Why Is Patriarchy Seen As A Bad Thing?

[sweep_shot]

Patriarchy means the Male point of view and perspective dominates over the Female point of view. Hence a man will be the decision maker and he can overrule any other opinion from the opposite sex of the family.
It is Testosterone driven decisions vs Emotional driven decisions. Both can be logical in their own way.

Testosterone is superior to estrogen when it comes to leadership. This is biological reality. This is science.

 

[Robert]

Patriarchy means the Male point of view and perspective dominates over the Female point of view. Hence a man will be the decision maker and he can overrule any other opinion from the opposite sex of the family.
It is Testosterone driven decisions vs Emotional driven decisions. Both can be logical in their own way.

Not exactly because women can be patriarchal too - Margaret Thatcher and Golda Meir are examples, and Truss when she becomes PM.

 

[sweep_shot]

Western society is starting to tip towards balance between the yang and yin values. This is welcome as war is a patriarchal / yang value which is now viewed very differently in the West, post-Iraq War.

One of the reasons why western civilization is perhaps declining. Things are becoming more and more feminine instead of letting nature take its course.

 

[Robert]

Testosterone is superior to estrogen when it comes to leadership. This is biological reality. This is science.

That is not science. Leadership is not hormonal. Aggression is hormonal. Sometimes aggression is the wrong solution in a situation.

Some of the best managers I worked for were women. They have a larger corpus callosum than men which means they can get the two hemispheres of the brain cross-connecting faster. And that really is science.

Women tend to make better fighter pilots than men because they can process a lot of information faster and their comprehension of a situation will degrade more slowly as more and more factors are added.

 

[sweep_shot]

Well, it's good that those 2 girls are born in current era. Even 100 years back in US, women were not allowed to vote.

As you can see by posts here itself, we are not where we need to be as society, but progress is a huge one in the last 100 years. I am confident that every decade situation will keep getting better for half of world's population. It needs to. It's better for civilization.

If by progress you mean believing in 100 genders, I hope that would remain in west. I hope those strange theories would not be exported outside of west.

There are only 3 genders. Man, woman, and intersex.

Having said that, I always welcome female education and female empowerment (provided it is done without any nefarious feminist agenda).

 

[Technics 1210]

Pompei is an example of Liberalism gone mad, and how a failed ideology was destroyed yet preserved as a lesson for mankind.

 

[sweep_shot]

Not exactly because women can be patriarchal too - Margaret Thatcher and Golda Meir are examples, and Truss when she becomes PM.

Women become patriarchal because they probably know patriarchy works.

If you really want to get things done, you can't do it by being feminine wishy-washy person. You have to be a proactive authority figure.

 

[sweep_shot]

Pompei is an example of Liberalism gone mad, and how a failed ideology was destroyed yet preserved as a lesson for mankind.

West now has a dangerously high number of Marxists. They are reversing all the good works their forefathers did.

 

[Abel Reames]

Pompei is an example of Liberalism gone mad, and how a failed ideology was destroyed yet preserved as a lesson for mankind.

Here I was thinking it was plate techtonics that caused volcanic eruptions. I guess liberalism must have killed the dinosaurs too.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Testosterone is superior to estrogen when it comes to leadership. This is biological reality. This is science.

Not really. Not in this day and age. No one goes out to fight with sticks and sickles anymore. Wars are won with brain power. Man power is secondary to that.
When it comes to brain power, both men and women are equal. I thought this simple thing is self explanatory.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Pompei is an example of Liberalism gone mad, and how a failed ideology was destroyed yet preserved as a lesson for mankind.

Are you talking about the volcanic eruption that happened in Italy? If so, what has that got to do with Liberalism?

 

[James]

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...for-posting-on-Time-Pass-and-Sports-Forum-***

Forum rules — gentle reminder.

 

[Major]

Pompei is an example of Liberalism gone mad, and how a failed ideology was destroyed yet preserved as a lesson for mankind.

Pompei was destroyed because of Liberalism?
[MENTION=147314]topspin[/MENTION]

 

[topspin]

Pompei was destroyed because of Liberalism?
[MENTION=147314]topspin[/MENTION]

"Liberalism had gone too far in Pompei"

This is comedy gold

 

[Abel Reames]

We are told that the Prophet PBUH within Islam bought forth rights to women they previously did not have. Was he a liberal?

 

[topspin]

One of the reasons why western civilization is perhaps declining. Things are becoming more and more feminine instead of letting nature take its course.

Oh bhai before you comment on Western civilization, look at the state of Muslim countries. They are the ones that are actually declining and are in serious need of repair.

Before you bring up rich Gulf states, they still pale in comparison to the West by a mile.

 

[sweep_shot]

Not really. Not in this day and age. No one goes out to fight with sticks and sickles anymore. Wars are won with brain power. Man power is secondary to that.
When it comes to brain power, both men and women are equal. I thought this simple thing is self explanatory.

Looks like you didn't get what I was saying.

I wasn't referring to wars. Even a kid can operate a drone. Wars have become much easier thanks to technology.

Please see post #87.

 

[sweep_shot]

We are told that the Prophet PBUH within Islam bought forth rights to women they previously did not have. Was he a liberal?

Women deserve rights. Who said they don't?

Islam gives men and women their due rights. Thank God for that.

