accordingly. Afterwards claiming that you were referring to 'some' Muslim men only isn't going to pull the wool over anyone's eyes. What is your point then?

No I haven't watched your video, we don't all have time to sit through every video some members post to bolster their own prejudices. Note I said 'some' this wasn't a personal attack on you or Indians so don't take it personally.

 

[mustang]

If you are going to troll by questioning Muslim masculinity or virility, then you should be prepared to be answered accordingly. Afterwards claiming that you were referring to 'some' Muslim men only isn't going to pull the wool over anyone's eyes. What is your point then?

No I haven't watched your video, we don't all have time to sit through every video some members post to bolster their own prejudices. Note I said 'some' this wasn't a personal attack on you or Indians so don't take it personally.

Not trolling but very much a valid question since systematic control of women does stem from innate insecurities. Also not generalizing all muslim men about this, just as you would hopefully not generalize all Indian Americans are bad, all South Indians are weird, all Indian immigrants are butlers for white men - hang on a sec ... you actually did. I don't actually care about personal insults so long as we also stick to the topic. I identify more with my latino roots and I have seen quite a few insults against my community, so no big deal.

I do believe the question and video are directly related and applicable to the topic. Women in general are more subjugated in traditional muslim communities relative to other religious communities. It is a valid open question as to what leads men from these sections of society to do so. It is not just some scripture based segregation of women. Matter of fact, it is not segregation but subjugation. Why are these muslim men not secure or confident enough to give full freedom to their women?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Not trolling but very much a valid question since systematic control of women does stem from innate insecurities. Also not generalizing all muslim men about this, just as you would hopefully not generalize all Indian Americans are bad, all South Indians are weird, all Indian immigrants are butlers for white men - hang on a sec ... you actually did. I don't actually care about personal insults so long as we also stick to the topic. I identify more with my latino roots and I have seen quite a few insults against my community, so no big deal.

I do believe the question and video are directly related and applicable to the topic. Women in general are more subjugated in traditional muslim communities relative to other religious communities. It is a valid open question as to what leads men from these sections of society to do so. It is not just some scripture based segregation of women. Matter of fact, it is not segregation but subjugation. Why are these muslim men not secure or confident enough to give full freedom to their women?

Well that's slightly better, at least you have seen enough sense to stop trying to tie masculinity or virility and lack of these qualities in 'some' Muslim men. Now you have moved onto lack of confidence and insecurity. You seem convinced it is some innate psychological or physical defect, I don't really agree and have already given the reasons I believe are valid. Not happy with that, fair enough you are entitled to whatever opinion you have.

Women in general are more subjugated in traditional muslim communities relative to other religious communities

Are you comparing traditional Muslim communities with modern 'other' religious communities?

 

[KingKhanWC]

I did multiple times but you have refused to read or are pretending not to have noticed it. Muslim communities are the only ones which have all 3 systems - legal+religious+social systems - in place to subjugate women.

Now go watch the video to ask informed questions instead of stubbornly trying to be in denial by not watching it and only questioning the poster. Until then, I am politely refusing to engage with you so long as you choose to be deliberately uninformed. Seems like all you want to do is keep posting more trivial questions just to have the last word.

Question to others who can hopefully watch the content and engage in an informed manner, my open question for the Nth time -- Why are the muslim men in question are so insecure about their own masculinity?

You are wrong ,such systems which discriminate/subjugate women are in place in 'communities' all over the world.

After ranting about Muslim men, you haven't showed why they are unique in controlling women. Either write something sensible or move on, anyone can post videos and request others to watch them.

 

[troodon]

You are wrong ,such systems which discriminate/subjugate women are in place in 'communities' all over the world.

After ranting about Muslim men, you haven't showed why they are unique in controlling women. Either write something sensible or move on, anyone can post videos and request others to watch them.

Every society is patriarchal. But in Islam, a woman has to be accompanied by either father/brother/husband when she goes out. Men and woman are completely segregated. Its like a woman has no existence without a man holding and guiding her in every step of her life.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Every society is patriarchal. But in Islam, a woman has to be accompanied by either father/brother/husband when she goes out. Men and woman are completely segregated. Its like a woman has no existence without a man holding and guiding her in every step of her life.

lol. No she doesnt. Do you get your education from the BJP school of learning? Men and Women mix in most Muslim communities.

Please dont waste my time with your ignorance.

 

[troodon]

lol. No she doesnt. Do you get your education from the BJP school of learning? Men and Women mix in most Muslim communities.

Please dont waste my time with your ignorance.

So Saudis also get their Islam from BJP?
You typically run away from anything I post.

 

[KingKhanWC]

So Saudis also get their Islam from BJP?
You typically run away from anything I post.

Saudi Arabia has a population of 32 million. In India there are nearly 200 million muslims. Knowing the behaviour of Indian men, I would assume you have noticed Muslim women walking the streets shopping without a man to hold their hands? Or are you blind?

 

[troodon]

[MENTION=43583]KingKhanWC[/MENTION]

Traveling without a mahram

It is not permissible for a woman to travel without a mahram, whether she is travelling to do an act of worship such as Hajj or visiting her parents in order to honour them and be kind to them, or travelling for permissible purposes such as going on vacation etc. The evidence for that is as follows: The general meaning of the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “No woman should travel unless she has a mahram with her, and no man should enter upon her unless her mahram is present.” A man stood up and said: “O Messenger of Allaah, my wife has gone out for Hajj, and I want to go out with such and such an army.” He said: “Go and do Hajj with your wife.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1862.

Muslim (1339) narrated from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “It is not permissible for a woman who believes in Allaah and the Last Day to travel one day’s distance without a mahram.” There are many ahaadeeth which forbid a woman to travel without a mahram; they are general in meaning and apply to all kinds of travel.

