Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Hijab, Niqab or Nothing interview

245678

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4 Paradize


    Hijab actually is not just about covering your hair. Hijab is a requirement for both men and woman because it is about ones behaviour, how one talks etc. Both men and women are told to lower their gaze and this is also hijab. There is no doubt that it is a requirement and people who try to seperate the hadith from the quran , this is wrong. The quran tells us to listen to the messenger. If we seperated the hadith from the quran we wouldn't know a lot of things. I personally have no issue with a person who doesn't want to cover her hair but I do have an issue with people who want to prevent a woman from covering.
    Peace.


  • Registered Users Posts: 81,223 ✭✭✭✭biko


    The woman I admire most in Islam is HM Queen Rania of Jordan.
    She discusses the veil at 2.30



  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    meglome wrote: »
    It's interesting how you keep saying you tell the truth. I have no desire to insult you but what you see as truthfulness comes across as arrogance and self-righteousness.
    hiya meglome, it's interesting to see that you have no desire to insult me yet you mentioned it, Do you think i am insulting you, Is truth insulting to you. Am i not speaking truth. Do women in your society not look sex dolls. Ask to yourself, what your youth is doing in colleges and universities. Who is brainwashing them against status of Women. Is that Dead one.
    meglome wrote: »
    I have travelled the world and there's one thing I'm sure about, that people are people. Strip away some superficial differences and people are the same all over the world. You seem to believe that men will suddenly become beasts by seeing a woman's uncovered head, this is utter nonsense. I very much appreciate the beauty of women, just like a sunset or a great painting. Sure I am sexually attracted to women but that doesn't mean I show any less respect.
    Five finger aren't equal. People aren't the same all over the world, when you say people are same you are saying five finger are equal which isn't true.
    meglome wrote: »
    Your points might stand up if in Muslim countries woman were treated far better than in western countries but that's not true. In many Muslim countries women can't speak out about the terrible things that can happen to them. In Saudi Arabia women cannot drive a car, even when covered. Is that respect? Because that seems like control to me. It sickens me that a woman who is raped can be treated so badly in your society. I could go on but this isn't a competition, no society is perfect.
    I ain't saying muslim countries are better than western countries. Majority of these countries are inspired by western culture. Due to western invasion into these countries, these countries have lost their true islamic culture. A culture which preserves rights of Woman. Take example of saudia, saudis are ruled by dictators, there is dictatorship in saudia, that's why what they implement in their country, has got nothing to do with Islam. Islam is quran and the way given by Prophet Muhammad. A person who is muslim and not following Islam. He doesn't represent Islam at all .
    meglome wrote: »
    According to you... "These two women, in the video, have submitted to the will of God and submission to the will of God, is the source of all freedom." Maybe I've missed something but where does God say that women have to be covered?

    "The Noble Qur'an - Al-Ahzab 33:59

    O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils)* all over their bodies (i.e. screen themselves completely except the eyes or one eye to see the way). That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed. And Allah is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

    *the arabic word here is Jalabeeb (plural of Jalbaab), which is the loose outer garment that covers all a woman's body. It says here to use the Jalabeeb to cover all, and scholars say this means to use it to cover her head (agree upon by all scholars) and her face (agreed by many scholars, not all) and one or both eyes, in order for it to be known that she is a free woman and so not to be exposed to any harm."


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    Khan looks superficial? Just because you can see her hair? Doesn't that make you superficial, not her? And, not that she does, what difference would it make that she looks like a male?
    not because of her hairs, because of her cutting, the way she talk. During her first or second response, we find, her color changes, because she doesn't know how to answer a thing which she doesn't know and she tries to generalize thing by taking help of lies. Isn't it shallowness. Tell if i am wrong.
    :confused: This is one big contradiction. First you say that my society has rules, but my thoughts have none and that is dangerous to society. But then you say that islam removes "curbs" (rules?) from thoughts and creates full freedom of thought and expression and that this avoid hypocrites and is good. So you are saying that Islam is trying to produce a society like mine, with no thought rules, but its good when islam does it, but not when my society does it. Can you make up your mind.
    See that's not contradiction, What is purpose of traffic signals on the roads, that is to control traffic. Similarly Islam put signals upon thought, where thoughts follow no rules/signals that is very dangerous for that society. Do you not see your thought following no rules/signals and where your society is going. It is very common to put sex scenes in majority of westren movies. Why what is purpose those scene, Don't get me wrong it's just an example. Do you not feel shame by seeing those scene or you get pleasured. This is how islam cleans the soul of a person by putting signals on thought. I hope you would get my point.
    Its hardly respect if it denies it. Can you not just educate youths to know the real status of women? Would it not be better for societies to encourage a social growth and maturity in men themselves, instead of expecting women to change themselves, to alter their own identity, to suit men?
    This identity is given to women by God, even modern men, who wish open and naked women for their business, can't change this identity. This is how Islam preserve dignity and honor of women in a society. This identity doesn't suit any man, because, you'r a man and you know how you fill hunger of your desires.
    You need to justify this more. How is gods will not someone else's will? Even if god was acting in our best interests and was completely right in his actions, it would still be his will that we are submitting to.
    He is our creator. He created us with his will and he wants us to live a pious life. A life with full of piousness. He wants to liberate us from evil desires which corrupt human soul. The freedom lies in the path of faithfulness not faithlessness.
    But they aren't liberated, they have to constantly alter their identity to hide a part of themselves from me. They must live their public lives according to my "evil" desires. The only way for them to be truly free would be to educate me to control my desires.
    See, they are liberated from evil desires which enslaves their will, which corrupts their ego, You'r measuring freedom in term of materialism. That isn't freedom, Freedom is name of control, If you controls yourself against all the evil then you're free, If you control your movies against sex scenes then that is freedom in your media. Freedom is to resist pleasure not to enslave to them. It's very hard to make you understand simple things because you'r take mirage's beauty thinking it as nest.
    But you havent explained why, you just assert that I haven't because my society is shallow. But what difference would that make? Hell, coming from a shallow society would enable me to recognise something else shallow easier than you, so I dont see the relevance.
    See, simple, don't get me wrong, if you're corrupt then it isn't easy to exactly pin point corruption. Corruption increases with passage of times. You don't know you're shallow inside or you're society is shallow. It's i who is telling you that your society look shallow, and i feel ocean of shallowness in your society.
    As hard as it is to make out what your saying (and its really hard) it seems you are just saying that the west coerces people to wear some clothes, so islam should be able to do it to. How is that a defence?
    So how is that not a defense, coercion is good if used by westren and not good by if used eastern/Muslims. I smell hypocrisy.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    biko wrote: »
    The woman I admire most in Islam is HM Queen Rania of Jordan.
    She discusses the veil at 2.30

    Absolutely, you know, very often. But likewise, there are many women like me who do not wear the veil. So, as long as it's a choice.

    I have nothing against the veil. And I think that wrongly, many in the West look at the veil as a symbol of oppression.

    Now, as long as a woman chooses to wear the veil, because that's her belief and because of her own -- that's a personal relationship with God, so she should be free to dress in whichever way she wants.

    And we should be smarter than to apply more meaning to a symbol of clothing than we should, because, you know, all over the world there are many symbols of dress and many ways of prayer, et cetera. We shouldn't judge people through the prism of our own stereotypes.

    And I think there has been a stereotype that has developed over -- in the Western world of a women -- a veil means oppression, you know. That is not necessarily the case.

    And unfortunately, these stereotypes have been very dangerous between East and West. And we really need to start challenging them, because, you know, they really rob us of accurate perspective.
    Biko, that's her personal view, She doesn't choose hijab. But her choice has got nothing to with Islam. Did she say, she was representing Islam in her choice. Islam is quran and way of Prophet, If she is not following then no one is forcing her to follow islam. It is also clear that women in islam aren't coerced. If they were coerced, then you would see Queen Rania in Hijab.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 37,295 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    dead one wrote: »
    A society which observes no rules.
    It's sad that the boys and men in these countries with those rules you speak of cannot control themselves if the women are not covered head to toe.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    dead one wrote: »
    not because of her hairs, because of her cutting, the way she talk. During her first or second response, we find, her color changes, because she doesn't know how to answer a thing which she doesn't know and she tries to generalize thing by taking help of lies. Isn't it shallowness. Tell if i am wrong.

    But you are the same, you don't know how to answer the question that I asked, so you are generalising and making no sense. You haven't explained how she looks superficial, how she looks like a man or how that makes someone shallow. You argument is actually contradictory to muslim teaching, as the whole point of hijab is to make women be indistinguishable from men (by requiring both men and women to downplay actions and attire that would emphasise the differences between them).
    dead one wrote: »
    See that's not contradiction, What is purpose of traffic signals on the roads, that is to control traffic. Similarly Islam put signals upon thought, where thoughts follow no rules/signals that is very dangerous for that society. Do you not see your thought following no rules/signals and where your society is going. It is very common to put sex scenes in majority of westren movies. Why what is purpose those scene, Don't get me wrong it's just an example. Do you not feel shame by seeing those scene or you get pleasured. This is how islam cleans the soul of a person by putting signals on thought. I hope you would get my point.