However, modern day liberalism has completely lost it when it comes to stuffs related to women. As a matter of fact, they are struggling to define what a woman is (please see Matt Walsh's "What is a Woman?").

 

[sweep_shot]

Oh bhai before you comment on Western civilization, look at the state of Muslim countries. They are the ones that are actually declining and are in serious need of repair.

Before you bring up rich Gulf states, they still pale in comparison to the West by a mile.

West is declining. There is no question about it. The country that is rising is China.

Muslim states are in bad conditions because of British Empire and Zionists/USA. They didn't allow Muslim states to flourish. Also, infightings didn't help.

British Empire looted subcontinent for 200 years. They did the same in Africa and many other places.

America has been bombing Middle East and Afghanistan for two decades. How can they prosper?

Also, there is a thing called "Greater Israel Project". Look it up.

To fix Muslim states, they have to unite and eliminate all degeneracies from societies. Good and efficient laws are needed; corruptions have to be weeded out.

 

[Abel Reames]

Women deserve rights. Who said they don't?

Islam gives men and women their due rights. Thank God for that.

So Islam was the liberalism of it's time. I bet there were men who who complained at the time too.

 

[Technics 1210]

West now has a dangerously high number of Marxists. They are reversing all the good works their forefathers did.

It is more than that. We see liberalism destroying humanity in the West, whether through cultural and biological whitewashing, or through supporting a dissident society where there are no rules other than ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom’ - The impending result? Debauchery, sodomy, homosexuality, transgenderism, wanton sex, no difference between man or woman, vulgarity, incest, hedonism, and the rejection of God. These are just some examples.

Pompei is a lesson to mankind of what happens to society when there are no rules, no distinctions, no respect; where everything is game in the name of democracy and freedom - or better known as - liberalism.

God made an example of Pompei, and enforced the fact that humanity needs law and order to progress, just like the universe.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Looks like you didn't get what I was saying.

I wasn't referring to wars. Even a kid can operate a drone. Wars have become much easier thanks to technology.

Please see post #87.

Yes. Hence Women can lead countries too and can even outperform men which does not involve physical labor.
As you have said, as technology keeps improving, the need for Men to lift heavy duty stuff keeps decreasing.
When it comes to decision making, women and men are equal. Patriarchy removes women from the role of decision making and relegates them to kitchen and household chores. Most women would not accept that role willingly.

 

[Champ_Pal]

It is more than that. We see liberalism destroying humanity in the West, whether through cultural and biological whitewashing, or through supporting a dissident society where there are no rules other than ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom’ - The impending result? Debauchery, sodomy, homosexuality, transgenderism, wanton sex, no difference between man or woman, vulgarity, incest, hedonism, and the rejection of God. These are just some examples.

Pompei is a lesson to mankind of what happens to society when there are no rules, no distinctions, no respect; where everything is game in the name of democracy and freedom - or better known as - liberalism.

God made an example of Pompei, and enforced the fact that humanity needs law and order to progress, just like the universe.

Liberalism is the reason why we even made this much progress. If it were for Rightwing nuts, we would still be riding horses and bullock carts.

Debauchery is not supported by Liberalism. Don't know where you get that from.
Homosexuality is the right of a grown individual whom he or she wants to have sex with. Why do we care what someone does in their bedroom?
What you consider vulgar differs from society to society. Nobody is forcing you to wear a bikini or a swimsuit in the West. Its called freedom of choice.
I do not support transgenderism as scientifically I am not convinced yet on it. But if an adult man or woman wants to change their sex, so be it. Its their body. They are not forcing you.

I consider cousin marriages as incest. You are genetically very close to your couisn. Its a big no no. But your religion promotes it.

Pompei happened because of Volcanic activity. Nothing to do with God.

You are confusing liberalism with far left and antifa loons. This is like comparing Muslims and Taliban/ISIS. Very different.

 

[sweep_shot]

When it comes to decision making, women and men are equal. Patriarchy removes women from the role of decision making and relegates them to kitchen and household chores. Most women would not accept that role willingly.

There was never a point in this thread where I said I wanted to send women to kitchens. Not sure why you keep on bringing it up.

I support women education, women employment, and women empowerment. But, I also believe patriarchy is not automatically harmful to achieve these. That's what my thread is about.

When you say "women and men are equal in decision-making", I agree with you. However, there are some distinguishable psychological differences between men and women. So, depending on the type of job, a male may be more suitable for leadership and vice versa.

 

[sweep_shot]

You are confusing liberalism with far left and antifa loons. This is like comparing Muslims and Taliban/ISIS. Very different.

Far-left and Antifa have hijacked liberalism though.

Extreme cancel culture and LGBTQ agenda are testimonies to that.

Even a normal liberal like Bill Maher got bashed by radical liberals.

 

[Technics 1210]

West is declining. There is no question about it. The country that is rising is China.

Muslim states are in bad conditions because of British Empire and Zionists/USA. They didn't allow Muslim states to flourish. Also, infightings didn't help.

British Empire looted subcontinent for 200 years. They did the same in Africa and many other places.

America has been bombing Middle East and Afghanistan for two decades. How can they prosper?

Also, there is a thing called "Greater Israel Project". Look it up.

To fix Muslim states, they have to unite and eliminate all degeneracies from societies. Good and efficient laws are needed; corruptions have to be weeded out.