It is well known that travel involves exhaustion and difficulty. Because of her weakness, a woman needs someone to help her and look after her. Things may happen to her that make her panic and act out of character if there is no mahram present. This is well known nowadays when there are so many car accidents and other kinds of transportation accidents. Moreover, travelling alone exposes her to temptation, especially since there is so much corruption. Men who do not fear Allaah may sit neat her, and haraam actions may become attractive to her. Similarly if she is travelling alone in her car, she is exposed to other kinds of danger, if the car breaks down or if evil people conspire against her, and so on. It is perfectly wise that she should be accompanied by a mahram when travelling, because the purpose behind the mahram’s presence is to protect her and look after her, especially if something bad happens. Travel exposes her to such things regardless of how long it takes.

Al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: The point is that whatever is known as travelling, women are forbidden to travel without a husband or a mahram.

http://www.usislam.org/islam/Concept_Of_Mahram_And_NaMahram_In_Islam.htm


Please do not runaway like you normally do. Kindly comeback with an answer. Don't claim that the website I quoted above is run by BJP

 

[troodon]

Saudi Arabia has a population of 32 million. In India there are nearly 200 million muslims. Knowing the behaviour of Indian men, I would assume you have noticed Muslim women walking the streets shopping without a man to hold their hands? Or are you blind?

Just because someone is violating Islamic rules does not make it a norm. You do not know your own religion, but claim like you know everything. Indian women are in a liberal society. They do not follow the strict rules of Islam like Arab countries do. Some do follow, but majority do not follow what is taught by Prohpet Muhammed.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Just because someone is violating Islamic rules does not make it a norm. You do not know your own religion, but claim like you know everything. Indian women are in a liberal society. They do not follow the strict rules of Islam like Arab countries do. Some do follow, but majority do not follow what is taught by Prohpet Muhammed.

lolThis is for when they go on Hajj not in general. Even a schoolboy knows this.

Indian women are Muslims and no non-Muslim Hindu or athiest can speak for them. They follow their faith and please stay away from them. Thanks.

 

[troodon]

lolThis is for when they go on Hajj not in general. Even a schoolboy knows this.

Indian women are Muslims and no non-Muslim Hindu or athiest can speak for them. They follow their faith and please stay away from them. Thanks.

All I can do is put 100 for this post.

Read again the post from Sahih Bukhari.

Muslim women are not permitted to travel without a Mahram. Be it for Hajj or visiting parents/in-laws, vacation etc. What you don;t understand in this?

Just because Muslim women in India or Indonesia are not following this does not mean that it is permissible as per your Prophet Muhammed. Again women are not allowed to travel for Hajj or any other purpose without a Mahram. Your lies are exposed.

You as usual is refuse to read and come up with silly responses.

 

[KingKhanWC]

All I can do is put 100 for this post.

Read again the post from Sahih Bukhari.

Muslim women are not permitted to travel without a Mahram. Be it for Hajj or visiting parents/in-laws, vacation etc. What you don;t understand in this?

Just because Muslim women in India or Indonesia are not following this does not mean that it is permissible as per your Prophet Muhammed. Again women are not allowed to travel for Hajj or any other purpose without a Mahram. Your lies are exposed.

You as usual is refuse to read and come up with silly responses.

Why as a Hindu/Athiest you think you know better ? lol

This was originally set as a distance, the distance now is not required as you can travel anywhere in the world less than 3 days+. So women are only required for Hajj and besides this ruling is for their safety not for control. I mean I woudn't want a female in my family to be travelling around India alone, such is the sexual assault and rape epidemic.

 

[mustang]

Well that's slightly better, at least you have seen enough sense to stop trying to tie masculinity or virility and lack of these qualities in 'some' Muslim men. Now you have moved onto lack of confidence and insecurity. You seem convinced it is some innate psychological or physical defect, I don't really agree and have already given the reasons I believe are valid. Not happy with that, fair enough you are entitled to whatever opinion you have.



Are you comparing traditional Muslim communities with modern 'other' religious communities?

I have always said some muslim men (I gotta be a super troll who is ready to be banned in a Pakistani forum in order to make statements about ALL muslims - which I'm not). Go track my verbiage, I have been consistent with my terms in masculinity, insecurity, and confidence. I did mean mental virility as men but realized you can infer it as biological virility, so I also corrected myself openly.

Your response is lacking and my open question stands for others- muslim men who feel that the only way they can hold onto their women is my subjugating them for others, what makes them feel less of a man about themselves, thus compelling to treat their own women this way? Clearly it is beyond just following some ancient text advocating segregation of genders because what we see here is NOT gender segregation but gender subjugation, thanks to which your response and logic is inadequate.

 

[mustang]

You are wrong ,such systems which discriminate/subjugate women are in place in 'communities' all over the world.

After ranting about Muslim men, you haven't showed why they are unique in controlling women. Either write something sensible or move on, anyone can post videos and request others to watch them.

I did but you seem to refuse to read and want to bury your head in sand, and be in denial. No other community has legal+social+religious systems in place to subjugate women as these sub-groups of islamic communities. Show me another religious group that has all 3 systems to hold women down - religious+social+legal?

I bet you have still not watched that full video and only spouting angry rants in response.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Just because someone is violating Islamic rules does not make it a norm. You do not know your own religion, but claim like you know everything. Indian women are in a liberal society. They do not follow the strict rules of Islam like Arab countries do. Some do follow, but majority do not follow what is taught by Prohpet Muhammed.

That is because there are many different schools of thought in the religion, you can't just pull up some hadiths and expect that they are applied universally everywhere. It would be like me quoting Hindu texts like Manu Smirti and saying look it says here a woman is lower than a dog, or a a Shudra should have hot oil poured in his ear if he speaks to a high born. Hadith are from 1400 years ago, you would have a hard time applying them literally in this day and age, even all Arab countries don't do so.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I have always said some muslim men (I gotta be a super troll who is ready to be banned in a Pakistani forum in order to make statements about ALL muslims - which I'm not). Go track my verbiage, I have been consistent with my terms in masculinity, insecurity, and confidence. I did mean mental virility as men but realized you can infer it as biological virility, so I also corrected myself openly.