    Except you said "Islam promote freedom of thoughts by removing the curbs.", so you are presenting Islam as a society which removes rules, so you are still contradicting yourself. Am I right in saying that English isn't your first language? Try and keep the language simpler: do you think that islam removes rules that western society places on the mind, or do you think that islam puts rules on the mind that western society does not?.
    dead one wrote: »
    This identity is given to women by God, even modern men, who wish open and naked women for their business, can't change this identity. This is how Islam preserve dignity and honor of women in a society. This identity doesn't suit any man, because, you'r a man and you know how you fill hunger of your desires.

    Except that this identity, as detailed by men, is claimed by the same men to actually be coming from god. You see the problem, dont you? Many many islamic nations dont have the requirement or tradition of wearing the full burkha. And the ones that do, are the ones that are, stereotypically, very dominating of their native women. So which is it? God tells women to respect mens desires (desires that god arbitrarily put there in the first place) by completely hiding everything that would actually sate those desires, or have some men bastardised the teachings of god in order to even more dominate their women?
    dead one wrote: »
    He is our creator. He created us with his will and he wants us to live a pious life. A life with full of piousness. He wants to liberate us from evil desires which corrupt human soul. The freedom lies in the path of faithfulness not faithlessness.

    And gods will is still someone elses will. All you are saying here is that we should bow to his will, but thats a different (and contradictory) point to your earlier assertion that submitting to gods will is freedom.
    dead one wrote: »
    See, they are liberated from evil desires which enslaves their will, which corrupts their ego, You'r measuring freedom in term of materialism. That isn't freedom, Freedom is name of control, If you controls yourself against all the evil then you're free, If you control your movies against sex scenes then that is freedom in your media. Freedom is to resist pleasure not to enslave to them. It's very hard to make you understand simple things because you'r take mirage's beauty thinking it as nest.

    Actually your are thinking of freedom materialistically. You are only seeing freedom for women from men acting on their desires (by assuming the burkha stops men from acting on their desires). But the women are still wearing the burkha subject to the possibility of men acting on their desires, so they are still not free from those desires.Basically, if women wear truly free from those desires, then they wouldn't even half to think about them and therefore wouldn't actually need to wear the burkha at all.
    dead one wrote: »
    See, simple, don't get me wrong, if you're corrupt then it isn't easy to exactly pin point corruption. Corruption increases with passage of times. You don't know you're shallow inside or you're society is shallow. It's i who is telling you that your society look shallow, and i feel ocean of shallowness in your society.

    None of which would stop me from recognising shallowness in your society. All this is, is a childish "I know you are, but what am I?" defence. It is incredibly shallow to think, and teach, that women have no hope of presenting their individuality and personality if their individual physical face is on display.
    dead one wrote: »
    So how is that not a defense, coercion is good if used by westren and not good by if used eastern/Muslims. I smell hypocrisy.

    Who said its good to that coercion is used by Western society. Even if it was good, isn't is Islam supposed to be better than the West, why is it happy to fall to the West's way of doing things? This is all hypothetical anyway, as I've already explained that the way the West "coerces" people into the examples you gave is monumentally different from how Islam (and religion in general) coerces.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    dead one wrote: »
    It is also clear that women in islam aren't coerced. If they were coerced, then you would see Queen Rania in Hijab.

    The Islam in one country can be massively different from the Islam in another country, and both are different from the true, perfect, Islamic society, which doesn't exist (or do you believe that some society on earth has Islam down perfectly?). Just because one muslim woman isn't coerced (in one particular way, to one particular point of view) doesn't mean that other women aren't.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    the_syco wrote: »
    It's sad that the boys and men in these countries with those rules you speak of cannot control themselves if the women are not covered head to toe.
    hiya syco,
    You didn't understand, Don't get me wrong, It's sad, when society display parts of women to attract customers. Like i said, sex scenes are very common in western movies. What is purpose of those sex scenes in movies. The media uses immodesty of women for its business. I feel pity on your understand. The hijab has got nothing to do with controlling of men . It is device to create respect and modesty in thoughts about Women in long term. It's long term planning to create pure youth on earth. you see corruption in thoughts of youth, it is because immodesty in behavior of women.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    But you are the same, you don't know how to answer the question that I asked, so you are generalising and making no sense. You haven't explained how she looks superficial, how she looks like a man or how that makes someone shallow. You argument is actually contradictory to muslim teaching, as the whole point of hijab is to make women be indistinguishable from men (by requiring both men and women to downplay actions and attire that would emphasise the differences between them).
    again you're creating more confusion for yourself. Let see what is meaning of superficial. "Apparent rather than actual or substantial". See, there are trillion of women on earth. These trillion women will feel shame if they expose their parts before men public. That's reality, ask to any good woman, she will tell you, a woman doesn't feel good in exposing her parts to other. Now if a woman feels no shame with binkies/half naked dresses that is superficiality. Majority of women in westren media don't feel shame. See, movies/daramas and culture. This is how sonia khan is superficial. This is how the two other women aren't superficial, they know what they are hiding and why are they hiding. i hope you would get the point.
    Except you said "Islam promote freedom of thoughts by removing the curbs.", so you are presenting Islam as a society which removes rules, so you are still contradicting yourself. Am I right in saying that English isn't your first language? Try and keep the language simpler: do you think that islam removes rules that western society places on the mind, or do you think that islam puts rules on the mind that western society does not?.
    I don't hesitate in telling the truth, that english isn't my first language and you will find serious mistakes in my english and grammar but yet it is understandable. I have used curbs in sense of gutter. you know what is gutter in thoughts, that is hypocrisy/bigotry / prejudice and other deep rooted evil. Islam puts some restriction on thoughts by removing these curb, that is actually what i am saying. These restrictions are signals which control traffic of thoughts, i hope you would understand and i am saying your thoughts don't following such types of signal and your thought break rules creating a society full of bigot/hypocrites.
    Except that this identity, as detailed by men, is claimed by the same men to actually be coming from god. You see the problem, dont you? Many many islamic nations dont have the requirement or tradition of wearing the full burkha. And the ones that do, are the ones that are, stereotypically, very dominating of their native women. So which is it? God tells women to respect mens desires (desires that god arbitrarily put there in the first place) by completely hiding everything that would actually sate those desires, or have some men bastardised the teachings of god in order to even more dominate their women?
    The man was a prophet of God, he had got nothing personal in this business. Before Islam the situation of women was worse, they buried alive their daughter in fear of hunger. He finished these stupid ritual and gave respect to woman by telling that "heaven lies in feet of mother". He told, O people fear God in matters of women. God didn't tell woman to respect men's desires. It's what you're telling. Actually the purpose is hijab is how to get respect/modesty in society. No hijab, full porn, full sex sences in movies. Again, don get me wrong. Why is your media completely brainwashing children about status of women by putting these scenes. almost every movies/dramas got scenes. This is how children are brainwashing by watching these sence again and again. This is how hijab is necessary. Hijab tells women about their real status. Hijab tells women how not to be misused in society
    And gods will is still someone elses will. All you are saying here is that we should bow to his will, but thats a different (and contradictory) point to your earlier assertion that submitting to gods will is freedom.
    you're here because of God's will, no God, no will. God isn't someone else. Are you not understanding. It is God who created you so that he can test you, that you follow his will, or take your own will as lord.
    Actually your are thinking of freedom materialistically. You are only seeing freedom for women from men acting on their desires (by assuming the burkha stops men from acting on their desires). But the women are still wearing the burkha subject to the possibility of men acting on their desires, so they are still not free from those desires.Basically, if women wear truly free from those desires, then they wouldn't even half to think about them and therefore wouldn't actually need to wear the burkha at all.
    No i am taking freedom in spiritual sense. When you submit to will of God then you are free of all kind of evils which puts chain of slavery upon your desires. The identity of special dress is given by God and that's how those two women are free any types of corruption. You can't hire those women to work in strips clubs, or for sex scenes in movies. They will prefer to give their lives rather doing such stupidity. This is how hijab tells women about their real status in society. The hijab, it is identity which no man can misuuse. Don't you see slavery of desires in the minds of youth. Ask to yourself.
    None of which would stop me from recognising shallowness in your society. All this is, is a childish "I know you are, but what am I?" defence. It is incredibly shallow to think, and teach, that women have no hope of presenting their individuality and personality if their individual physical face is on display.
    That's you personal thinking, i have nothing to say about this. But you're misunderstanding that it is choice of woman who wants to hide her face or not. But Islamic way of dress is hijab, that full face covering isn't mandatory.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 37,295 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    dead one wrote: »
    I feel pity on your understand.
    If the women are not covered head to toe, it's not the fault of the man that he rapes the woman. If the woman doesn't want to shame her family, she should marry the rapist.