Take out the Islamic nations that have not been involved in a ‘Western/Zionist’ war, and Islamic nations are just doing fine, in fact, way better than the West in economic and social terms. Healthcare, Energy, Taxation, infrastructure, are miles ahead of the debt ridden Western system - and the trick? These countries do not follow the Western ideology/system of Democracy, and follow Islamic principles.

UAE, Qatar, Singapore, Malaysia are just some examples of successful Islamic nations.

The bulk of ME and Pakistan have been victims of the JC alliance underpinned by the Zionist agenda - Afghanistan, Libya, Syria were so far advanced in the 50s that it was difficult to comprehend that said countries were Islamic.

Iran, was one of the most beautiful places on earth, now crippled by Zionists economic sanctions and threat of war.

Pakistan - well we all know how Pakistan was played by the Amreekans.

If the West doesn’t change soon, it will be confined to history as the shortest lived civilisation.

 

[sweep_shot]

Take out the Islamic nations that have not been involved in a ‘Western’ war, and Islamic nations are just doing fine, in fact, way better than the West in economic and social terms. Healthcare, Energy, Taxation, infrastructure, are miles ahead of the debt ridden Western system - and the trick? These countries do not follow the Western ideology/system of Democracy, and follow Islamic principles.

UAE, Qatar, Singapore, Malaysia are just some examples of successful Islamic nations.

The bulk of ME and Pakistan have been victims of the JC alliance underpinned by the Zionist agenda - Afghanistan, Libya, Syria were so far advanced in the 50s that it was difficult to comprehend that said countries were Islamic.

Iran, was one of the most beautiful places on earth, now crippled by Zionists economic sanctions and threat of war.

Pakistan - well we all know how Pakistan was played by the Amreekans.

If the West doesn’t change soon, it will be confined to history as the shortest lived civilisation.

Exactly.

Singapore, Malaysia, UAE, Qatar, KSA etc. are doing amazing.

As a matter of fact, I would say gulf states are the true first world. West has become second world or fake first world.

Iraq was doing quite well under Saddam Hussain before American invasion. So was Syria. So were Libya and Yemen. There were stabilities in the region before American interference.

 

[SalimBhai]

Take out the Islamic nations that have not been involved in a ‘Western/Zionist’ war, and Islamic nations are just doing fine, in fact, way better than the West in economic and social terms. Healthcare, Energy, Taxation, infrastructure, are miles ahead of the debt ridden Western system - and the trick? These countries do not follow the Western ideology/system of Democracy, and follow Islamic principles.

UAE, Qatar, Singapore, Malaysia are just some examples of successful Islamic nations.


The bulk of ME and Pakistan have been victims of the JC alliance underpinned by the Zionist agenda - Afghanistan, Libya, Syria were so far advanced in the 50s that it was difficult to comprehend that said countries were Islamic.

Iran, was one of the most beautiful places on earth, now crippled by Zionists economic sanctions and threat of war.

Pakistan - well we all know how Pakistan was played by the Amreekans.

If the West doesn’t change soon, it will be confined to history as the shortest lived civilisation.

I don't think Qatar or UAE would be much if not for the oil. Singapore is secular country with a Muslim minority. Malaysia is muslim

 

[Champ_Pal]

West is declining. There is no question about it. The country that is rising is China.

Muslim states are in bad conditions because of British Empire and Zionists/USA. They didn't allow Muslim states to flourish. Also, infightings didn't help.

British Empire looted subcontinent for 200 years. They did the same in Africa and many other places.

America has been bombing Middle East and Afghanistan for two decades. How can they prosper?

Also, there is a thing called "Greater Israel Project". Look it up.

To fix Muslim states, they have to unite and eliminate all degeneracies from societies. Good and efficient laws are needed; corruptions have to be weeded out.

China is an atheist nation. Nothing to feel happy if you are a Muslim.

Muslim states are in bad condition because they are still stuck in dark ages. Nothing useful came out of those countries since 12th century. While West was stuck in dark ages too, they broke the shackles of religion and adopted scientific approach. They made all the progress that we happily use and enjoy today.
Blaming America again. As if Afghanistan and Iraq would be world leaders if not for the bombing done. They were bombing the Taliban and ISIS terrorists.

The only prospering Muslim nations are rich due to oil. Just pure dumb luck. At least Saudis are trying to improve on it and UAE improved because of their liberal policies. The rest of the non-oil producing nations are poor because they did not make any scientific advancement. They cannot even make a small computer if their life depended on it. Everything is imported making West richer by the day.

Stop blaming west for the failure of Muslim nations. That is not the way to improve.

 

[sweep_shot]

China is an atheist nation. Nothing to feel happy if you are a Muslim.

Muslim states are in bad condition because they are still stuck in dark ages. Nothing useful came out of those countries since 12th century. While West was stuck in dark ages too, they broke the shackles of religion and adopted scientific approach. They made all the progress that we happily use and enjoy today.
Blaming America again. As if Afghanistan and Iraq would be world leaders if not for the bombing done. They were bombing the Taliban and ISIS terrorists.

The only prospering Muslim nations are rich due to oil. Just pure dumb luck. At least Saudis are trying to improve on it and UAE improved because of their liberal policies. The rest of the non-oil producing nations are poor because they did not make any scientific advancement. They cannot even make a small computer if their life depended on it. Everything is imported making West richer by the day.