Your response is lacking and my open question stands for others- muslim men who feel that the only way they can hold onto their women is my subjugating them for others, what makes them feel less of a man about themselves, thus compelling to treat their own women this way? Clearly it is beyond just following some ancient text advocating segregation of genders because what we see here is NOT gender segregation but gender subjugation, thanks to which your response and logic is inadequate.

If you don't accept my theory why don't you tell us your own? You have formed this opinion that (some) Muslim men lack masculinity/virility/confidence and subjugate women as a result, why do you think that is? Why would they lack confidence? What is lacking in their masculinity? Why do they need to hold onto "their women"?

As you have given this so much thought, and have watched specially selected videos, you must have some theories, would love to hear them, especially as I have no desire to watch your video. Please share and let us see if we can come up with some answers.

 

[KingKhanWC]

I did but you seem to refuse to read and want to bury your head in sand, and be in denial. No other community has legal+social+religious systems in place to subjugate women as these sub-groups of islamic communities. Show me another religious group that has all 3 systems to hold women down - religious+social+legal?

I bet you have still not watched that full video and only spouting angry rants in response.

You lack knowledge then. Are you upset you were involved in occupation and are now trying to justify your evil doings by making yourself feel better feeling Muslims are bad people?

Israel the Jewish state for one. Please go educate yourself.

 

[mustang]

If you don't accept my theory why don't you tell us your own? You have formed this opinion that (some) Muslim men lack masculinity/virility/confidence and subjugate women as a result, why do you think that is? Why would they lack confidence? What is lacking in their masculinity? Why do they need to hold onto "their women"?

As you have given this so much thought, and have watched specially selected videos, you must have some theories, would love to hear them, especially as I have no desire to watch your video. Please share and let us see if we can come up with some answers.

I honestly do not know and I was hoping someone here would have some logic on that instead of only blindly attacking the poster or poking holes in the question being posed. Clearly there has been a bad behavioral element instilled into the minds of these muslim men over generations to feel this is the norm. Maybe they do not realize that this actually makes them appear less of a man. Maybe they do, and there is some other reason compelling to continue caging their own women in spite of that.

The video I mentioned is not specially selected but from a neutral source about the lady in question mentioned by the OP. It is not some specially selected western concoction against you just because you cannot stomach the truth - in all fairness. Again ... you are only trying to poke holes at the question instead of any reasonable informed response.

To any other forum participants (from Islamic background) reading this - Is this how you want the opinions of muslim men held? The likes of "Cpt. Rishwat" or "KingKhanWC" whose only responses are poking holes at the question, digressing, name calling? This is a genuine question about subjugation of women by men in your communities through an extensive legal+social+religious framework over many generations. I firmly contend any man who subjugates women lacks masculinity, is insecure, mentally not virile, lacks confidence ... and whatever else. As educated people I believe we can all agree on that. Do y'all not want to address that? If "Cpt. Rishwat" or "KingKhanWC" is the only type of voice from males in your community here to address such an issue then any path to solution is flawed and we should hope that should not be the case.

As a frame of reference - if there is a separate thread about day t day objectifying women among the latino community (serious issue for us), I will happily acknowledge, answer and participate without getting unnecessarily defensive at y'all. I'm hoping to see other voices from muslim men besides just the 2 gentlemen who are only posing to be neutral.

 

[troodon]

That is because there are many different schools of thought in the religion, you can't just pull up some hadiths and expect that they are applied universally everywhere. It would be like me quoting Hindu texts like Manu Smirti and saying look it says here a woman is lower than a dog, or a a Shudra should have hot oil poured in his ear if he speaks to a high born. Hadith are from 1400 years ago, you would have a hard time applying them literally in this day and age, even all Arab countries don't do so.

Here you go. What part of what I posted from Sahib. Ukhari is ambiguous?

Islam claims to be the perfect religion, but it cannot come into consensus on anything.

What ever you say about Islam, apologists say, it is only according to this interpretation, this sect bla bla bla..

Something like whether a woman can go out without a Mehram needs a straight yes or no answer. Why hide behind interpretations? If you are a Sunni Muslim, you have to accept what Bukhara says. So answer is Yes. A Muslim woman cannot go out without a Mehram. Anyone not following this rule is clearly not following the teachings of Prophet.

 

[Badsha]

Here you go. What part of what I posted from Sahib. Ukhari is ambiguous?

Islam claims to be the perfect religion, but it cannot come into consensus on anything.

What ever you say about Islam, apologists say, it is only according to this interpretation, this sect bla bla bla..

Something like whether a woman can go out without a Mehram needs a straight yes or no answer. Why hide behind interpretations? If you are a Sunni Muslim, you have to accept what Bukhara says. So answer is Yes. A Muslim woman cannot go out without a Mehram. Anyone not following this rule is clearly not following the teachings of Prophet.

You lack knowledge. Not everyone believes in accounts compiled 100s of years after the death of the prophet PBUH.

Islam is the perfect religion. Who says consensus is perfection? Do you not think humans should follow what they believe is right?

Or do you want the whole world to follow just one belief system?

The irony of calling no consensus imperfect when you're arguing against the limitations of a religion

 

[troodon]

You lack knowledge. Not everyone believes in accounts compiled 100s of years after the death of the prophet PBUH.

Islam is the perfect religion. Who says consensus is perfection? Do you not think humans should follow what they believe is right?

Or do you want the whole world to follow just one belief system?

The irony of calling no consensus imperfect when you're arguing against the limitations of a religion

Sahih Bukhari has all sahih hadiths. They are accepted by all sunni muslims. No Muslim Sunni woman can go out without a Mehram. What is so hard to understand in this?

Are you a Quran only Muslim? You do not believe in Hadiths?

 

[Badsha]

Here you go. What part of what I posted from Sahib. Ukhari is ambiguous?

Islam claims to be the perfect religion, but it cannot come into consensus on anything.

