Muslim People in Australia (3 Viewers)

[SashatheMan]

Some guys will find a woman's hands, eyes, lips also attractive/arousing - are you going to wear gloves, sunglasses etc to cover those up too?

i beleive some muslim women wear the whole shabang. which covers everytihng, leaving only little pinholes to see

 

[Benny1103]

Benny, they do harm people.

- We're empathetic, we can see the road this is leading the people down and we don't think it's the right road.

- Enforcing a belief that to wear the veil shows modesty and keeps away rapists or whatever... means that when they see a girl who is not wearing a veil and is perhaps unmodest they will assume she's a slut or a less worthy person.

If that's your opinion then there is nothing wrong with that. But do you actually think that people shouldn't be able to wear head scarves or any other sort of clothing for that matter, simply because of what you said; "means that when they see a girl who is not wearing a veil and is perhaps unmodest they will assume she's a slut or a less worthy person".

To me that's a flawed argument. People pass judgment on others all of the time - it's human nature. You'll see a person and you'll make some kind of judgment, whether it be a detailed or minor one. This is indepdent of a person's race, beliefs or whatever. The judgment itself doesn't hurt anyone unless it entails something tangible - someone's opinion of you is generally not such a thing. If a wealthy person sees a poor person and thinks less of them, then does that mean that people shouldn't be permitted to be rich?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

You were saying we shouldn't criticise because it doesn't affect us... I explained that we should criticise and that it does affect us. I never said anything about banning the wearing of headscarves, nor did I say anything about the banning of any other sort of clothing.

If a wealthy person sees a poor person and thinks less of them, then does that mean that people shouldn't be permitted to be rich?

People become rich without looking down on poorer people, the belief most people have reguarding the wearing of the hijab directly leads to the assertion that other people are not modest and are skanks (they look down on them etc). If a wealthy person did look down on poorer people as inferior or whatever, then we can criticise them.

 

[Sweets]

I think people really have to get out of the binary of whore/madonna which seems to dominate any discussion about women, feminism and the hijab. First, if feminists are truly fighting for the empowerment of women, they must encourage women to express themselves through any religion or attire they desire. If women wish to wear the burka or anythin else out of free will, then they should do so without comment by any feminists. Of course, feminists believe that the will to many things in life are “socially constructed.” In this way, a person making the decision to do something is not entirely of free mind and body because their brain was “colonized” by the man. If you cannot sense the sarcasm, this is one aspect of feminist philosophy which I am a bit uncomfortable with. If things are all socially constructed, then what place is there for free will? Are we mere intellectual sponges, lacking in the capacity to think? And if we have the capacity to think, is it not possible to arrive at a conclusion not based on social construction? Such is a dilemma to keep in mind as you read my comments.

From my perspective, the hijab and the miniskirt are not all that different (this is going somewhere- I promise). With the miniskirt, a woman is selling promescuity (or conforming to that standard), with the hijab a woman is sellling virginity. In both cases, the pentrability of women and her weak nature is reasserted. Sure, the hijab is called modesty, but the burden of that modesty falls on women, rather than men (which strikes me as unfair- men seem to conviniently forget about the idea of male hijab). And yes, the miniskirt is called sexually liberated, but its funny how that liberation pleases every man from Sydney to Djibuti.

In this respect, women who wear miniskirts seem to think that hijabi’s are oppressed, stupid, and unhappy. Hijabi’s in turn believe that women who wear miniskirts are prostitutes. In both cases, their is an unfair, unrealistic, and uninformed judgement of the other party.

No more generalisations for me

 

[Benny1103]

You were saying we shouldn't criticise because it doesn't affect us... I explained that we should criticise and that it does affect us. I never said anything about banning the wearing of headscarves, nor did I say anything about the banning of any other sort of clothing.

Are you muslim? Whether or not muslims choose to wear head scarves is their choice. (That is different to muslims being forced to wear them.) Are you criticising that choice? If not then what are you rambling on about?

Because the message I was getting across is that if muslims choose to wear headscarves then people shouldn't criticise them for that choice - especially when the justification for the criticism is the very weak assumption that muslims wearing headscarves lead to degradation of women.

Certainly in an Australian context, muslims are a minority. In such a broad context, it is clear that headscarves won't lead to widespread degradation of women. Unless of course you are going to assert that the vast majority of Australians are muslim and also that muslims generally degrade women in ways such as those you are implying. If the aforementioned points are not what you are trying to put forward then what are you going on about?