Stop blaming west for the failure of Muslim nations. That is not way to improve.

Who said I am happy about China? I was stating a fact. China is rising and that's a fact. By the way, China has many Muslims too. Also, China has good relations with many Muslim states.

Does Singapore and Malaysia look like they are in bad conditions? What about Brunei? What about gulf states?

The problems that some Muslim states are facing are due to politics and external reasons. Not religion.

 

[sweep_shot]

It is funny when some people say gulf states are lucky because they have oil.

That's a foolish argument.

Should I call India lucky too since they have more land than other subcontinental countries? Maybe United States is lucky too because they have like an entire continent as their country.

 

[SalimBhai]

China is an atheist nation. Nothing to feel happy if you are a Muslim.

Muslim states are in bad condition because they are still stuck in dark ages. Nothing useful came out of those countries since 12th century. While West was stuck in dark ages too, they broke the shackles of religion and adopted scientific approach. They made all the progress that we happily use and enjoy today.
Blaming America again. As if Afghanistan and Iraq would be world leaders if not for the bombing done. They were bombing the Taliban and ISIS terrorists.

The only prospering Muslim nations are rich due to oil. Just pure dumb luck. At least Saudis are trying to improve on it and UAE improved because of their liberal policies. The rest of the non-oil producing nations are poor because they did not make any scientific advancement. They cannot even make a small computer if their life depended on it. Everything is imported making West richer by the day.

Stop blaming west for the failure of Muslim nations. That is not the way to improve.

Damn Son. NO need to be brutally honest

 

[Major]

It is funny when some people say gulf states are lucky because they have oil.

That's a foolish argument.

Should I call India lucky too since they have more land than other subcontinental countries? Maybe United States is lucky too because they have like an entire continent as their country.

Look at afghanistan.

You have to ubderstand the history of gulf countries to understand the point

 

[sweep_shot]

Look at afghanistan.

You have to ubderstand the history of gulf countries to understand the point

Afghanistan regularly got invaded. How can they possibly prosper?

If America or India gets invaded like that regularly, they would be like Afghanistan too probably.

It is remarkable how resilient Afghans are. They have given Americans and Soviets resounding defeats.

 

[SalimBhai]

It is funny when some people say gulf states are lucky because they have oil.

That's a foolish argument.

Should I call India lucky too since they have more land than other subcontinental countries? Maybe United States is lucky too because they have like an entire continent as their country.

Name one gulf states contribution other than oil. I think dates is next

 

[Technics 1210]

It is funny when some people say gulf states are lucky because they have oil.

That's a foolish argument.

Should I call India lucky too since they have more land than other subcontinental countries? Maybe United States is lucky too because they have like an entire continent as their country.

It is a foolish argument.

Nordics is nothing without oil.

UK is nothing without the loot from its Empire, and we can add coal to the list. UK survives by providing financial services.

Europe is nothing without a political union, next to no natural resources which is why it has to rely on Russia for the majority of its energy demands, and the rest from other parts of the world.

Amreeka is nothing without its military complex and Zionist funding.

And to wrap it all up, the entire West is a slave to debt, and is nothing without debt.

Smart nations reinvest their natural resources for progression and success of their people - UAE, Qatar, KSA, Russia etc - while the rest, bank on debt, borrowed time and money.

 

[sweep_shot]

It is a foolish argument.

Nordics is nothing without oil.

UK is nothing without the loot from its Empire, and we can add coal to the list. UK survives by providing financial services.

Europe is nothing without a political union, next to no natural resources which is why it has to rely on Russia for the majority of its energy demands, and the rest from other parts of the world.

Amreeka is nothing without its military complex and Zionist funding.

And to wrap it all up, the entire West is a slave to debt, and is nothing without debt.

Smart nations reinvest their natural resources for progression and success of their people - UAE, Qatar, KSA, Russia etc - while the rest, bank on debt, borrowed time and money.

Exactly.

Where would UK be had it not been for resources they stole in Asia and Africa? They invaded and looted many countries for a very long time.

You see Indians getting salty about Mughals but they never mention British Empire's looting. I guess you can call it inferiority complex.

Rothschild central banks need to be eliminated from every country. Bring back gold standard; repel and replace usury-based banking system.

 

[Technics 1210]

Exactly.

Where would UK be had it not been for resources they stole in Asia and Africa? They invaded and looted many countries for a very long time.

You see Indians getting salty about Mughals but they never mention British Empire's looting. I guess you can call it inferiority complex.

Rothschild central banks need to be eliminated from every country. Bring back gold standard; repel and replace usury-based banking system.

Couldn’t agree more, but this topic deserves a thread of its own.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Who said I am happy about China? I was stating a fact. China is rising and that's a fact. By the way, China has many Muslims too. Also, China has good relations with many Muslim states.

Does Singapore and Malaysia look like they are in bad conditions? What about Brunei? What about gulf states?

The problems that some Muslim states are facing are due to politics and external reasons. Not religion.

China is buying Muslim nations by giving them loans. They are Atheist and will never be friends with Muslim nations.
Malaysia is a liberal nation. Singapore is not Muslim. Brunei is rich due to oil.

West also has its problems like corruption and politics. But their governance is more transparent and politicians are answerable to people. They improve because of their secular liberal and free market policies.
Muslim nations are backward because they do not give importance to science. Just listen to Dr.Parvez Hoodbhoy. He explains the difference between West and Muslim nations perfectly. No point blaming the outside forces.

