Did loverboy get it right? (8 Viewers)

[Azzurri7]

I wasn't discussing social and economic systems. It was just an analogy.

If you're asking me if the psychological principle you were suggesting is true in the case of muslim women wearing hijab. My answer is, for the majority of them no.

You can't really tell here Fred. Once someone is forced to do something you can't tell whether she's satisfied or happy. It is in human's nature, we don't like to be obliged, take orders yes, but to be obliged to do something that's disliked by every human nature... She may show that she's happy but inside her she knows this is not what she chose.

I accept and respect women choice of wearing Hijab because who am I not to accept or to complain it's their choice. But I can't really swallow the idea of someone forcing his daughter (put aside a country, government) someone forcing his daughter to wear Hijab. That's just too much.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Fred]

I'm not with forcing any girl to wear hijab. Once she's old enough she can choose if she wants to wear it or not. At least for me, and in my family that is the case.

 

[Martin]

Which means that yet again it all ends pointlessly and in a stalemate like all other religious discussions between theists and atheists. So whats new?

What's the point of any discussion ever? A lot of them end in a stalemate. If I was god and I knew the outcome I wouldn't do it. But since I never know precisely what something is going to lead to, I talk to people sometimes even when it seems unlikely that something new will come of it.

But I'll take it on the record that you don't consider yourself particularly interesting in discussion

 

[Fred]

What's the point of any discussion ever? A lot of them end in a stalemate. If I was god and I knew the outcome I wouldn't do it. But since I never know precisely what something is going to lead to, I talk to people sometimes even when it seems unlikely that something new will come of it.

But I'll take it on the record that you don't consider yourself particularly interesting in discussion

Wow, i love how you infer things from thin air sometimes??!!:frown:

But as consolation, at least i always know that you think of me as interesting in discussion

 

[Martin]

When you do bother to show up, that is.

 

[Fred]

When i bother to show up?

 

[Martin]

Sometimes the people who are willing to participate in a discussion are not the ones I would pick if I was picking the team, so to speak.

 

[Zé Tahir]

Do you know which dominantly muslim countries obligate the women to wear a hijab?

I know Iran does and i believe the Saudis also obligate the women to wear something on their heads. I also know that Turkey, Lebanon, Albania and Bosnia don't do that.

What about the other muslim countries?

As far as I know only Iran and Saudi Arabia enforce it. Hijab is compolsary for women but its her own choice whether she follows it or not.




I read this article a few years back in the Washington Post about how Latinos are accepting Islam and they interviewed this one lady. Here's a part of that:

Portrayals of Women

After the juma , where Avelar recited verses from the Koran in the back of the mosque with the other women, she left through the same door she had entered.

She said it doesn't bother her that women in Islam have different roles, roles that many westerners describe as repressed. Where they see inequality, she sees respect. A respect, she said, she doesn't see often in Latino culture.

"The way Latin men portray women, it's terrible," Avelar said. "You look at Spanish CDs, and you see women in bikinis on the cover."

Before Islam: The day laborers at a nearby 7-Eleven whistled and cat-called -- "Mamacita ! " -- as she passed them.

After Islam: The day laborers stared in silence as she, in her hijab, passed them.

"The fact they stayed quiet, I was like, ' Alhamdulillah! '," said Avelar, reciting the Arabic phrase "Praise be to Allah."

"I love the respect that I get from the opposite sex [when I'm] in hijab."

Her relationship with her brother also changed.

Before Islam: "We were close," said Selwyn Avelar. "We used to go out and have a drink. We used to talk."

After Islam: "I felt like she was a different person," he said. "She wasn't the girl I had known for 25 years. . . . I felt like she was trying to convert me.''

Yet she's also his sister. And he loves her. In recent months, he said, he's grown to admire her, for learning Arabic, for using her time wisely and for living a healthier and more constructive life.

"Maybe there are times I don't talk to her about my life because she'll give me advice on the Muslim way," he said. "But she's become more of an interesting person. I can learn more from her."

And what about Avelar's father?

Now, whenever a man visits their home, she said, he waits to see if his daughter is properly covered. He likes it that men don't ogle her and she doesn't drink alcohol and stay out late.