What ever you say about Islam, apologists say, it is only according to this interpretation, this sect bla bla bla..

Something like whether a woman can go out without a Mehram needs a straight yes or no answer. Why hide behind interpretations? If you are a Sunni Muslim, you have to accept what Bukhara says. So answer is Yes. A Muslim woman cannot go out without a Mehram. Anyone not following this rule is clearly not following the teachings of Prophet.

You lack knowledge. Not everyone believes in accounts compiled 100s of years after the death of the prophet PBUH.

Islam is the perfect religion. Who says consensus is perfection? Do you not think humans should follow what they believe is right?

Or do you want the whole world to follow just one belief system?

The irony of calling no consensus imperfect when you're arguing against the limitations of a religion

 

[Badsha]

Sahih Bukhari has all sahih hadiths. They are accepted by all sunni muslims. No Muslim Sunni woman can go out without a Mehram. What is so hard to understand in this?

Are you a Quran only Muslim? You do not believe in Hadiths?

They are not all accepted by every Muslim. Just like not all Christian's are the same.

Yes I reject a fair amount of bukhari hadith. Most imo are fabrications

 

[troodon]

They are not all accepted by every Muslim. Just like not all Christian's are the same.

Yes I reject a fair amount of bukhari hadith. Most imo are fabrications

You reject the Hadith you don’t like? They are Sahih for a reason.

Do you pray 5 times a day? It comes from Hadith.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I honestly do not know and I was hoping someone here would have some logic on that instead of only blindly attacking the poster or poking holes in the question being posed. Clearly there has been a bad behavioral element instilled into the minds of these muslim men over generations to feel this is the norm. Maybe they do not realize that this actually makes them appear less of a man. Maybe they do, and there is some other reason compelling to continue caging their own women in spite of that.

The video I mentioned is not specially selected but from a neutral source about the lady in question mentioned by the OP. It is not some specially selected western concoction against you just because you cannot stomach the truth - in all fairness. Again ... you are only trying to poke holes at the question instead of any reasonable informed response.

To any other forum participants (from Islamic background) reading this - Is this how you want the opinions of muslim men held? The likes of "Cpt. Rishwat" or "KingKhanWC" whose only responses are poking holes at the question, digressing, name calling? This is a genuine question about subjugation of women by men in your communities through an extensive legal+social+religious framework over many generations. I firmly contend any man who subjugates women lacks masculinity, is insecure, mentally not virile, lacks confidence ... and whatever else. As educated people I believe we can all agree on that. Do y'all not want to address that? If "Cpt. Rishwat" or "KingKhanWC" is the only type of voice from males in your community here to address such an issue then any path to solution is flawed and we should hope that should not be the case.

As a frame of reference - if there is a separate thread about day t day objectifying women among the latino community (serious issue for us), I will happily acknowledge, answer and participate without getting unnecessarily defensive at y'all. I'm hoping to see other voices from muslim men besides just the 2 gentlemen who are only posing to be neutral.

Interesting that when I asked you to provide your own theories as to why Muslim men lack masculinity, confidence, insecurity and virility (mental whatever that means) you provided nothing except a verbal attack on me and KKWC. You didn't like my answer so when I asked you to provide an alternative view you ended up slating me for giving you the opportunity to do so!

But of course what is even more funny is that after insisting that only a little teeny bit of you is Indian, you then offered up your supposed Latin side as an example of similar lack of masculinity and insecurity.

"No, No!!! Don't talk about Indians, I'm not one really I'm not! Talk about white insecurities about blacks, talk about Muslims caging women, talk about Latinos objectifying women, but I'm not Indian so don't do any whataboutism about Indians!!"

Yeah Ok.

 

[mustang]

Interesting that when I asked you to provide your own theories as to why Muslim men lack masculinity, confidence, insecurity and virility (mental whatever that means) you provided nothing except a verbal attack on me and KKWC. You didn't like my answer so when I asked you to provide an alternative view you ended up slating me for giving you the opportunity to do so!

But of course what is even more funny is that after insisting that only a little teeny bit of you is Indian, you then offered up your supposed Latin side as an example of similar lack of masculinity and insecurity.

"No, No!!! Don't talk about Indians, I'm not one really I'm not! Talk about white insecurities about blacks, talk about Muslims caging women, talk about Latinos objectifying women, but I'm not Indian so don't do any whataboutism about Indians!!"

Yeah Ok.

Huh? I'm hoping you are not thick and I'm not name calling - just that you are missing obvious points here.

Dude - I honestly do not know why the said muslim men behave this way and it is an open question. I really do not have some answer handy and did not pose this question just to ruffle your delicate feathers as unbelievable as it may seem to you. I am looking for an honest and objective answer without resorting to the usual defensive postures of - "how can I poke holes in your question", "how dare you comment about my community" type. You attempted an answer and I'm glad but I have clearly showed you in what ways your answer lacks in terms of logical reasoning and why the question still looms.


I never said lack of masculinity and insecurity for my latin side, I said I am open to discussing real issues facing my community without getting defensive or insecure about it. If the core issues there do stem from us men in the community being insecure/deficient/not-masculine, then so be it, that is the reality. It is true for my latin side or my Indian side. Lastly - please do not take personal jibes at my ethnic background. Do you see me commenting about your family or your mom/dad/sibling/family/ethnicity/race? Why are all your counter-points only coming in towards the person as against the topic at hand? So obviously there is some reality in my statement that is ruffling up posters like yourself and the other dude. Don't take it personally (even if you have probably seen the aforementioned unfortunate issues in your own family) and just answer the topic.



Lastly I mentioned do not do whataboutism about ANYONE. I said if you create a separate thread about issues affecting any other community (including my own) I will contribute without getting defensive about it.

Latino-Indians: As much as it is hard for you to believe there is a community of latino-indians here in the US (South east and South west). The Indian side has usually been from Caribbean, Fijian-Indian, and early South African migrants to the US. Given their inter-generational background from outside of India, all of these families have been open with marrying outside the Indian side since 1-2 generations ago, leading to our diverse and mixed families. As with any mixed group, you stop being too defensive about things, at the end of the day we are proud Americans with a high percentage of military veterans in our community.