    I see the above as a weakness on behalf of the man and boys, and/or their government/religious leaders. I extremely doubt that the Prophet would condone such behaviour.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    dead one wrote: »
    again you're creating more confusion for yourself. Let see what is meaning of superficial. "Apparent rather than actual or substantial". See, there are trillion of women on earth. These trillion women will feel shame if they expose their parts before men public. That's reality, ask to any good woman, she will tell you, a woman doesn't feel good in exposing her parts to other. Now if a woman feels no shame with binkies/half naked dresses that is superficiality. Majority of women in westren media don't feel shame. See, movies/daramas and culture. This is how sonia khan is superficial. This is how the two other women aren't superficial, they know what they are hiding and why are they hiding. i hope you would get the point.

    I'll think you'll find that the 3.5 billion women on earth all have different ideas about what constitutes "exposing their parts on public" (plenty have no problem not wearing the veil, plenty have no problem not wearing head scarves at all, some have no problem wearing nothing above their waist, if national geographic is to be believed). You are calling Khan superficial because she doesn't measure herself according to how other people think she should look and cover up. By not covering up to such extreme points, she shows how un-superficial she is. She shows that the she understands that her presence in society can dictated by her personality and her opinions ie more than her superficial appearance, despite the burkha claiming otherwise.
    dead one wrote: »
    I don't hesitate in telling the truth, that english isn't my first language and you will find serious mistakes in my english and grammar but yet it is understandable. I have used curbs in sense of gutter. you know what is gutter in thoughts, that is hypocrisy/bigotry / prejudice and other deep rooted evil. Islam puts some restriction on thoughts by removing these curb, that is actually what i am saying. These restrictions are signals which control traffic of thoughts, i hope you would understand and i am saying your thoughts don't following such types of signal and your thought break rules creating a society full of bigot/hypocrites.

    Ok, I kind of get what you mean by "curb" ("curb", in the way you had used it, can mean restraints, or to restrain), but you are still contradicting yourself, but in a different way. Islam cannot be a society of freedom, if it puts rules on the thoughts of its citizens. Even if you argue that those rules are necessary, it still contradicts the notion of freedom.
    dead one wrote: »
    The man was a prophet of God, he had got nothing personal in this business. Before Islam the situation of women was worse, they buried alive their daughter in fear of hunger. He finished these stupid ritual and gave respect to woman by telling that "heaven lies in feet of mother". He told, O people fear God in matters of women. God didn't tell woman to respect men's desires. It's what you're telling. Actually the purpose is hijab is how to get respect/modesty in society. No hijab, full porn, full sex sences in movies. Again, don get me wrong. Why is your media completely brainwashing children about status of women by putting these scenes. almost every movies/dramas got scenes. This is how children are brainwashing by watching these sence again and again. This is how hijab is necessary. Hijab tells women about their real status. Hijab tells women how not to be misused in society

    I'm not talking about Mohammed, I'm talking about the men who have come since him, and who now claim, after decades or centuries of not requiring it, that hijab implies the veil. Look at pictures of Iran in the 70s, it looks like America in the 70s. The resurgence of fundamentalist interpretations of islamic rules happened across the islamic world in the 70's, as a result of the Arab Oil Embargo of the 70s and the revolution in Iran at the same time, which resulted in billions of dollars going to newly "crowned" fundamentalist rulers of these countries who used the money to spread propaganda and denounce the west in order to dominate their people. The societies who most strongly argue for the burkha, and other fundamentalist interpretations of the koran, are the ones whose entire power base is based on association with the koran, therefore the more control of their citizens (and the less questioning of any of their interpretations of the koran) the better.
    dead one wrote: »
    you're here because of God's will, no God, no will. God isn't someone else. Are you not understanding. It is God who created you so that he can test you, that you follow his will, or take your own will as lord.

    God is a different entity to me, therefore his will is different to my own. You even point out that I can take his will or my will, so I can see you agree in principle, you just dont like the contradiction its creating for you in your other assertions.
    dead one wrote: »
    No i am taking freedom in spiritual sense. When you submit to will of God then you are free of all kind of evils which puts chain of slavery upon your desires. The identity of special dress is given by God and that's how those two women are free any types of corruption. You can't hire those women to work in strips clubs, or for sex scenes in movies. They will prefer to give their lives rather doing such stupidity. This is how hijab tells women about their real status in society. The hijab, it is identity which no man can misuuse. Don't you see slavery of desires in the minds of youth. Ask to yourself.

    But they aren't free spiritually, as they have submitted to anothers will, so they are slaves of it. By submitting to the will of god, you are putting chains upon your desires, remember that the whole point of hijab is for people to rein in their sexual instincts. How can the hijab be any kind of identity? It makes every woman the same as any other woman. If peoples identity wasn't based on how they physically looked, then muslim men would have to wear the burkha too, as they would lose nothing from not wearing it and only emphasise their devotion to hijab. That they dont, and yet assert women should, shows the imbalance in hijab, not to mention the true status of women in fundamentalist society.
    dead one wrote: »
    That's you personal thinking, i have nothing to say about this. But you're misunderstanding that it is choice of woman who wants to hide her face or not. But Islamic way of dress is hijab, that full face covering isn't mandatory.

    Ok, replace "face" with "hair" in the last post, the point is the same. The societies which assert the veil, assert that women have no hope of presenting their individuality and personality without it, the societies which assert the head scarf, do the same for the headscarf. It doesn't matter to what level the covering is asserted, its all still a shallow view that if their body is on view (to some arbitrary degree) that this negates their personality and identity and voice in society. A woman could walk around naked, and it wouldn't do anything to effect her personality or identity in society (it might be a reflection of her personality of identity). And if some people in society cant see that woman's personality or identity because of her nakedness, then that's their fault, their shallowness and their problem to fix, not hers.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17 Irish_Muslim


    My local Imam and islamic teacher here in Dublin gave a year ago a detailed lecture on the concept of Hijab in Islam from Quran & Hadith (two primary sources of islamic law)