His daughter believes he has found a comfortable balance.

-http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/04/AR2006060400957.html

 

[Fred]

Wait are you saying that she's willingly letting go of her freedom, Z? Thats impossible.

 

[Martin]

From the article it would seem that the only reason she's doing it is to get respect from men who for some reason respect her new appearance in a way they didn't the old one.

In other words because men have such a poor restraint on their sexual urges, it should be the women's job to make sure they are in check.

Gotta love that rationale. I guess whoever came up with this idea did not have a high opinion of men. "Nah, men are beyond education and progress, let's just make sure women don't tempt them too much."

 

[Fred]

Ya, i'm sure thats the only reason. Afterall, whoever doesn't embrace your absolute truth must have some kind of agenda.

 

[Alen]

What does this mean? The eunuchs?

Can i ask again? :smile:

 

[Martin]

Right because if you don't agree with me that must mean I'm wrong.

 

[Azzurri7]

What's eunuchs??

 

[Martin]

What's eunuchs??

They were castrated men who played a social function as servants to the emperor of China. It was thought that since they couldn't have children they would not be a threat because they could not start a dynasty of their own.

 

[Azzurri7]

They were castrated men who played a social function as servants to the emperor of China. It was thought that since they couldn't have children they would not be a threat because they could not start a dynasty of their own.

I see. New word added to my dectionary

 

[Enron]

They were castrated men who played a social function as servants to the emperor of China. It was thought that since they couldn't have children they would not be a threat because they could not start a dynasty of their own.

They are also thought to have lovely singing voices.

 

[Alen]

They were castrated men who played a social function as servants to the emperor of China. It was thought that since they couldn't have children they would not be a threat because they could not start a dynasty of their own.

Not just China. They were almost everywhere, especially in the harems.

Rab, they were without testicles. At young age they were castrated so they never really "grew up". Their voice was a voice of a child, they had no facial hair and since they had no testicles, they couldn't produce estrogen and androgen (sex hormones) and they couldn't get a hard on so there was no danger of them having sex with women.

They were servants and bodyguards in the harems. They were still men, stronger than the women, but they couldn't have sex with women.
They were perfect for the role :smile:

So i guess by "male servants not having need of women" (The 30th and 31st verse of Surah an-Nur) , God means the eunuchs.

Of course, "God" was having in mind the situation in the 7th century when there were male servants without need of women.
Or wait, it's the everlasting word of God.
So how can i take it now in the 21st century? Who are the male servants now in 2009, that have no need of women?

 

[Azzurri7]

Not just China. They were almost everywhere, especially in the harems.

Rab, they were without testicles. At young age they were castrated so their voice was a voice of a child, they had no facial hair and since they had no testicles, they couldn't produce estrogen and androgen (sex hormones) and they couldn't get a hard on so there was no danger of them having sex with women.

They were servants and bodyguards in the harems. They were still men, stronger than the women, but they couldn't have sex with women.
They were perfect for the role :smile:

So i guess by "male servants not having need of women" (The 30th and 31st verse of Surah an-Nur states) , God means the eunuchs.

Of course, "God" was having in mind the situation in the 7th century when there were male servants without need of women.
Or wait, it's the everlasting word of God.
So how can i take it now in the 21st century? Who are the male servants now in 2009, that have no need of women?

I think I've seen a documentary about this now that I read your explanation.

Religions are complicated and full of contradictions. It's good to read but never follow.

And btw, I doubt any of the religious members here following Quraan or Bible 100%. That's another thing I don't like. If you believe in your religion either follow it as you should without any exception or don't and most importantly don't tell others what's wrong from right since you don't follow it as you should.

 

[Martin]

I think I've seen a documentary about this now that I read your explanation.

Religions are complicated and full of contradictions. It's good to read but never follow.

And btw, I doubt any of the religious members here following Quraan or Bible 100%. That's another thing I don't like. If you believe in your religion either follow it as you should without any exception or don't and most importantly don't tell others what's wrong from right since you don't follow it as you should.

It's commonly said that the quickest path to atheism is to read the bible start to finish. I wonder if that applies to the Koran too.