 

[Major]

Exactly.

Where would UK be had it not been for resources they stole in Asia and Africa? They invaded and looted many countries for a very long time.

You see Indians getting salty about Mughals but they never mention British Empire's looting. I guess you can call it inferiority complex.

Rothschild central banks need to be eliminated from every country. Bring back gold standard; repel and replace usury-based banking system.

If you replace usury based banking how are you gonna implement monetory policy? How are you gonna control inflation?

Have you studied basic macro-economics?

Just because something is against your faith, west is not gonna replace a whole economic system. Maybe go back to Bangladesh and advocate for this.

 

[sweep_shot]

If you replace usury based banking how are you gonna implement monetory policy? How are you gonna control inflation?

Have you studied basic macro-economics?

Just because something is against your faith, west is not gonna replace a whole economic system. Maybe go back to Bangladesh and advocate for this.

I have taken both macroeconomics and microeconomics at university level (in Canada).

I can't believe a Muslim is opposing me for being anti-usury. Subhanallah!

 

[Technics 1210]

On another note, Hitler transformed Weimar Germany from hyperinflation to European superpower in about 10 years without a monetary system based on usury.

In Amreeka however, the monetary system is based on usury, more and more people are in debt.

Must read : The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve by G. Edward Griffin.

 

[sweep_shot]

So Islam was the liberalism of it's time. I bet there were men who who complained at the time too.

Are you seriously comparing modern day concept of women's rights with Islamic women's rights? That's preposterous.

Modern day liberalism says women can be anything (including topless).

Islam has given both rights and guidelines to women.

Islam brought in purity for women while modern day liberalism brought in lunacy.

 

[Abel Reames]

Are you seriously comparing modern day concept of women's rights with Islamic women's rights? That's preposterous.

Modern day liberalism says women can be anything (including topless).

Islam has given both rights and guidelines to women.

Islam brought in purity for women while modern day liberalism brought in lunacy.

At the time we are led to believe that those rights were revolutionary too.

 

[Robert]

Are you seriously comparing modern day concept of women's rights with Islamic women's rights? That's preposterous.

Modern day liberalism says women can be anything (including topless).

Islam has given both rights and guidelines to women.

Islam brought in purity for women while modern day liberalism brought in lunacy.

Have you considered that women might reject this "purity"?

Abrahamic faiths brought a patriarchal control of women, to disempower them because they were scared of women. For example St Paul gave the edict that women cannot speak in church, immediately making them subordinate to men.

A Gospel of Mary was written but excluded from the Bible because the church rulers didn't want women to have power in the church.

Hypatia of Alexandria was a philosopher, teacher, pagan, mathematician and woman - four things which the local Patriarch did not like, so he had her dragged from her chariot and brutally killed.

Right now the Taliban are denying Afghan women access to work and education.

 

[Technics 1210]

Church rulers, St Paul, Taliban are misinterpreting the guidance from God for their own politicised version of religion. Very different to what God guides in the books.

It would be akin to the world judging the UK based on Tommy Robinson's opinion of the UK, and not common law.

 

[sweep_shot]

Hypatia of Alexandria was a philosopher, teacher, pagan, mathematician and woman - four things which the local Patriarch did not like, so he had her dragged from her chariot and brutally killed.

Right now the Taliban are denying Afghan women access to work and education.

Taliban is probably mixing their local culture with religion of Islam.

Islam doesn't prohibit female education and female employment.

However, there are some prerequisites to women working. Here are these:

According to the noble Shari'a [Islamic law], it is permissible for a Muslim woman to go out for work providing the following conditions:

- The job is deemed permissible in Shari'a and does not include anything that contradicts legal rulings.

- The woman guarantees safety for her person, chastity and religion [from temptation).

- The job suits woman's physical and psychological nature.

Consequently, a woman's work should not contradict righteousness [birr] or oppose her guardian's responsibility over her.

Evidence from the sunna

Jabir Ibn 'Abdullah (Allah be pleased with them) reported: My maternal aunt was divorced, and she intended to pluck her dates [from palm trees]. A person scolded her for having come out (during her waiting period). She came to the Prophet (peace and blessins be upon him) and he told her: "Certainly you can pluck (dates) from your palm trees, for perhaps you may give out charity or do an act of kindness." [Muslim, Sahih).

https://www.dar-alifta.org/Foreign/ViewFatwa.aspx?ID=6810

 

[Robert]

However, there are some prerequisites to women working. Here are these:

https://www.dar-alifta.org/Foreign/ViewFatwa.aspx?ID=6810

OK.

How many female rulers of Muslim nations have there been?

 

[sweep_shot]

OK.

How many female rulers of Muslim nations have there been?

A female needs to be qualified to be a ruler. A female shouldn't automatically become a ruler just because she is a woman.

Please see this video.

 

[Abel Reames]

It is usually low status males that have the feminism as their bugbear as it upsets the hierarchy.

 

[sweep_shot]

It is usually low status males that have the feminism as their bugbear as it upsets the hierarchy.

Opposite is also true. It is usually the confused simps who can't take constructive criticism of radical feminism.

There's nothing wrong with a benevolent and effective hierarchy. Do not fix something that is not broken.

 

[sweep_shot]

At the time we are led to believe that those rights were revolutionary too.