    I am posting this for anyone interested.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    the_syco wrote: »
    If the women are not covered head to toe, it's not the fault of the man that he rapes the woman. If the woman doesn't want to shame her family, she should marry the rapist.
    hiya again syco, some time they call me the dead psycho.
    What rape has got to do with hijab. Are you saying, a rapist wouldn't rape the woman if she is wearing hijab. See, hijab has got nothing to with rape or whatever. Like i said, it's long term planning to create pure society on earth.
    the_syco wrote: »
    I see the above as a weakness on behalf of the man and boys, and/or their government/religious leaders. I extremely doubt that the Prophet would condone such behaviour.
    Now, you're on the spot, the weakness on behalf of the man and boys. What removes these weakness, that is hijab. I am talking about long term planning. If every mother, who knows her true status in a society, guides her children about true status of woman in a scoeity, then you wouldn't see such weakness on behalf of the man and boys. No one is born with knowedgle, every one learns from same society, If mothers cheat their husband then that is exactly what children will learn, i hope you would get the point.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    I'll think you'll find that the 3.5 billion women on earth all have different ideas about what constitutes "exposing their parts on public" (plenty have no problem not wearing the veil, plenty have no problem not wearing head scarves at all, some have no problem wearing nothing above their waist, if national geographic is to be believed). You are calling Khan superficial because she doesn't measure herself according to how other people think she should look and cover up. By not covering up to such extreme points, she shows how un-superficial she is. She shows that the she understands that her presence in society can dictated by her personality and her opinions ie more than her superficial appearance, despite the burkha claiming otherwise.
    of the 3.5 billon women on earth, all have honor and dignity in their minds, i am saying again, of these 3.5 billion women, no good women will advertise her body part that she might get attraction of men. Isn't it corruption of intent. See, majority of western or eastern women do makeup, they do all this makeup to cheat public. I mean, majority of women do makeup or advertise to good look. See for example, i like a girl in her makeup or in her artificial dress, but when i come to know that she isn't beautiful in her real status, i get disappointed. I hope you would get this point. Isn't it cheating public by hiding your real face..... on the other hand, in hijab, you look what you're in reality. No cheating, no attraction/cheating of men. This is how, Islam creates a shallow free society. Now, hope you would understand the reason for hijab aren't shallow. Isn't it what they call wishful thinking. In westren, freedom is totally material. Freedom is concept which based on one's wished.
    Ok, I kind of get what you mean by "curb" ("curb", in the way you had used it, can mean restraints, or to restrain), but you are still contradicting yourself, but in a different way. Islam cannot be a society of freedom, if it puts rules on the thoughts of its citizens. Even if you argue that those rules are necessary, it still contradicts the notion of freedom.
    See, what is freedom, if you're freed from all kind of corruption. Isn't it freedom. See, if every man, in a society, is not corrupt. isn't it freedom?. Islam puts some restriction upon thought. What is purpose of those restrictions, to free society from all kinds of corruption. You create traffic signal on the roads, Is purpose of signals to slave traffic. So what freedom are you talking about. Can you please explain. Are you saying, if some men hire few women for growth of their business, Is that freedom. Or woman, with open dresses, who corrupt imagination of youth, Is that freedom. Please explain to me, what do you mean by freedom.
    I'm not talking about Mohammed, I'm talking about the men who have come since him, and who now claim, after decades or centuries of not requiring it, that hijab implies the veil. Look at pictures of Iran in the 70s, it looks like America in the 70s. The resurgence of fundamentalist interpretations of islamic rules happened across the islamic world in the 70's, as a result of the Arab Oil Embargo of the 70s and the revolution in Iran at the same time, which resulted in billions of dollars going to newly "crowned" fundamentalist rulers of these countries who used the money to spread propaganda and denounce the west in order to dominate their people. The societies who most strongly argue for the burkha, and other fundamentalist interpretations of the koran, are the ones whose entire power base is based on association with the koran, therefore the more control of their citizens (and the less questioning of any of their interpretations of the koran) the better.
    See, the bold font, the societies who are willing to dominate the world by getting resources from muslim world, In order to fill hunger of their dominance, they come with new hyena tactics. you know Iran and American were very Good partner before the Iranian revolution. But why everything changed after the revolution. The revolution revealed true status American and their imperialistic plan with their democratic values. Are you getting me. It was all about Oil. As long as American were getting Oil, they remain good with iranian, but when oil supply of oil stopped they became enemy of Iran and what about Iran and Iraq, who created disturbance in the world, It was American and their hyena tactics and now you are seeing a big riddle on the screen. 9-11. Again the american and the hunger of oil. Now they have cheated their own people, I mean, american fed hunger of oil at the corpses of their own people. It's a dirty politics even it is more dirty what you're saying in this case.
    fundamentalist rulers of these countries who used the money to spread propaganda and denounce the west
    I hope one day you would find the truth.
    God is a different entity to me, therefore his will is different to my own. You even point out that I can take his will or my will, so I can see you agree in principle, you just dont like the contradiction its creating for you in your other assertions.
    God is a different entity when you read God from different minds.
    But they aren't free spiritually, as they have submitted to anothers will, so they are slaves of it. By submitting to the will of god, you are putting chains upon your desires, remember that the whole point of hijab is for people to rein in their sexual instincts. How can the hijab be any kind of identity? It makes every woman the same as any other woman. If peoples identity wasn't based on how they physically looked, then muslim men would have to wear the burkha too, as they would lose nothing from not wearing it and only emphasise their devotion to hijab. That they dont, and yet assert women should, shows the imbalance in hijab, not to mention the true status of women in fundamentalist society.
    again, what do you mean by freedom. If your innerself is freed from all of kind of corruption, Isn't it freedom. If you're free from greed, lust, envy, bigotry and all kind of other deep rooted corruptions. Isn't it freedom....or you're saying a person, who can't stop himself from visiting strips club, is a free person. Is that freedom are taking about. don't get me wrong it's just an example. What do you mean by freedom....
    Ok, replace "face" with "hair" in the last post, the point is the same. The societies which assert the veil, assert that women have no hope of presenting their individuality and personality without it, the societies which assert the head scarf, do the same for the headscarf. It doesn't matter to what level the covering is asserted, its all still a shallow view that if their body is on view (to some arbitrary degree) that this negates their personality and identity and voice in society. A woman could walk around naked, and it wouldn't do anything to effect her personality or identity in society (it might be a reflection of her personality of identity). And if some people in society cant see that woman's personality or identity because of her nakedness, then that's their fault, their shallowness and their problem to fix, not hers.
    See, i am using again the same example, Isn't artificiality cheating. The women like sonia khan cheat other by representing themselves in extraordinary manner. You know what i am talking about. Suppose i am ugly, i look ugly and i use makeup inoder to become beautiful. Isn't it cheating. For me beauty doesn't lie in makeup/cheating. It's lies in character of a woman/man.... You're measuring beauty in material terms.... I am measuring beauty for sake of humanity. A woman who isn't cheating humanity with her real face is beautiful, on the other hand, a woman, who is cheating humanity with her superficiality, is spot on face humanity.
    Please answer me, Isn't it cheating


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,410 ✭✭✭oceanclub


    of the 3.5 billon women on earth, all have honor and dignity in their minds,

    dead one, am curious to know your reaction to the so-called honor killings that have happened, such as the one in Canada:

    http://www.khaama.com/afghan-family-commits-honor-killing-in-canada-120

    P.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    dead one wrote: »
    of the 3.5 billon women on earth, all have honor and dignity in their minds, i am saying again, of these 3.5 billion women, no good women will advertise her body part that she might get attraction of men. Isn't it corruption of intent. See, majority of western or eastern women do makeup, they do all this makeup to cheat public. I mean, majority of women do makeup or advertise to good look. See for example, i like a girl in her makeup or in her artificial dress, but when i come to know that she isn't beautiful in her real status, i get disappointed. I hope you would get this point. Isn't it cheating public by hiding your real face..... on the other hand, in hijab, you look what you're in reality. No cheating, no attraction/cheating of men. This is how, Islam creates a shallow free society. Now, hope you would understand the reason for hijab aren't shallow. Isn't it what they call wishful thinking. In westren, freedom is totally material. Freedom is concept which based on one's wished.

    :eek: I'm sorry, you think that hijab is what women look like in reality? If that was true, then there would be no need to explicitly detail what hijab was, as women, in reality, would already adhere to it.
    Besides that, you are still showing the shallowness of hijab. You are still presenting it as the only way for women to really show their physical appearance, free of make up (as if burka wearing women dont wear make up) and that women cant misrepresent themselves without make up. For instance, why do you think that women cant cheat or lie if their face can't be seen? Presumably muslim men must still strike up relationships with burka wearing women and eventually get married and have children, so it seems that attraction is still their without physical appearance. Do you think that a woman can't act differently if she is wearing the burka?
    dead one wrote: »
    See, what is freedom, if you're freed from all kind of corruption. Isn't it freedom. See, if every man, in a society, is not corrupt. isn't it freedom?. Islam puts some restriction upon thought. What is purpose of those restrictions, to free society from all kinds of corruption. You create traffic signal on the roads, Is purpose of signals to slave traffic. So what freedom are you talking about. Can you please explain. Are you saying, if some men hire few women for growth of their business, Is that freedom. Or woman, with open dresses, who corrupt imagination of youth, Is that freedom. Please explain to me, what do you mean by freedom.

    Being allowed and able to do what you want is freedom. Now, I know that people can't have absolute freedom. I recognise that inevitably one mans freedom will infringe on someone else, so, at best, what you are looking for is a system which maximises freedom but which does not aim to give absolute freedom, as that would not work. This is only a problem to those who blindly assert that their system is one of freedom when what they want to say is that their system is the one with the most harmony.
    dead one wrote: »
    See, the bold font, the societies who are willing to dominate the world by getting resources from muslim world, In order to fill hunger of their dominance, they come with new hyena tactics. you know Iran and American were very Good partner before the Iranian revolution. But why everything changed after the revolution. The revolution revealed true status American and their imperialistic plan with their democratic values. Are you getting me. It was all about Oil. As long as American were getting Oil, they remain good with iranian, but when oil supply of oil stopped they became enemy of Iran and what about Iran and Iraq, who created disturbance in the world, It was American and their hyena tactics and now you are seeing a big riddle on the screen. 9-11. Again the american and the hunger of oil. Now they have cheated their own people, I mean, american fed hunger of oil at the corpses of their own people. It's a dirty politics even it is more dirty what you're saying in this case.

    I hope one day you would find the truth.

    :confused: What has this got to do with my point? Islamic society had long since moved away from fundamentalist interpretations of the koran by the time the 70s came along It was fundamentalist parties that used traditionalist and patriotic values as their driving point to remove the US influence from their countries that brought it back (its a pretty common tactic, use traditionalism and notions that "X is true Islam and true "insert countries name here"" in order to make your country men think you are taking power from foreigner invaders when, in effect, you are just taking power from your country men)
    dead one wrote: »
    God is a different entity when you read God from different minds.

    :confused: And? This just makes me right.
    dead one wrote: »
    again, what do you mean by freedom. If your innerself is freed from all of kind of corruption, Isn't it freedom. If you're free from greed, lust, envy, bigotry and all kind of other deep rooted corruptions. Isn't it freedom....or you're saying a person, who can't stop himself from visiting strips club, is a free person. Is that freedom are taking about. don't get me wrong it's just an example. What do you mean by freedom....