Each post of yours only seems to probe or attack me and not address THIS THREAD's topic - the insecurities of these muslim men.

As I said before - I will happily contribute to threads focusing on flaws in Indian, Latino, American communities - whatever strokes your ego. But this thread is about muslim women's issue as a direct result of muslim men's actions. I do not know the reasons, and I am openly asking those who know. If what you typed before is the only reason you can come up with then you are inadequate. Kindly stop continuing to attack the person as your only known way of responding and let someone else with a better reasoning respond.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Huh? I'm hoping you are not thick and I'm not name calling - just that you are missing obvious points here.

Dude - I honestly do not know why the said muslim men behave this way and it is an open question. I really do not have some answer handy and did not pose this question just to ruffle your delicate feathers as unbelievable as it may seem to you. I am looking for an honest and objective answer without resorting to the usual defensive postures of - "how can I poke holes in your question", "how dare you comment about my community" type. You attempted an answer and I'm glad but I have clearly showed you in what ways your answer lacks in terms of logical reasoning and why the question still looms.


I never said lack of masculinity and insecurity for my latin side, I said I am open to discussing real issues facing my community without getting defensive or insecure about it. If the core issues there do stem from us men in the community being insecure/deficient/not-masculine, then so be it, that is the reality. It is true for my latin side or my Indian side. Lastly - please do not take personal jibes at my ethnic background. Do you see me commenting about your family or your mom/dad/sibling/family/ethnicity/race? Why are all your counter-points only coming in towards the person as against the topic at hand? So obviously there is some reality in my statement that is ruffling up posters like yourself and the other dude. Don't take it personally (even if you have probably seen the aforementioned unfortunate issues in your own family) and just answer the topic.



Lastly I mentioned do not do whataboutism about ANYONE. I said if you create a separate thread about issues affecting any other community (including my own) I will contribute without getting defensive about it.

Latino-Indians: As much as it is hard for you to believe there is a community of latino-indians here in the US (South east and South west). The Indian side has usually been from Caribbean, Fijian-Indian, and early South African migrants to the US. Given their inter-generational background from outside of India, all of these families have been open with marrying outside the Indian side since 1-2 generations ago, leading to our diverse and mixed families. As with any mixed group, you stop being too defensive about things, at the end of the day we are proud Americans with a high percentage of military veterans in our community.

Each post of yours only seems to probe or attack me and not address THIS THREAD's topic - the insecurities of these muslim men.

As I said before - I will happily contribute to threads focusing on flaws in Indian, Latino, American communities - whatever strokes your ego. But this thread is about muslim women's issue as a direct result of muslim men's actions. I do not know the reasons, and I am openly asking those who know. If what you typed before is the only reason you can come up with then you are inadequate. Kindly stop continuing to attack the person as your only known way of responding and let someone else with a better reasoning respond.

Just a question, do you think posting a wall of text in multiple colour fonts makes your points somehow more persuasive? Seriously I am getting a headache just trying to process it.

 

[Wiji]

Interesting debate going on in here. I agree with the general gist of the points that [MENTION=144392]mustang[/MENTION] has been making, but framing it in the form of 'virility' or 'masculinity' is not accurate in my view. It is a matter of overall levels of confidence (and trust) within a society.

Earlier [MENTION=43583]KingKhanWC[/MENTION] made a point about the installed regimes and puppets. This is an important factor in the discussion because it affects the levels of confidence in the society. The legal, social, and religious interpretations would obviously be shaped by the general mood within a society at any given point in time, with a bit of a lag of course because the legal, social, and religious interpretations do take time to change. So there has to be a period of persistent 'high confidence' within a society for legal, social, and religious changes to take place.

Societies will oppress the weaker segments for a whole myriad of reasons, e.g., economics. In this case, it seems to be an issue of confidence in my view (not 'virility' or 'masculinity' or some other vague/subjective notions of what it means to be a manly man or feminine woman). Just to clarify for [MENTION=144392]mustang[/MENTION], it is not only women in these societies that are oppressed. Many minority ethnic groups, minority religious groups, LGBT groups, men, children (boys and girls), intellectuals and free-thinkers, artists, activists, etc., are also oppressed by the same people who would oppress women. I would also contend that those people who do not oppress women would perhaps not be oppressing any of the other weaker groups within a society (by 'weaker' I mean in terms of numbers, economic power, etc.). So it is not a matter of 'virility' or 'masculinity'--it is an issue to do with overall confidence levels in my view.

Now if [MENTION=144392]mustang[/MENTION] truly wants to understand why there are low levels of confidence in these societies, perhaps this short 3-minute discussion between two important scholars of Islamic societies. Their subject of discussion is 'religious freedom', but they refer to 'religious freedom' as being 'one of the victims' of having low confidence levels (the other victims being oppression of women, etc.):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4YhClLRCXk

I hope this post was informative.

 

[mustang]

Interesting debate going on in here. I agree with the general gist of the points that [MENTION=144392]mustang[/MENTION] has been making, but framing it in the form of 'virility' or 'masculinity' is not accurate in my view. It is a matter of overall levels of confidence (and trust) within a society.

Earlier [MENTION=43583]KingKhanWC[/MENTION] made a point about the installed regimes and puppets. This is an important factor in the discussion because it affects the levels of confidence in the society. The legal, social, and religious interpretations would obviously be shaped by the general mood within a society at any given point in time, with a bit of a lag of course because the legal, social, and religious interpretations do take time to change. So there has to be a period of persistent 'high confidence' within a society for legal, social, and religious changes to take place.