I am sorry but I didn't get you.

Are you saying being topless and changing gender are revolutionary and these would be accepted by Islam?

Do not mix radical liberalism with religion of Islam. There is nothing to change in Islam; it has been perfected.

 

[SalimBhai]

If you look at Gender inequality index, the bottom countries are mostly muslim countries. I think someone posted this months ago also. Pakistan is somewhere in the very last with Yemen and Afghanistan.

 

[sweep_shot]

If you look at Gender inequality index, the bottom countries are mostly muslim countries. I think someone posted this months ago also. Pakistan is somewhere in the very last with Yemen and Afghanistan.

Gender inequality index itself is faulty. LOL.

Having high position in that index is not automatically a badge of honor.

As per this index, if a woman can become topless, that country can rank high. In other words, this index demands unopposed submission to radical feminism.

Having said that, I agree that many countries have works to do when it comes to treating women rightly. Abuse and oppression of women should always be condemned and fixed.

 

[Junaids]

I do not understand the opposition to patriarchy. A lot of modern day liberals seem to have an issue with it.

Why though?

I think patriarchy is efficient provided it is not toxic/unfair. Benevolent patriarchy is vital to a society's growth.

Thoughts?

Patriarchy is not just a bad thing, it is absurd.

Why not have a matriarchy, in which women act as the protector of males?

Or a catriarchy, in which cats acts as the protectors of humans?

The bottom line is that Patriarchal societies always under-achieve, on a monumental scale.

As an example, Saudi Arabia and the Netherlands have identical-sized economies.

But the 17 million Dutch residents share the same wealth as 36 million oil-rich Saudis, because theirs is a superior society by every possible measure - distribution of wealth, life expectancy, education, health, average savings etc etc.

Similarly, 243 million Pakistanis have an economy smaller than 6 million Danish people.

Why did I pick the Netherlands and Denmark? Because their society frees women to live lives that the Saudi and Pakistani patriarchies do not.

In short, Patriarchy makes countries fail. And the freer the women of a country are, and the less they are beholden to men, the better that country does.

Ultimately, to be brutally honest, the more men that a countries women sleep with on average before marriage, the more successful that country is!

 

[Junaids]

OK.

How many female rulers of Muslim nations have there been?

Benazir Bhutto?

Two female Bangladeshi PMs?

 

[Junaids]

It is more than that.

We see liberalism destroying humanity in the West, whether through cultural and biological whitewashing, or through supporting a dissident society where there are no rules other than ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom’ -

The impending result? Debauchery, sodomy, homosexuality, transgenderism, wanton sex, no difference between man or woman, vulgarity, incest, hedonism, and the rejection of God. These are just some examples.

Firstly, I cannot take lessons on "incest" from people who think that first cousin marriage is acceptable.

Secondly, let's look at the world's top ten countries by Human Development Index.

1. Norway
2. Ireland
3. Switzerland
4. Hong Kong
5. Iceland
6. Germany
7. Sweden
8. Australia
9. Netherlands
10. Denmark

These are the countries which have the best health, wealth and education.

And what do they have in common?

1. In nine of the ten most successful countries, women average more than 10 sexual partners before marriage.
2. In all of the countries, homosexuality is legal, and in nine of the ten countries gay marriage is legal.

So what does this tell us? The very things that you demonise - in effect a women's control of her own body and her own education and career, and gay rights - are things that are REQUIRED for a country to develop.

And countries which are patriarchal all have inferior outcomes.

 

[Junaids]

Ireland is probably the best example of how moving away from a patriarchy drives human development and the progress of a nation.

1. Homosexuality was against the law until 1993.

2. Divorce was impossible for women to obtain until November 1995.

3. Abortion was only legalised in 2013, but in 2002 a referendum came within 0.2% of legalising it.

In effect, the Republic of Ireland was a conservative, patriarchal backwater until the 1990s, and had a lower standard of living than Northern Ireland which itself had the lowest standard of living in the UK.

Now Ireland's GDP per capita is $101,509 - the highest in the world for any country with more than 1 million residents. (USA $76K, Australia $67K, Canada $57K, UK $50K).

Among Islamic nations with more than 1 million people, the oil-rich UAE is highest at $50,000 - less than half the Republic of Ireland's GDP per capita.

So what does this tell us?

Again, patriarchal societies cannot achieve their potential. It's impossible. They just underachieve.

 

[dildilpak]

This nonsensical thread is one of the reason why i drifted from my religion - cannot identify with something that actually allows men to set rules for the conduct of a woman. This is not 7th century AD Arabia anymore & women dont need any kind of permission nor give justification for their life choices, but unfortunately blind interpretation of religion can make even ‘educated’ men go bonkers as we see in this case.

Basically there are some who feel so threatened by competant women that they have to come up with terms like ‘benevolent patriarchy’ (whatever that means!) to hide their incompetency & justify how they can lord it over the females. In short, nothing but incels.

 

[Robert]

Opposite is also true. It is usually the confused simps who can't take constructive criticism of radical feminism.

There's nothing wrong with a benevolent and effective hierarchy. Do not fix something that is not broken.

There is if women cannot get up in it. It cannot be benevolent if half the population does not have equal opportunity to the other half. Therefore it is broken for half the population.

 

[sweep_shot]

Patriarchy is not just a bad thing, it is absurd.