    As I have said before, hijab doesn't make you free of any of those things you mention, in fact you are so much enslaved to them, that it can be physically seen - in the rigid, identity devouring clothes that women are made wear.
    dead one wrote: »
    See, i am using again the same example, Isn't artificiality cheating. The women like sonia khan cheat other by representing themselves in extraordinary manner. You know what i am talking about. Suppose i am ugly, i look ugly and i use makeup inoder to become beautiful. Isn't it cheating. For me beauty doesn't lie in makeup/cheating. It's lies in character of a woman/man.... You're measuring beauty in material terms.... I am measuring beauty for sake of humanity. A woman who isn't cheating humanity with her real face is beautiful, on the other hand, a woman, who is cheating humanity with her superficiality, is spot on face humanity.
    Please answer me, Isn't it cheating

    And why is the burka an answer to that, even if it were true? Why not just have women not wear any make-up if you are so afraid of artificiality? And what about artificiality in terms of personality? Is that not cheating too? This is just avoiding my point. Some woman's "artificiality" might entice a man to act in some way he otherwise wouldn't, but that's his fault and his problem, not hers.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    oceanclub wrote: »
    dead one, am curious to know your reaction to the so-called honor killings that have happened, such as the one in Canada:

    http://www.khaama.com/afghan-family-commits-honor-killing-in-canada-120

    P.
    hiya oceanclub
    my below message is true if it wasn't accident.... right...
    This is cultural sickness, It has got nothing to do with islam.... You know some people are so sick of culture that they got it as lord. Islam is against such sickness.... I think you don't know afghan people, majority of afghans are very straightforward in when it comes to rules...... They even don't forgive their own children who violate their family rituals.... You know i am talking about family... Family which makes society.... when family becomes threat to society, they don't hesitate in finishing their own family... You will not understand as you live in age of boy friend/girl friend... The afghans are living in family system through ages. It's family what matters to them not their children who abuse on their own family system.....


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    :eek: I'm sorry, you think that hijab is what women look like in reality? If that was true, then there would be no need to explicitly detail what hijab was, as women, in reality, would already adhere to it.
    I am talking about hijab, i don't know any goddamn burka... hijab is proper dress... for example see below angel on earth...
    275808_100002697981212_809502_n.jpg
    Right tell how this woman is cheating other... She is an angel or earth, she knows about herself, She knows how to protect her husband and family.... She will give her life for her dignity and honor... You'can't hire this angel for dirty polictics.... You can't make this angel as girlfriend.... This is no element of showing off her in dressing... You can't hire this angel to advertise her part for some dirty business or sex scence in media....... This is reality, mark hamil.... I have got no idea why would a genius like you want to escape from reality...
    now i tell you cheating and shallowness...
    276498_156351747792688_1392437173_n.jpg
    You see this is cheating, she is cheating other people by making her look artificial.. This is shallowness... You can hire her for strip club... You can make her girlfriend... You can do whatever you want with.... Why??? because she doesn't know who is she...... She doesn't know what is status in her society...
    Besides that, you are still showing the shallowness of hijab. You are still presenting it as the only way for women to really show their physical appearance, free of make up (as if burka wearing women dont wear make up) and that women cant misrepresent themselves without make up. For instance, why do you think that women cant cheat or lie if their face can't be seen? Presumably muslim men must still strike up relationships with burka wearing women and eventually get married and have children, so it seems that attraction is still their without physical appearance. Do you think that a woman can't act differently if she is wearing the burka?
    See, we aren't talking about action/character of a woman... We are talking about her physical appearance.... Is she cheating in her physical appearance or not.... A woman can cheat or lie even by wearing hijab but it doesn't change fact that she isn't cheating in her physical appearance.. A women in makeup can cheat or lie but it doesn't change the fact that she has already been cheating in her artificial appearance.... For example, suppose a woman is speaking truth by wearing a transparent dress, who would believe her?... on the other hand, she is clearly cheating the desires of public with her artificial dress.. i hope you would get the point...
    Being allowed and able to do what you want is freedom. Now, I know that people can't have absolute freedom. I recognise that inevitably one mans freedom will infringe on someone else, so, at best, what you are looking for is a system which maximises freedom but which does not aim to give absolute freedom, as that would not work. This is only a problem to those who blindly assert that their system is one of freedom when what they want to say is that their system is the one with the most harmony.
    See, Islam is a universal religion... It isn't property of my father..... You're right when you said a system which maximises freedom... Islam maximieses freedom... for example...."The main difference between the Islamic and Western views concerning women is that one is norm based and the other that claims to be value-free. The Islamic view offers a model for women to follow which is intended to be universal and normative in its impact. It takes a stand on many aspects of the life of the individual and the community. While women are free to struggle with how they will incorporate these values into their lives and their life styles, general definitions are clearly available as to what constitutes right and wrong and justice from injustice. The Islamic sources outline general principles and guidelines while it is up to the individual to apply these and give them meaning. The Western perspective strongly resists any agreed upon general principles or guidelines for women. It does not see a universal condition affirming model for the life of women. Making any statements about what a women's life should be like is considered as not leaving her free to make up her own mind according to her own conscience with or without reference to any outside source. This very essential difference may become clear when we consider each paradigm's views of society."
    :confused: What has this got to do with my point? Islamic society had long since moved away from fundamentalist interpretations of the koran by the time the 70s came along It was fundamentalist parties that used traditionalist and patriotic values as their driving point to remove the US influence from their countries that brought it back (its a pretty common tactic, use traditionalism and notions that "X is true Islam and true "insert countries name here"" in order to make your country men think you are taking power from foreigner invaders when, in effect, you are just taking power from your country men)
    I agree with you some extent some people use Islam in their politics to control common folks but five fingers aren't equal.....
    :confused: And? This just makes me right.
    No, that doesn't make you right, Do you know about Islamic concept of toheed, if you understand toheed, you will find answer for your answer...Moslems believes in toheed whichisn't merely monotheism i.e. belief in one God, but much more.
    As I have said before, hijab doesn't make you free of any of those things you mention, in fact you are so much enslaved to them, that it can be physically seen - in the rigid, identity devouring clothes that women are made wear.
    offcourse, hijab makes you free of all those thing in a society in long term.... i am using again in long term. It is only cure to the evil of society... if it isn't then give me alternative...
    And why is the burka an answer to that, even if it were true? Why not just have women not wear any make-up if you are so afraid of artificiality? And what about artificiality in terms of personality? Is that not cheating too? This is just avoiding my point. Some woman's "artificiality" might entice a man to act in some way he otherwise wouldn't, but that's his fault and his problem, not hers.
    i have given you detail answer above.. I don't know anything about burka, we are talking about hijab... It doesn't make women look artificial... There is no attraction in hijab.... When you use artificial mean to make yourself look natural that is artificial and cheating and shallowness.... Mark Hamil, honestly you've no point to resist... or prove me wrong!!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    dead one wrote: »
    I am talking about hijab, i don't know any goddamn burka... hijab is proper dress... for example see below angel on earth...

    Right tell how this woman is cheating other... She is an angel or earth, she knows about herself, She knows how to protect her husband and family.... She will give her life for her dignity and honor... You'can't hire this angel for dirty polictics.... You can't make this angel as girlfriend.... This is no element of showing off her in dressing... You can't hire this angel to advertise her part for some dirty business or sex scence in media....... This is reality, mark hamil.... I have got no idea why would a genius like you want to escape from reality...
    now i tell you cheating and shallowness...

    You see this is cheating, she is cheating other people by making her look artificial.. This is shallowness... You can hire her for strip club... You can make her girlfriend... You can do whatever you want with.... Why??? because she doesn't know who is she...... She doesn't know what is status in her society...

    I was talking about hijab as well (I said burka later, but here I was talking about hijab). My point still stands, because nothing here actually addresses it. If hijab was the way women look in reality, then there would be no need to have explicit rules on hijab, as women would already look that way in the first place.
    As for the rest of you post? While you can argue that it is "cheating" by emphasising your benefits with make up, it's also "cheating" to completely hide them away. Also, its pretty obvious that if you don't want to "cheat" with make-up, then simply don't wear make-up. That the implication here is that women have to completely cover up to avoid this cheating, which just begs the question of how men manage to avoid cheating by simply not wearing make up.
    dead one wrote: »
    See, we aren't talking about action/character of a woman... We are talking about her physical appearance.... Is she cheating in her physical appearance or not.... A woman can cheat or lie even by wearing hijab but it doesn't change fact that she isn't cheating in her physical appearance.. A women in makeup can cheat or lie but it doesn't change the fact that she has already been cheating in her artificial appearance.... For example, suppose a woman is speaking truth by wearing a transparent dress, who would believe her?... on the other hand, she is clearly cheating the desires of public with her artificial dress.. i hope you would get the point...

    Well, no I don't, why is it cheating to wear make up? It tells you something about a womans personality by seeing the make up they wear, so by not allowing it, you cant see how they think about themselves, which actually makes it a little harder to perceive their personality. Secondly, the hijab is itself a form of make up, but in this case its to completely hide their appearance (as opposed to emphasise parts of it), so its also cheating to wear it. Your physical appearance is a part of your personality. Adhering to hijab, according to those women in the video, allows them to express their personality the way they want, therefore the hijab is a way to emphasis the parts of themselves they like and hide the parts they dont, just like make up.
    dead one wrote: »
    See, Islam is a universal religion... It isn't property of my father..... You're right when you said a system which maximises freedom... Islam maximieses freedom... for example...."The main difference between the Islamic and Western views concerning women is that one is norm based and the other that claims to be value-free. The Islamic view offers a model for women to follow which is intended to be universal and normative in its impact. It takes a stand on many aspects of the life of the individual and the community. While women are free to struggle with how they will incorporate these values into their lives and their life styles, general definitions are clearly available as to what constitutes right and wrong and justice from injustice. The Islamic sources outline general principles and guidelines while it is up to the individual to apply these and give them meaning. The Western perspective strongly resists any agreed upon general principles or guidelines for women. It does not see a universal condition affirming model for the life of women. Making any statements about what a women's life should be like is considered as not leaving her free to make up her own mind according to her own conscience with or without reference to any outside source. This very essential difference may become clear when we consider each paradigm's views of society."