People become rich without looking down on poorer people, the belief most people have reguarding the wearing of the hijab directly leads to the assertion that other people are not modest and are skanks (they look down on them etc). If a wealthy person did look down on poorer people as inferior or whatever, then we can criticise them.

Re-read what I said. I said if "a(ie. one) person is rich...etc. I didn't say that all rich people, or even a single rich person for that matter is a snob. It was a hypothetical. The class of the person and context are just aesthetics, I don't believe that you didn't notice that. The point was that just because one person or a bunch of people belonging to a minority, decide to pass judgment on someone (as distinct from physical violence), it doesn't mean that the practices of their group should be abolished. This is because, as I explained before, it does not cause harm.

In any case I can see quite clearly that you are dodging my question. You made no attempt to address it. Look at it this way. One one hand a rich person thinks less of a poor person. On the other hand a person thinks a woman is a slut for not wearing a head scarf. You said that headscarves cause harm and from your comments the only sensible conclusion is that you think the harm stems from the judgment of the woman.

Well, the same principle apples to the rich-poor person example. If woman should be debarred from wearing a headscarf for the perceived harm that you claim, then people should not be permitted to be rich. Do you now see how illogical it is to even imply that muslim women shouldn't be able to wear headscarves if they wish to? You claim that you never implied such things but that is not true. You said that headscarves cause harm and hence you are clearly opposed to them.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Because the message I was getting across is that if muslims choose to wear headscarves then people shouldn't criticise them for that choice - especially when the justification for the criticism is the very weak assumption that muslims wearing headscarves lead to degradation of women.

I'm criticising them because it's detrimental to them and a bad concept for people to get into their heads (that covering up more leads to less rape or means that men will respect you more...).

Certainly in an Australian context, muslims are a minority. In such a broad context, it is clear that headscarves won't lead to widespread degradation of women.

True it won't.

If the aforementioned points are not what you are trying to put forward then what are you going on about?

I've explained myself already.

The point was that just because one person or a bunch of people belonging to a minority, decide to pass judgment on someone, it doesn't mean that the practices of their group should be abolished.

It does when that practice directly leads to the passing of judgement, unless there's some other reason why women wear headscarves?

 

[Benny1103]

I'm criticising them because it's detrimental to them and a bad concept for people to get into their heads (that covering up more leads to less rape or means that men will respect you more...).

When you say 'people' are you referring specifically to muslims or Australians in general. If the former, then many muslim women wear that sort of clothing. As such, they would not be discriminated against by their fellow muslims. Keep in mind that what I just said comes with the implicit assumption that muslims generally discriminate against women for not wearing headscarves which is ridiculous in itself. Perhaps you should go around BOS and ask some muslim guys if that's how they view women and to post their thoughts here.

Besides, since muslims are a minority in Australia if women are discriminated against for what they wear, then they can easily move somewhere which is not populated by a large proportion of muslims. It's like changing jobs - no one with any sense would continue working at a place they really dislike if they had the choice. Muslim women living in Australia certainly have that choice, which follows from the fact that muslims are a minority in Australia.

It does when that practice directly leads to the passing of judgement, unless there's some other reason why women wear headscarves?

You appear to be saying that accompanying that judgment, is actual harm done to women (because pure judgment by itself does not cause harm). Well religion certainly leads to conflict everywhere - whether it be on a global scale (eg. wars) or at a national level. The harm that it causes is quite visible. So does that mean religion should be abolished?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

You appear to be saying that accompanying that judgment, is actual harm done to women (because pure judgment by itself does not cause harm).

You don't think that a view of the world where women should be chaste causes harm?

So does that mean religion should be abolished?

I'm not calling for anything to be abolished, i'm just criticising it. Just as I do not think religion should be banned (I think that's a stupid idea) but I do have my criticisms of religion and believe we should be attempting to make steps away from it.

 

[Benny1103]

That comes down to personal perspective. I'm not going to post mine because someone will try to use it as a senseless argument to nullify my points. In any case, I think that opinions are only harmful when they lead to physical violence or other things which corrode the rights of people. Simple judgments of people do not do such things.

You see a person, pass judgment on them, you don't like them and so decide not to speak to them. No harm done. None of the other person's rights have been violated.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

You see a person, pass judgment on them, you don't like them and so decide not to speak to them. No harm done. None of the other person's rights have been violated.

And no one here has been advocating taking anyones rights away, we simply have criticisms of the practice.

 

[Salima]

i beleive some muslim women wear the whole shabang. which covers everytihng, leaving only little pinholes to see[/QUOTEYou mean the burqa.