Why not have a matriarchy, in which women act as the protector of males?

Or a catriarchy, in which cats acts as the protectors of humans?

The bottom line is that Patriarchal societies always under-achieve, on a monumental scale.

As an example, Saudi Arabia and the Netherlands have identical-sized economies.

But the 17 million Dutch residents share the same wealth as 36 million oil-rich Saudis, because theirs is a superior society by every possible measure - distribution of wealth, life expectancy, education, health, average savings etc etc.

Similarly, 243 million Pakistanis have an economy smaller than 6 million Danish people.

Why did I pick the Netherlands and Denmark? Because their society frees women to live lives that the Saudi and Pakistani patriarchies do not.

In short, Patriarchy makes countries fail. And the freer the women of a country are, and the less they are beholden to men, the better that country does.

Ultimately, to be brutally honest, the more men that a countries women sleep with on average before marriage, the more successful that country is!

It is true that western countries have higher human development index. However, these countries are pretty much living off legacy of the past. These countries are great not because of current liberal generations; they are great because previous generations did the hard work.

Current Marxist generations are reversing all the hard works done by their forefathers. They may cause west to decline to the point of no return.

Also, can't believe you are glorifying women having multiple partners. There's nothing good about it.

 

[Robert]

This nonsensical thread is one of the reason why i drifted from my religion - cannot identify with something that actually allows men to set rules for the conduct of a woman. This is not 7th century AD Arabia anymore & women dont need any kind of permission nor give justification for their life choices, but unfortunately blind interpretation of religion can make even ‘educated’ men go bonkers as we see in this case.

Basically there are some who feel so threatened by competant women that they have to come up with terms like ‘benevolent patriarchy’ (whatever that means!) to hide their incompetency & justify how they can lord it over the females. In short, nothing but incels.

That’s it. Scared of girls, so they have to be kept in their place.

 

[sweep_shot]

This nonsensical thread is one of the reason why i drifted from my religion - cannot identify with something that actually allows men to set rules for the conduct of a woman. This is not 7th century AD Arabia anymore & women dont need any kind of permission nor give justification for their life choices, but unfortunately blind interpretation of religion can make even ‘educated’ men go bonkers as we see in this case.

Basically there are some who feel so threatened by competant women that they have to come up with terms like ‘benevolent patriarchy’ (whatever that means!) to hide their incompetency & justify how they can lord it over the females. In short, nothing but incels.

Benevolent patriarchy is the type of patriarchy where women are allowed to get educations and have successful careers despite being within a patriarchy.

Patriarchy doesn't automatically mean it is bad for woman. That's my argument.

 

[Robert]

Also, can't believe you are glorifying women having multiple partners. There's nothing good about it.

He didn’t. He say women should be free to have lots of sex with different men (or women, or both) until they find the right person to become partners with. Again this is just basic equality with men.

 

[sweep_shot]

There is if women cannot get up in it. It cannot be benevolent if half the population does not have equal opportunity to the other half. Therefore it is broken for half the population.

Men and women are different biologically, psychologically, physically, and even mentally.

A fish cannot fly in the sky just like a bird cannot swim underwater.

Men and women need suitable opportunities; not necessarily equal always.

 

[dildilpak]

Men and women are different biologically, psychologically, physically, and even mentally.

A fish cannot fly in the sky just like a bird cannot swim underwater.

Men and women need suitable opportunities; not necessarily equal always.

You really seem stuck in a time warp. Women can fly fighter planes & be marine commanders. They can be Presidents, politicians, wrestlers, shooters or anything else they want. Or maybe do nothing. Who the hell are we to decide for them what they can do or not to - especially when they are more than capable enough to decide for themselves?

 

[sweep_shot]

If you remove patriarchy from society, this can happen:

There is no alternative to strong (yet benevolent) male leadership.

 

[Robert]

If you remove patriarchy from society, this can happen:

There is no alternative to strong (yet benevolent) male leadership.

I would stop now. You are coming across as an incel.

 

[Junaids]

Also, can't believe you are glorifying women having multiple partners. There's nothing good about it.

We went through this in the west, and it was the greatest advance of the twentieth century - even ahead of antibiotics!

Before the advent of the Pill, Western women were less marriage-able if they had a “past” sexual history.

Women stayed in terrible marriages with rubbish husbands. People got married to have sex, and ended up with people they were completely incompatible with.

And insecure and inadequate men prevented their wives from going out to work or study for fear that they might meet somebody less pathetic than themselves.

Not any more. Not so much anyway.

Men have had to lift their game. If you are lazy or spoilt or controlling, your wife may well leave you for somebody better. And so she should.

If you are a rubbish lover who only has sex to please yourself, your girlfriend will not marry you because she has already had better, more considerate, more skilful lovers.

Basically the Pill gave women choices and it gave them an equal amount of power in relationships.

And this has not been bad for men at all. You get a wife who earns an income which helps you to have a nicer house and better holidays. You get a wife who chooses to be with you because she loves you. And you get a wife who is a more skilled lover in the bedroom, because like with everything else, practice makes perfect.

I’m not seeing a downside, except for lazy, stinky, controlling men who are terrible lovers and who want a hostage rather than a partner.

 

[Abel Reames]

There is no alternative to strong (yet benevolent) male leadership.

Countries led by white people seem to do a lot better. Maybe there is no alternative than strong white leadership.