    Its funny seeing a quote that tries to represent Islam as being the free choice, and the West as being the constrictive choice, when the language used directly contradicts teh point because its nonsense. Women are "free to struggle" in Islam, it says, as if that is any kind of freedom. The West "resists guidelines for women" as if that represents a lack of freedom on women's part. The Islamic model can't claim any model if it expects its citizens to struggle against its imposed values and restrictions.
    dead one wrote: »
    I agree with you some extent some people use Islam in their politics to control common folks but five fingers aren't equal.....

    And? Does this say anything about my original point? That the Islamic societies that most strongly push Hijab (and the most fundamentalist interpretations of it) are societies with a recent resurgence of fundamentalists who used that fundamentalism (under the guise of traditionalism and anti-foreign influence propaganda) to gain control in the first place.
    dead one wrote: »
    No, that doesn't make you right, Do you know about Islamic concept of toheed, if you understand toheed, you will find answer for your answer...Moslems believes in toheed whichisn't merely monotheism i.e. belief in one God, but much more.

    It seems to be the belief that god is absolute, unique and indivisible. Still dont see how it contradicts me.
    dead one wrote: »
    offcourse, hijab makes you free of all those thing in a society in long term.... i am using again in long term. It is only cure to the evil of society... if it isn't then give me alternative...

    It doesn't matter whether you look long or short term, there is still no freedom in hijab. Imagine there was someone who was afraid of going out of their house, afraid of being attacked, afraid of getting lost. So, to avoid having to deal with these fears, they stay at home, all the time. Are they free? Is it freedom to deny your fears by completely removing a facet of your life? Or is true freedom facing those fears and not giving in to them, not living your life subject to them.
    If you want an alternative to the hijab, its simple. Just recognise that those evils, dont have any power over you if you dont let them have it. You dont need to do anything, you dont need to avoid anything, just recognise that regardless of what environment you are in and temptations are presented to you, that its up to you to take them or not take them. Deny the possibility of taking them, denies your opportunity to reject them, which denies the whole point of existence (to be tested by god, according to you and islam.).
    dead one wrote: »
    i have given you detail answer above.. I don't know anything about burka, we are talking about hijab... It doesn't make women look artificial... There is no attraction in hijab.... When you use artificial mean to make yourself look natural that is artificial and cheating and shallowness.... Mark Hamil, honestly you've no point to resist... or prove me wrong!!!

    Of course the hijab makes women look artificial, no-one is born wearing a head scarf, its not a naturally occurring biological appendage. You assert that the hijab is necessary to make women look natural, yet hijab is itself an artificial addition to their biological body. Therefore you have a contradiction and and you just demonstrate the shallowness of the hijab again.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    I was talking about hijab as well (I said burka later, but here I was talking about hijab). My point still stands, because nothing here actually addresses it. If hijab was the way women look in reality, then there would be no need to have explicit rules on hijab, as women would already look that way in the first place.
    hiya mark,
    hijab has rules and those rules are prescribed in hadiths. What are hadith, hadiths are action of Prophets.... Muslims have to follow those rules while offering Prayers, Hajjj and etc... Quran tells us about prayer but rules aren't prescribe in whole quran... similarly, there is no explicitly in rules about hijab. Hijab is religious dress given to women. If you don't wear hijab according to those rules then that isn't hijab.... I hope you would be clear.
    As for the rest of you post? While you can argue that it is "cheating" by emphasising your benefits with make up, it's also "cheating" to completely hide them away. Also, its pretty obvious that if you don't want to "cheat" with make-up, then simply don't wear make-up. That the implication here is that women have to completely cover up to avoid this cheating, which just begs the question of how men manage to avoid cheating by simply not wearing make up.
    No it's not cheating, even it's cheating then it's clear cheating... I mean, you can clearly judge by her dress that she has been cheating others... Let me give you example, suppose i wear a shirt with the word "cheater"... I am giving clear message with my shirt that i am a cheater... So it doesn't come into detail of cheating. As people can judge me by seeing on my shirt...Where as if i try to cheat other people by pretending that i ain't a cheater, that would be greater cheater... See, mark hamil, clearly you don't have any answer what i am saying and you just countering my argument... ... cheating is fraud, in which the victim doesn't that he/she is being cheated. Makeup is cheating by hiding your real self . Cheating refers to immoral way of achieving a goal... while there is no immorality in hijab.... Cheating is generally used for the breaking of rules to gain advantage in a competitive situation... There is no advantage wearing hijab in a competitive situation... while purpose of makeup is to gain advantage in a competitive situation..... For example majority of models do make for modeling.... This is how they cheat the mob and their fellow models.... clearly hijab doesn't come in the definition of cheating... think for a moment what are saying.... or provide me proof, how a woman wearing hijab is cheating other by giving example...
    Well, no I don't, why is it cheating to wear make up? It tells you something about a womans personality by seeing the make up they wear, so by not allowing it, you cant see how they think about themselves, which actually makes it a little harder to perceive their personality. Secondly, the hijab is itself a form of make up, but in this case its to completely hide their appearance (as opposed to emphasise parts of it), so its also cheating to wear it. Your physical appearance is a part of your personality. Adhering to hijab, according to those women in the video, allows them to express their personality the way they want, therefore the hijab is a way to emphasis the parts of themselves they like and hide the parts they dont, just like make up.
    You got to be kidding me.... you said
    the hijab is itself a form of make up, but in this case its to completely hide their appearance (as opposed to emphasise parts of it), so its also cheating to wear it
    if that is case then everything is makeup... reality is that every one should be naked.... Every one is cheating other... See, there is no artificiality in hijab.. It's just a dress as you wear cloth.... But making up yourself in such a way that you cheat reality, that is shallowness. For example suppose my color is black and you know blacks don't good look in the valley of whites... So i makeup in such a way that i look white... that's cheating / shallowness in reality.... i have cheated my existence to become white... as i was naturally black... That's what majority of westren and eastren woman do... Who is brainwashing them about concept of reality..... is artificiality reality... I think you have no answer for that.... The answer is Islam and hijab.... A religion of nature...
    Its funny seeing a quote that tries to represent Islam as being the free choice, and the West as being the constrictive choice, when the language used directly contradicts teh point because its nonsense. Women are "free to struggle" in Islam, it says, as if that is any kind of freedom. The West "resists guidelines for women" as if that represents a lack of freedom on women's part. The Islamic model can't claim any model if it expects its citizens to struggle against its imposed values and restrictions.
    it's funny when you say this by neglecting what is happening around you... "The Qur'anic view insists on interdependence while the Western view encourages atomization and independence. The Western view sees society as a place where the individual should be as free as possible to pursue his own definition of norms to the extent that he likes without hurting anyone else. Injury to another individual in the Western view of society usually means physical or material injury. The rights of the individual and his social, economic and political sovereignty are paramount. The purpose of society is to gain the individual his/her rights and to guarantee order and equal opportunity to make the pursuit of rights possible. To make this possible, society must be defined as value free to avoid clashes or the prevention of others to pursue their own personal definition of happiness or success or fairness etc... In the Western model, value judgements are considered to be 'biased' and an impingement of another's rights. The only value judgement allowed is the one of material equality. No one would argue, for example, that it is right to be poor or wrong to be rich. In the value free society the norm to measure inequality is usually based on a material criteria. The western feminist movement framed its goals within this criteria. The "value-free" society is presumably based on the assumption that everyone pursuing his own interests and personalized definition of norms will lead to the harmonization of the whole community. Such a society also justifies its value-free claim on the assumption that in a pluralistic heterogeneous community with different levels of education and condition, that it is impossible to agree on a loose body of norms deemed universal"
    And? Does this say anything about my original point? That the Islamic societies that most strongly push Hijab (and the most fundamentalist interpretations of it) are societies with a recent resurgence of fundamentalists who used that fundamentalism (under the guise of traditionalism and anti-foreign influence propaganda) to gain control in the first place.
    you used the words islamic societies, give at least two or three example... leave the irananian society for a moment.
    It seems to be the belief that god is absolute, unique and indivisible. Still dont see how it contradicts me.
    it seems you didn't the whole of concept of taweed... and it contradict with your point...
    God is a different entity to me, therefore his will is different to my own. You even point out that I can take his will or my will, so I can see you agree in principle, you just dont like the contradiction its creating for you in your other assertions.
    what is tauheed. it tells that toheed is the essence of the testimony that there is no god except Allaah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah, and that this is Islam with which Allaah sent His Prophet to the two races of mankind and the jinn, other than which Allaah will not accept any religion from anyone. If you follow islam and believe in God then God is't a different entity to you...
    It doesn't matter whether you look long or short term, there is still no freedom in hijab. Imagine there was someone who was afraid of going out of their house, afraid of being attacked, afraid of getting lost. So, to avoid having to deal with these fears, they stay at home, all the time. Are they free? Is it freedom to deny your fears by completely removing a facet of your life? Or is true freedom facing those fears and not giving in to them, not living your life subject to them.
    If you want an alternative to the hijab, its simple. Just recognise that those evils, dont have any power over you if you dont let them have it. You dont need to do anything, you dont need to avoid anything, just recognise that regardless of what environment you are in and temptations are presented to you, that its up to you to take them or not take them. Deny the possibility of taking them, denies your opportunity to reject them, which denies the whole point of existence (to be tested by god, according to you and islam.).
    right give me, answer why society is going towards evils, if i believe your quote is true...
    Of course the hijab makes women look artificial, no-one is born wearing a head scarf, its not a naturally occurring biological appendage. You assert that the hijab is necessary to make women look natural, yet hijab is itself an artificial addition to their biological body. Therefore you have a contradiction and and you just demonstrate the shallowness of the hijab again.
    That's dress, but does that dress changes color or original apearance of women.... No it doesn't, but makeup changes original/natural apearance of women/men.... Take example of micheal Jackson for the time being.. what makes him to betray his own race... wasn't he shy with his original appearance...