Societies will oppress the weaker segments for a whole myriad of reasons, e.g., economics. In this case, it seems to be an issue of confidence in my view (not 'virility' or 'masculinity' or some other vague/subjective notions of what it means to be a manly man or feminine woman). Just to clarify for [MENTION=144392]mustang[/MENTION], it is not only women in these societies that are oppressed. Many minority ethnic groups, minority religious groups, LGBT groups, men, children (boys and girls), intellectuals and free-thinkers, artists, activists, etc., are also oppressed by the same people who would oppress women. I would also contend that those people who do not oppress women would perhaps not be oppressing any of the other weaker groups within a society (by 'weaker' I mean in terms of numbers, economic power, etc.). So it is not a matter of 'virility' or 'masculinity'--it is an issue to do with overall confidence levels in my view.

Now if [MENTION=144392]mustang[/MENTION] truly wants to understand why there are low levels of confidence in these societies, perhaps this short 3-minute discussion between two important scholars of Islamic societies. Their subject of discussion is 'religious freedom', but they refer to 'religious freedom' as being 'one of the victims' of having low confidence levels (the other victims being oppression of women, etc.):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4YhClLRCXk

I hope this post was informative.

Thank you [MENTION=362]Wiji[/MENTION] - this is an informative and helpful response. Interesting points about religious freedom (and all other freedoms) correlating with a strong state in that video you sent. I have noticed correlations between freedom for marginalized sections (women, minorities, LGBTQ ...) and economic prosperity before but strong state is a new one. Economic prosperity always makes sense since at the end of the day if we have more $ we are happy regardless of what some 1000-4000 year old book says.

So - for women's conditions in the Islamic world to improve, we need a strong independent state combined with economic prosperity, which does seem to have examples in the form of - Libya during Gaddafi and Turkey.

Question - We have many latin american countries with low economic prosperity and weak central governments. Their HDI for women seems higher than comparable countries in the Islamic world (though they are all below the median, let's not kid ourselves). How can we explain this difference?

As an fyi - I corrected myself from virility because it leads people into biological virility (an unnecessary distraction from the topic) and I'm stating it again to emphasize my not so stellar verbiage choice. I mentioned masculinity not to instigate but as any western raised person, I do firmly believe men who abuse women are never real men - hence the use of that term. But, I see that the combination of masculinity and virility (again ... mis-term by me) could have readers interpret things into a biological sense which is not a metric for anything (breeding like rats ain't a big accomplishment for anyone). I believe it has also left the room open for some unfortunate posters to only harp on that as a means of digressing from core issue.

 

[Wiji]

Thank you [MENTION=362]Wiji[/MENTION] - this is an informative and helpful response. Interesting points about religious freedom (and all other freedoms) correlating with a strong state in that video you sent. I have noticed correlations between freedom for marginalized sections (women, minorities, LGBTQ ...) and economic prosperity before but strong state is a new one. Economic prosperity always makes sense since at the end of the day if we have more $ we are happy regardless of what some 1000-4000 year old book says.

So - for women's conditions in the Islamic world to improve, we need a strong independent state combined with economic prosperity, which does seem to have examples in the form of - Libya during Gaddafi and Turkey.

Question - We have many latin american countries with low economic prosperity and weak central governments. Their HDI for women seems higher than comparable countries in the Islamic world (though they are all below the median, let's not kid ourselves). How can we explain this difference?

As an fyi - I corrected myself from virility because it leads people into biological virility (an unnecessary distraction from the topic) and I'm stating it again to emphasize my not so stellar verbiage choice. I mentioned masculinity not to instigate but as any western raised person, I do firmly believe men who abuse women are never real men - hence the use of that term. But, I see that the combination of masculinity and virility (again ... mis-term by me) could have readers interpret things into a biological sense which is not a metric for anything (breeding like rats ain't a big accomplishment for anyone). I believe it has also left the room open for some unfortunate posters to only harp on that as a means of digressing from core issue.

The HDI male and HDI female data is available for you to download:
http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/male-hdi
http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/hdi-female

The correlation between HDI male and HDI female is 0.978212. In other words, HDI male and HDI female are almost perfectly correlated. Most likely, whatever factors that are affecting HDI male are also affecting HDI female.

It is hard to conclude from the data that HDI female is significantly lower in Muslim-majority countries compared to comparable Latin American countries or any other countries for that matter. So I would caution against reaching that conclusion without serious analysis. In such emotional topics, it would be wise NOT to rely on hunches that could potentially suffer from serious cognitive biases, such as stereotypical biases. We all suffer from them.

Interesting to note that India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan are very similar in the HDI female scores. Also interesting to note that Iraq and Syria, two war-torn countries who were also affected by the kinds of men that you have in mind, rank better than India on the HDI female. I am only using India for the purpose of comparison--not trolling here. India is a large, democratic, 'secular' country that is a member of the G20.

I also note that there are many Muslim majority-countries (non-G20) that are doing better on those scores than Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico (Latin American countries who are members of G20), despite lacking many of the important ingredients.

HDI--although useful--has many limitations. For instance, I believe that violence against women is a universal phenomenon--the HDI does not directly measure this as far as I know. I do not think women in Muslim societies are at a greater danger of being victims of violence than women in other societies. I have not seen any evidence for such a link, whether anecdotally or in any published statistics.

So in short, this is a more complicated topic than it seems. The widely held perception of women being more oppressed than usual in Muslim-majority countries is probably not true, no matter how strong or widely held this perception is. That is not to say that there are no problems--of course, there are!

 

[Wiji]

[continuing my last post]
That is not to say that there are no problems--of course, there are! And the problems are quite serious. That's why I agreed with your message about low confidence. And it is the same lack of confidence that accounts for oppression of women in Western or "non-Muslim" societies.

As for the question of why are Muslim societies generally 'less confident', listen again to the discussion between those two scholars that I posted earlier. It's a lot more complicated than just having a 'strong state'. (Oh, and I probably would not classify Gaddafi-run Libya under this category, as you did.) There are many historical reasons as mentioned in that video, and these issues will persist for a while because they are now in the laws, cultures, and religious interpretations as you rightly observed. Due to the 'stickiness' of law, culture, and religion, it may take a while to alter them, even after achieving stronger states, sustainable and inclusive economic prosperity, political freedoms, improvements in HDI, and improvements in confidence.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

yeah, yet again resorting to personal attacks while ignoring my question. Notice that I have not personally said anything against you while each post of yours is peppered with personal attacks. We typically resort to low blows when our logic fails us.