I heard an interesting thing the other day, though I suppose you won't care becuase you don't beleive int eh same hting as me...but hey I'll sya it anyways.

Any person found to dishonour the prophet will never be forgiven, such as your name there sasha. I mean you are degrading yourself, and you have become something worse than poo that has been eaten vomited out and then pissed on and eaten and vomited out again. If I ever saw you I'd see only ugliness in your eyes, not ot mention your words. You have no honour. To muslims hte prophet is someone real and honourable. If believed in someone of the same stature, I would not go around with my name saying something so distasteful. If I could I would ask fo ryou to take it off, but you have no desency so I don't see the point, I would also ask you to be band from this sight, but I've come to notice most moderators are on the same line as you, though not to your extnent, so I wouldn't bother either.

But i fyou have a shred of decency or humanity in your body you'd kindly remove muhammad is a pedo from your name and not replace it with anything else vulgar.

A story was told to me not long ago. A man who was christian converted to islam. He then became a scribe for the prophet. Then he converted back out again, claiming hte prophet only aksed him to write what he suggested and that the qur'an was his doing. Then when he died, and he was buried the ground would not take him. The ground spat him bakc out. His chrisitan friends thought it the doing of hte muslims, so they re-buried him and guarded his grave. Then in the morning, his body had once again been thrown out of the earth. That was when they realised he was evil, and not loved by man nor earth. So they left him to rot and for the birds ot eat in the desert far away from them.

This is a lesson for all people who would dishonour any persons religion by speaking about their cherished prophet or god so.

Who cares if Jesus has been drawn. It does not say in the bible that this cannot be done. But is says it int he qur'an, therefore, it should be respected.

Now excuse me, I am going to eat some Nudie sorbet.

Now hijab, is another matter. It is the right of a person to show htier spirituality. If this is by hijab, or covering up further than that (wearing the veil just unde rthe eyes=niqab...is considered sunnah not fard so some people wear it to receive extra reward form allah)/but hijab MUST be worn!

 

[Salima]

heh, you seen a gay/lesbian muslim? i dont think they would have stayed muslim if they did decide to change, and so problem of having gay/lesbians standing next to you is somewhat solved.

im not sure 100% about the punishment of a muslim that has become a homosexual, but i do know that it is severe if they admit to it.

It's death. Just like it is for adultery fo rboth parties involved (contrary to popular belief, thinking it was only the woman who was punished)

 

[davin]

ah, gotta love tolerance for those different than oneself.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

...

Well, we don't really have the ability to think, we're just socially constructed to think we can think. (Descartes was wrong!) You only posted on BOS because society told you to, you don't really want to.

You know what I'd do if I were of the female persuasion? (and if I imagined hard enough they believe I could make myself one; you know now gender is just a social construct too! Maybe I could socially construct myself some boobs to play with) I'd walk around wearing both a headscarf AND a miniskirt at the same time.

With the whole "freedom" and "responsibility" maybe attitudes to how males/females/others dress should be kept private and we should respect each others' rights to dress in trenchcoats and dance down main streets in broad daylight. ie. Let them wear hijab or miniskirts, for whatever derranged reasons they have, and shut up about it. Some of the Aussie women that are on the more robust side could do well by choosing burkha over bikini. Ugh.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

I spit on muslims like you and shit on Mohammed.

Mohammed was a man
I mean, he was a prophet-man
Or maybe he was just a prophet
but he was still
MUHAMMED!
MUHAMMED!
JIHAD'ING THE COUNTRYSIDE
JIHAD'ING ALL THE PEASANTS
JIHAD'ING ALL THE PEOPLE
IN THEIR THATCH ROOFED COTTAGES!!!

 

[davin]

now THERE is a flash animation that would be interesting to watch

 

[davin]

yeah, Captain gh3y's thing

 

[Benny1103]

And no one here has been advocating taking anyones rights away, we simply have criticisms of the practice.

Now you're going around in circles. This point has already been covered. No one has been advocating taking people's rights away? Someone *cough* has already made comments which clearly say otherwise. Perhaps you might see them if you read over some of the posts from this afternoon. I intentionally decided not to comment on those because I knew someone (in this case you) would initiate a circular argument if I did so - such things are a waste of my time.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

You were talking to me and generator as far as I knew, i dunno about other people.. there's some stupid posters in this thread and I usually just ignore them.

 

[Benny1103]

Lets just leave it at that. I'd rather not drag up petty issues which are not really necessary.