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,410 ✭✭✭oceanclub


    dead one wrote: »
    hiya oceanclub
    my below message is true if it wasn't accident.... right...
    This is cultural sickness, It has got nothing to do with islam

    That may be true, but the fact is that many Muslims _think_ it is a religious issue.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/20/us/missouri-couple-sentenced-to-die-in-murder-of-their-daughter-16.html
    "If my father is sent to death because he is a Muslim, then he is proud of himself to die that way," the dead girl's sister, Fatima Isa, screamed after the sentences were handed down by Circuit Judge Charles A. Shaw

    http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/28/us/terror-and-death-at-home-are-caught-in-fbi-tape.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
    After the verdicts were read, an agitated family friend who would give her name only as Mrs. Abraham expressed her dismay at what she saw as the jury's failure to acknowledge the Palestinian culture. "I feel it's not right. We follow our religion," said Mrs. Abraham. She said the Isas had to discipline their daughter or lose respect. "They'd be embarrassed in front of everybody in the country like somebody when they go without their clothes outside."

    In this case, a girl approves of the murder of her own sister, by her own parents, because he was doing his "Muslim" duty. The entire thing was caught on tape as the father was being investigated for other reasons:

    http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/28/us/terror-and-death-at-home-are-caught-in-fbi-tape.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
    The mother says, "Shut up!"

    Tina continues to cry, but her voice is unintelligible.

    "Die! Die quickly! Die quickly!" the father says.

    The girl moans, seems to quiet, then screams one last time.

    "Quiet, little one! Die my daughter, die!" the father says.

    Tina was stabbed six times in the chest with a boning knife, which pierced her heart, one lung, and liver, investigators said.

    Mr. Zein admitted on the witness stand that he put his foot on his daughter's mouth to quiet her. His wife did not testify.

    An alternate juror, Carl Smith, said he would think about the tape for the rest of his life. "I cried because I wish I could have been there to help her," he said.
    You know some people are so sick of culture that they got it as lord. Islam is against such sickness.... I think you don't know afghan people

    Honour killings are not limited to Afghans; the above case involved Palestinian-Americans.

    Here's my question, dead one. Do you think your constant haranging about women to be "honorable" and your inability to see women as anything other than sexless appendages to their husbands/fathers adds to this climate of hate?

    P.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    dead one wrote: »
    hiya mark,
    hijab has rules and those rules are prescribed in hadiths. What are hadith, hadiths are action of Prophets.... Muslims have to follow those rules while offering Prayers, Hajjj and etc... Quran tells us about prayer but rules aren't prescribe in whole quran... similarly, there is no explicitly in rules about hijab. Hijab is religious dress given to women. If you don't wear hijab according to those rules then that isn't hijab.... I hope you would be clear.

    Thats clear, but its got nothing to do with what I was saying. You said that the hijab was what women look like in reality, I said if that was the case, there would be no need for explicit rules for the hijab for when girls become women as they would be born that way in the first place.
    dead one wrote: »
    No it's not cheating, even it's cheating then it's clear cheating... I mean, you can clearly judge by her dress that she has been cheating others... Let me give you example, suppose i wear a shirt with the word "cheater"... I am giving clear message with my shirt that i am a cheater... So it doesn't come into detail of cheating. As people can judge me by seeing on my shirt...Where as if i try to cheat other people by pretending that i ain't a cheater, that would be greater cheater... See, mark hamil, clearly you don't have any answer what i am saying and you just countering my argument... ... cheating is fraud, in which the victim doesn't that he/she is being cheated. Makeup is cheating by hiding your real self . Cheating refers to immoral way of achieving a goal... while there is no immorality in hijab.... Cheating is generally used for the breaking of rules to gain advantage in a competitive situation... There is no advantage wearing hijab in a competitive situation... while purpose of makeup is to gain advantage in a competitive situation..... For example majority of models do make for modeling.... This is how they cheat the mob and their fellow models.... clearly hijab doesn't come in the definition of cheating... think for a moment what are saying.... or provide me proof, how a woman wearing hijab is cheating other by giving example...

    Just follow your own example. With the hijab, you can cover up your shirt with the word "cheater" on it and so you become a greater cheater. If covering up with make up is cheating, then so is covering up with clothes.
    dead one wrote: »
    You got to be kidding me.... you said

    if that is case then everything is makeup... reality is that every one should be naked.... Every one is cheating other... See, there is no artificiality in hijab.. It's just a dress as you wear cloth.... But making up yourself in such a way that you cheat reality, that is shallowness.

    Everything is make up. But I'm not the one who says that make up is cheating so this is not an issue with me.
    dead one wrote: »
    For example suppose my color is black and you know blacks don't good look in the valley of whites... So i makeup in such a way that i look white... that's cheating / shallowness in reality .... i have cheated my existence to become white... as i was naturally black...

    Or suppose that you are a woman, who knows that women dont come across well in the valley of men, so they cover up in such a way that they cant be distinguished as women (in theory anyway). Is that not cheating and shallowness? Is it not cheating a woman's existence to deny that her physical body is a part of who she is?
    dead one wrote: »
    it's funny when you say this by neglecting what is happening around you... "The Qur'anic view insists on interdependence while the Western view encourages atomization and independence. The Western view sees society as a place where the individual should be as free as possible to pursue his own definition of norms to the extent that he likes without hurting anyone else. Injury to another individual in the Western view of society usually means physical or material injury. The rights of the individual and his social, economic and political sovereignty are paramount. The purpose of society is to gain the individual his/her rights and to guarantee order and equal opportunity to make the pursuit of rights possible. To make this possible, society must be defined as value free to avoid clashes or the prevention of others to pursue their own personal definition of happiness or success or fairness etc... In the Western model, value judgements are considered to be 'biased' and an impingement of another's rights. The only value judgement allowed is the one of material equality. No one would argue, for example, that it is right to be poor or wrong to be rich. In the value free society the norm to measure inequality is usually based on a material criteria. The western feminist movement framed its goals within this criteria. The "value-free" society is presumably based on the assumption that everyone pursuing his own interests and personalized definition of norms will lead to the harmonization of the whole community. Such a society also justifies its value-free claim on the assumption that in a pluralistic heterogeneous community with different levels of education and condition, that it is impossible to agree on a loose body of norms deemed universal"

    While I suppose it is something that you at least put quotes from some website in quotes, you should also reference the website you are taking them from. This is especially important for you, as English isn't your first language, so arguing someone else's points, made in a non native language, will only get you so far. For instance, you haven't seen the immediate and obvious contradiction in bold. Western society cannot be value free, the very opposite must be true. At the very least, Western society must value freedom, assuming they are championing it above all else. Of course western society values a great many other ideas too, its why western society has laws.
    dead one wrote: »
    you used the words islamic societies, give at least two or three example... leave the irananian society for a moment.

    Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan (under taliban law, until recently). Then you have the fundamentalist groups trying to get in power in and around Indonesia and Malaysia such as Jemaah Islamiyah.
    dead one wrote: »
    it seems you didn't the whole of concept of taweed... and it contradict with your point...

    what is tauheed. it tells that toheed is the essence of the testimony that there is no god except Allaah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah, and that this is Islam with which Allaah sent His Prophet to the two races of mankind and the jinn, other than which Allaah will not accept any religion from anyone. If you follow islam and believe in God then God is't a different entity to you...