 

[Technics 1210]

Firstly, I cannot take lessons on "incest" from people who think that first cousin marriage is acceptable.

Secondly, let's look at the world's top ten countries by Human Development Index.

1. Norway
2. Ireland
3. Switzerland
4. Hong Kong
5. Iceland
6. Germany
7. Sweden
8. Australia
9. Netherlands
10. Denmark

These are the countries which have the best health, wealth and education.

And what do they have in common?

1. In nine of the ten most successful countries, women average more than 10 sexual partners before marriage.
2. In all of the countries, homosexuality is legal, and in nine of the ten countries gay marriage is legal.

So what does this tell us? The very things that you demonise - in effect a women's control of her own body and her own education and career, and gay rights - are things that are REQUIRED for a country to develop.

And countries which are patriarchal all have inferior outcomes.

Pompei the sequel is upon us!

)

 

[Technics 1210]

Also, can't believe you are glorifying women having multiple partners. There's nothing good about it.

I would let them be with their liberalism. It is shocking to see the bearers of Liberalism glorify wanton sex. Then when the facts are produced, that diseases such as Monkey Pox/AIDs/HIV are more prevalent within the homosexuality community, they run like Forest Gump and cry anti LGBTQ.

Monogamy is the tried and tested discipline, everything else results in broken homes, divorces, delinquent children etc.

 

[Technics 1210]

The most hilarious aspect is that when a women sleeps with multiple men, she is swiftly labelled as - you know what - yet the same liberals who cry for equality encourage women to engage in wanton sex.

Unbelievable.

 

[Junaids]

I would let them be with their liberalism. It is shocking to see the bearers of Liberalism glorify wanton sex.

You’re the one who fails to recognise marital rape - I accuse YOU of being the one glorifying wanton sex. When my wife married me she wasn’t consenting to sex any time I wanted it, any place, any time, any where.

I just think that consensual sex between consenting unrelated adults in private is fine, whatever their orientation. Whereas sex between cousins is always wrong, and sex between older men and their teenage partners is wrong too.

I’m still appalled by the Pakistan cricket international who married a schoolgirl a few years ago. I don’t see very much difference between him and Adam Johnson.

You think I have no sexual standards, but I find yours to be pretty appalling. The reality is that we BOTH have standards - they just aren’t the same.

 

[Technics 1210]

You’re the one who fails to recognise marital rape - I accuse YOU of being the one glorifying wanton sex. When my wife married me she wasn’t consenting to sex any time I wanted it, any place, any time, any where.

I just think that consensual sex between consenting unrelated adults in private is fine, whatever their orientation. Whereas sex between cousins is always wrong, and sex between older men and their teenage partners is wrong too.

I’m still appalled by the Pakistan cricket international who married a schoolgirl a few years ago. I don’t see very much difference between him and Adam Johnson.

You think I have no sexual standards, but I find yours to be pretty appalling. The reality is that we BOTH have standards - they just aren’t the same.

What are you bleating on about?

 

[Junaids]

What are you bleating on about?

I’m pointing out that you are talking about Pompeii and monkeypox and accusing me of lacking sexual values.

Whereas we in the west just have different sexual values.

To me, a cricketer in his mid-twenties who marries a schoolgirl is a Paedo. A husband who pressures his wife into unwanted sex is a rapist. And a person who marries his or her cousin is a sexual deviant, whereas a homosexual is not a sexual deviant.

We just have different values and beliefs.

 

[Technics 1210]

I’m pointing out that you are talking about Pompeii and monkeypox and accusing me of lacking sexual values.

Where did I do that?

You're the one who came out with this gem - "In nine of the ten most successful countries, women average more than 10 sexual partners before marriage."

If this is what you call your 'values' then the West is in far worse shape than I thought, and we're only watching the trailer to Pompei's sequel.

)

 

[SalimBhai]

Gender inequality index itself is faulty. LOL.

Having high position in that index is not automatically a badge of honor.

As per this index, if a woman can become topless, that country can rank high. In other words, this index demands unopposed submission to radical feminism.

Having said that, I agree that many countries have works to do when it comes to treating women rightly. Abuse and oppression of women should always be condemned and fixed.

10 Causes of Gender Inequality
#1. Uneven access to education. ...
#2. Lack of employment equality. ...
#3. Job segregation. ...
#4. Lack of legal protections. ...
#5. Lack of bodily autonomy. ...
#6. Poor medical care. ...
#7. Lack of religious freedom. ...
#8. Lack of political representation

GOING TOPLESS IS NOT ONE OF THEM.

 

[SalimBhai]

Where did I do that?

You're the one who came out with this gem - "In nine of the ten most successful countries, women average more than 10 sexual partners before marriage."

If this is what you call your 'values' then the West is in far worse shape than I thought, and we're only watching the trailer to Pompei's sequel.

)

I see you have missed the point he made.

 

[Junaids]

Where did I do that?

You're the one who came out with this gem - "In nine of the ten most successful countries, women average more than 10 sexual partners before marriage."

If this is what you call your 'values' then the West is in far worse shape than I thought, and we're only watching the trailer to Pompei's sequel.

)

Why is that even relevant?

I am baffled that you think that a woman’s increasing number of sexual partners makes her more and more worthless.

Then again, I don’t see what business of any man it is to concern himself with a woman’s autonomy over her own body.