There are umpteen muslim nations and communities where women are forced to live like cattle. Which evil white man's puppet regime are you going to blame for those?

As I said before ... Correlation <> causation. Saudi having a puppet regime (as you claim) is not the sole reason why Saudi and other muslim men being so insecure about their women. Why are muslim men in these places so insecure about their own masculinity?

Women have been historically viewed as a part of a man's honor in most countries. Western countries were the first ones who gave women the modern rights that they have today. The Muslim countries are behind, and so are pretty much most non western countries with women rights. However things are changing tho. Let me give you an example of my own family.

My great grand mother was illiterate.

My grandmother did the equivalent of high school, and then she got married in a arranged marriage where she did not even talk to my grandfather.

My mother, aunts, and the women of her generation in my family all went to college. Most of them had arranged marriages, but they did talk with their husbands before marriage, and they had a say in whether they get married or not. Most did not work though, they for the most part became stay at home wives.

My sister, female cousins (if you count first and second i have over 100) all went to college, most have done education beyond bachelors. These girls either find their own spouses, or if they are introduced to some by family they are free to talk as long as they want without any pressure of having to agree. almost all of these girls work, and if they don't its their own choice.

So things are changing in the Muslim world, and by the end of the century they will have the same rights that western women have today. However their is no way to rush this process. It will take time.

 

[mustang]

[continuing my last post]
That is not to say that there are no problems--of course, there are! And the problems are quite serious. That's why I agreed with your message about low confidence. And it is the same lack of confidence that accounts for oppression of women in Western or "non-Muslim" societies.

As for the question of why are Muslim societies generally 'less confident', listen again to the discussion between those two scholars that I posted earlier. It's a lot more complicated than just having a 'strong state'. (Oh, and I probably would not classify Gaddafi-run Libya under this category, as you did.) There are many historical reasons as mentioned in that video, and these issues will persist for a while because they are now in the laws, cultures, and religious interpretations as you rightly observed. Due to the 'stickiness' of law, culture, and religion, it may take a while to alter them, even after achieving stronger states, sustainable and inclusive economic prosperity, political freedoms, improvements in HDI, and improvements in confidence.

Excellent points that are spot on. I do agree about HDI being nebulous. I mentioned since it is widely used in non-profit and impact investing circles but it is also "hazy" because it seems a composite of many metrics. Cases like that where metrics rely on self-reported inputs, we could question that. Case in point would be when Indians in India claim rape statistics as a percentage are below certain countries - well it is because a large number of cases are not even reported. So cases where reporting of the data that could make up HDI or any other metric involves the subjugated/affected parties reporting to generate the said data - I would say we should take it with a pinch of salt. BUT - to your point, this is applicable to all of those countries you had mentioned I do agree.

Couple of questions
1. Why does Gaddafi-run Libya does not qualify for that metric? I thought for all his "evils" he did promote women's education. I'm guessing I'm way off and wrong about that.

2. Why is there a need for strong federal government? I do believe you are onto something about strong government and economically prosperous. I looked at women's progress in Brunei and they do fit the bill as well -- https://borneobulletin.com.bn/brunei-women-lucky-but-still-need-more-work-to-raise-gender-equality -- For instance, here is a ranking from best to worst Latin American countries for women -- https://www.peacewomen.org/content/latin-america-best-and-worst-countries-latin-america-women -- you could notice that some of the countries at the top actually have a weaker federal government. Is the need for a strong federal government specific to Islamic countries? If yes, why so?

For reference (if I can digress a bit and show an example) - Our family has no ties to Honduras but a cousin volunteered there, and I got to know about women's issues there from her. See this sanitized ABC news video -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VERguOc0laE -- It is horrible but once the data points start coming out it forces the system and some of the players in the system to act upon it.

The one thing I love in the Islamic world is low tolerance for perps once proven guilty. This creates a huge deterrence for crime unlike in the western world (and dare I say even in places like India) where proven death row convicts eat up tax payer money for years and years. If only the horrible trifecta of legal+social+religion against women is broken in the Islamic world, and given their low tolerance for convicts, things could improve. Easier said than done I suppose.

 

[mustang]

Women have been historically viewed as a part of a man's honor in most countries. Western countries were the first ones who gave women the modern rights that they have today. The Muslim countries are behind, and so are pretty much most non western countries with women rights. However things are changing tho. Let me give you an example of my own family.

My great grand mother was illiterate.

My grandmother did the equivalent of high school, and then she got married in a arranged marriage where she did not even talk to my grandfather.

My mother, aunts, and the women of her generation in my family all went to college. Most of them had arranged marriages, but they did talk with their husbands before marriage, and they had a say in whether they get married or not. Most did not work though, they for the most part became stay at home wives.

My sister, female cousins (if you count first and second i have over 100) all went to college, most have done education beyond bachelors. These girls either find their own spouses, or if they are introduced to some by family they are free to talk as long as they want without any pressure of having to agree. almost all of these girls work, and if they don't its their own choice.

So things are changing in the Muslim world, and by the end of the century they will have the same rights that western women have today. However their is no way to rush this process. It will take time.

That is a fantastic series of progress in your familia. I'm much closer and involved with my mom's side and they are all originally out of Cuba, DR, and Colombia from back in the day. Similar progress here as well, except they were a generation ahead. My great grandma (we refer to her as our lalela) reached high school probably thanks to her dad letting her. Grandma (our abuela) went to college and so on. It is great to see the positive progress over generations in the Islamic families as well.

Your sisters and cousins - Are they growing up in a western country or in Pakistan or both?

The key difference for empowerment that you have also mentioned is financial independence. Being able to move around independently, hold a job + earn, and also live independently as needed. Once this happens women in these societies will not feel the need to run away to other countries.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

That is a fantastic series of progress in your familia. I'm much closer and involved with my mom's side and they are all originally out of Cuba, DR, and Colombia from back in the day. Similar progress here as well, except they were a generation ahead. My great grandma (we refer to her as our lalela) reached high school probably thanks to her dad letting her. Grandma (our abuela) went to college and so on. It is great to see the positive progress over generations in the Islamic families as well.

Your sisters and cousins - Are they growing up in a western country or in Pakistan or both?

The key difference for empowerment that you have also mentioned is financial independence. Being able to move around independently, hold a job + earn, and also live independently as needed. Once this happens women in these societies will not feel the need to run away to other countries.

Both Pakistan and Western countries. Among Middle/Upper Middle Class families who live in Urban areas of Pakistan women of the the current generation, its no longer for a problem for them to work.

In fact a reason why some educated women of this generation stop working after marriage is often if they receive a rishta from a high earning guy, and then they can sit back and relax, and not because of any pressure. I have had a few cousins from the West move to Pakistan after marriage, and they like the lifestyle they have with maids, cook, driver. If they got married in the West they would have most likely had to continue working, since majority of the Pakistani guys in west want their wives to work.

 

[Wiji]

Excellent points that are spot on. I do agree about HDI being nebulous. I mentioned since it is widely used in non-profit and impact investing circles but it is also "hazy" because it seems a composite of many metrics. Cases like that where metrics rely on self-reported inputs, we could question that. Case in point would be when Indians in India claim rape statistics as a percentage are below certain countries - well it is because a large number of cases are not even reported. So cases where reporting of the data that could make up HDI or any other metric involves the subjugated/affected parties reporting to generate the said data - I would say we should take it with a pinch of salt. BUT - to your point, this is applicable to all of those countries you had mentioned I do agree.

Couple of questions
1. Why does Gaddafi-run Libya does not qualify for that metric? I thought for all his "evils" he did promote women's education. I'm guessing I'm way off and wrong about that.

2. Why is there a need for strong federal government? I do believe you are onto something about strong government and economically prosperous. I looked at women's progress in Brunei and they do fit the bill as well -- https://borneobulletin.com.bn/brunei-women-lucky-but-still-need-more-work-to-raise-gender-equality -- For instance, here is a ranking from best to worst Latin American countries for women -- https://www.peacewomen.org/content/latin-america-best-and-worst-countries-latin-america-women -- you could notice that some of the countries at the top actually have a weaker federal government. Is the need for a strong federal government specific to Islamic countries? If yes, why so?

For reference (if I can digress a bit and show an example) - Our family has no ties to Honduras but a cousin volunteered there, and I got to know about women's issues there from her. See this sanitized ABC news video -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VERguOc0laE -- It is horrible but once the data points start coming out it forces the system and some of the players in the system to act upon it.

The one thing I love in the Islamic world is low tolerance for perps once proven guilty. This creates a huge deterrence for crime unlike in the western world (and dare I say even in places like India) where proven death row convicts eat up tax payer money for years and years. If only the horrible trifecta of legal+social+religion against women is broken in the Islamic world, and given their low tolerance for convicts, things could improve. Easier said than done I suppose.

1. Let me correct and clarify myself about what I meant by "strong state". You are right to label Gaddafi-run Libya as a strong state. What I was suggesting is that in today's world, you need a "consensually strong state" for a long period of time for any long-term societal transformations to take place. Look at the collapse of Libya today. I also think the professors in the clip would agree to this idea. True--in the old days just having a strong state was probably enough. But not in today's world of mass literacy, access to information, access to food, better living conditions, etc., what's important is that we have consensually strong states. Having a strong state today (without the consensual part) like in most parts of Arabia actually destroys the confidence of the population and insults their human dignity.

2. I don't think the idea that "having a [consensually] strong federal government is a pre-requisite for achieving long-term social and economic progress" is something unique to Muslim societies. I think that is true for all contemporary societies. When enough time is given for good institutions (legal, social, religious) to take shape, it will take a long succession of 'weak' federal governments to revert that.

The USA is a case in point. It will take a very long succession of really bad Trump-like governments to reverse all the good work that the founding fathers did to create that country. And Trump is not a Muslim nor does he intend to bring in shariah law. In other words, I don't think Islam is the cause of bringing down societies if that is what you seem to be suggesting. History tells us that that is not the case. If anything, for most of history it was the introduction of Islam that perhaps helped societies to flourish in the ways that we are talking about in this thread. (And I'm conscious that that's also a debatable claim).

But you are partly right when you seem to indicate that there is something wrong with the way Muslims practice or view Islam. In the last couple of centuries, Muslims started viewing the religion as a set of fixed immutable laws, which is not what it was intended to be. It was supposed to be a set of ethical principles--this was understood for the first millennia of Islam. (See the late Harvard professor Shahab Ahmed's book titled "What is Islam? The importance of being Islamic" published by Princeton University Press).

On a side note, I am glad that you are taking interest in this topic. It seems that you truly want to see progress and human development in Muslim societies. What I would advise you is to refrain from making quick judgments, jumping to conclusions, and using language that may be deemed as aggressive or offensive (e.g. "There are umpteen muslim nations and communities where women are forced to live like cattle"). You seem like a very sincere and intelligent guy. I know in the heat of the debate and battle, things can be said in haste. But in order to get to the goal of better understanding and progress, it is better to dampen some of these views and be cautious with the choice of words, even if what you say is true. For instance, if your friend or family member is obese due to poor lifestyle choices, there are many ways of communicating this to them. More often than not, the effective way of communicating it would be through polite words, good etiquette, and with careful consideration of their emotions.

I am sure the other guys you were debating with here share the common vision you have of seeing progress in societies and better conditions for women and men all over the world. Let's establish the common ground first with mutual respect.