    Thats not the wikipedia explanation of Tawhid, which specifically states the opposite: "The Qu'ran asserts the existence of a single and absolute truth that transcends the world; a unique, independent and indivisible being, who is independent of the entire creation."
    dead one wrote: »
    right give me, answer why society is going towards evils, if i believe your quote is true...

    Firstly, I dont believe that society is going towards evil. Yes people do stupid and bad things with their freedoms, but people have always done that and thats why we have laws, because we recognise that some freedoms need to be curtailed so that they dont infringe on others. Secondly if what you said was true, then the muslim societies with the highest observance of hijab (ie the ones that require it, like Saudi Arabia and Iran and Afghanistan) would be the societies that had the least amount of evils in the world. Do you believe this to be the case? Can you name an islamic society, in the world today, that is better than the West thanks to the hijab?
    dead one wrote: »
    That's dress, but does that dress changes color or original apearance of women.... No it doesn't, but makeup changes original/natural apearance of women/men.... Take example of micheal Jackson for the time being.. what makes him to betray his own race... wasn't he shy with his original appearance...

    The dress changes the appearance of women, that's the point of it. Make up also changes the appearance of women (make up doesn't actually change your skin colour, its a temporary colouring, not a permanent chemical change). Michael Jackson didn't change colour because of make up, he change colour because drugs taken specifically to do that (ie it was a chemically induced permanent change). Even if he did, so what? Its no different to someone having corrective surgery for a crooked nose or to remove a mole. If your personality and your opinions are really what matter, then it shouldn't matter if and by how much you change your appearance.


  • Registered Users Posts: 181 ✭✭pancuronium


    I have watched the video and would like to give my opinion in relation to the full head dress worn by Muslim women, I have no problem with anyone wearing these items in the privacy of their own home but In Ireland & other parts of Europe I think people feel threatened by the full head dress as much as they feel threatened by someone wearing a hoodie & covering their face (See Link Below) people like to see what they are dealing with and if Muslim people can’t understand this then where can we go but to ban these items........................ I'm open to opinions / questions / correction.





    article-1307592-0AF95E62000005DC-817_468x261.jpg


  • Registered Users Posts: 90 ✭✭blackthorn


    Hi Pancuronium
    In my opinion it is a mistake to categorise the face veil as something that belongs in the home, like a fetish that should stay in the privacy of the bedroom. For the women who wear it, the veil facilitates them to go out in public - that is its function. Without it, they would not go out. Banning the veil would take away those women's access to the outside world.

    I do not believe that a veiled woman is equivalent to a hooligan or a criminal. I'm sure you don't feel threatened when a Christian woman wears a white veil on her wedding day. Similarly, when I see a veiled Muslim woman, I see someone expressing a particular piety and I feel no threat. I realise people can be afraid of the unknown, but surely the answer is to try and learn and understand as an antidote to that fear.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    oceanclub wrote: »
    That may be true, but the fact is that many Muslims _think_ it is a religious issue.
    http://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/20/us/missouri-couple-sentenced-to-die-in-murder-of-their-daughter-16.html
    http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/28/us/terror-and-death-at-home-are-caught-in-fbi-tape.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
    In this case, a girl approves of the murder of her own sister, by her own parents, because he was doing his "Muslim" duty. The entire thing was caught on tape as the father was being investigated for other reasons:
    http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/28/us/terror-and-death-at-home-are-caught-in-fbi-tape.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
    hiya ocean club...
    your gave me link of "new york times" but you forget who owns new york news---The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, & the Washington Post.
    ...These three paper are in Jewish hands.. Suzberger family also owns, through the New York Times Co. 36 other newspapers; twelve magazines, including McCall's and Family Circle..."
    Now, you also know Israel Palestine crisis.. You think Jew boys will tell us truth about real situation in Palestine.. infact whole state of Isreal is illegal at that land... think for a moment... who knows jew boys are telling truth, who knows whether they planted these tapes or not... like i said, It's cultural issue, Afghan are straightforward when it comes to family ritual... The news in newyork time is nothing but jew boy propganda to legitimize their doing in public... it's old hyena tactics...
    oceanclub wrote: »
    Honour killings are not limited to Afghans; the above case involved Palestinian-Americans.
    Above case is clear propaganda, even in the book of lies you will find truth...
    oceanclub wrote: »
    Here's my question, dead one. Do you think your constant haranging about women to be "honorable" and your inability to see women as anything other than sexless appendages to their husbands/fathers adds to this climate of hate?
    P.
    Good question, right if that is case, then i don't use women to create sex scenes... The same sex scene which are corrupting the imagination of youth... Thinks for a moment, it's not me, its liberal mindset like you... Are you not aware of your media.... why are they banning hijab, the reason is simple because it makes women feel what they are, and liberal like you don't want women should feel what are they.... See, it's dangerous for their business if all women start wearing hijab and boycotting their product... They are using women in the name of freedom... To flourish their business, they have been corrupting the most beautiful element of life i.e, the women.. See, the irony in your own question....what you think is completely is reverse to real world..


  • Registered Users Posts: 181 ✭✭pancuronium


    blackthorn wrote: »
    Hi Pancuronium
    In my opinion it is a mistake to categorise the face veil as something that belongs in the home, like a fetish that should stay in the privacy of the bedroom. For the women who wear it, the veil facilitates them to go out in public - that is its function. Without it, they would not go out. Banning the veil would take away those women's access to the outside world.

    I do not believe that a veiled woman is equivalent to a hooligan or a criminal. I'm sure you don't feel threatened when a Christian woman wears a white veil on her wedding day. Similarly, when I see a veiled Muslim woman, I see someone expressing a particular piety and I feel no threat. I realise people can be afraid of the unknown, but surely the answer is to try and learn and understand as an antidote to that fear.


    Firstly Blackthorn many thanks for your reply, generally I wouldn't get involved in a debate in relation to something I know little about, but above "dead one" made a point of posting a picture of a woman and I quote:

    "You see this is cheating, she is cheating other people by making her look artificial.. This is shallowness... You can hire her for strip club... You can make her girlfriend... You can do whatever you want with.... Why??? because she doesn't know who is she...... She doesn't know what is status in her society... "

    Firstly I personally find this statement offensive & I think "dead one" will find in our society You cannot do whatever you want with............ There is a thing called respect & concent in our country & also a thing called the law!


    Also I must disagree with you comparing the veil on a Christian woman’s face to the niqab (See picture below)

    wedding-veils.jpg


    Quite a difference, do you not agree? you can also do a search on Google images for a Christian wedding veil, there all very similar to the one posted here & I don’t think you will find one that can be compared to a niqab.

    my point simply was that people in a public place in Ireland (where crime is not nonexistent) can feel threatened by any person concealing their face, therefore we can't have a rule for one & not for another........... my point is that shop owners, pub owners, banks, shopping centres etc, may have no choice but to ban such items of clothing concealing the face...................................

    Do you believe that it would be past a criminal to wear niqab in public if this would help them in acquiring their goal?

    Again I'm open to opinions / questions / correction on this.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,410 ✭✭✭oceanclub


    dead one wrote: »
    hiya ocean club...
    your gave me link of "new york times" but you forget who owns new york news---The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, & the Washington Post.
    ...These three paper are in Jewish hands..

    Yes, I should have known you're resort to anti-Semitism.

    OK, fine, give me a list of which newspapers you consider accurate. I'll make sure as far as possible that no Jews work for them.

    P.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    hiya pancuronium
    do you think that i lied, or i am liar, I spoke truth and truth is quite bitter to accept.. You can see movies of Muslim countries. Even those movies don't represent islam, but due to infulence islam in the region, movie makers hesitate to put sex scene in their movies.
    Also I must disagree with you comparing the veil on a Christian woman’s face to the niqab (See picture below)
    The women doesn't represent Christianity and we believe Bible was once word of God. The teaching of Jesus was Islam and he was one of the messenger of God. If you see the reality, you will find most Christian women (including the women in the picture) don't, and many don't take other guideline of the Bible (against pre-marital sex, adultery, etc) literally either. However, there do seem to be a increasing no of Christian women out there who are committed to following the Bible as it is written. Below are some webpages

    According to the Scriptures: Headcovering
    Biblical Headcovering: The Scarf of Hidden Power
    Christian Women's Headcovering Directory
    Headcoverings and the Christian Woman
    Is a Woman's Hair Her Only Covering?
    Let Her Be Veiled
    Modesty and Christian Living in the 90s
    My Testimony Regarding the Headcovering
    Nigerian Catholics told to be modest
    No Such Custom?
    On the Covering of Heads
    She Maketh Herself Headcoverings
    Should Christian Women Wear a Headcovering?
    The Biblical Practice of Headcovering
    The Christian Modesty
    The Christian Veiling
    The Headcoverings of Sisters
    The Rites of Submission
    The Significance of the Christian Woman's Veiling
    The Veil
    Women's Headcovering and the Glory of God


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    oceanclub wrote: »
    Yes, I should have known you're resort to anti-Semitism.

    OK, fine, give me a list of which newspapers you consider accurate. I'll make sure as far as possible that no Jews work for them.

    P.
    oceanclub, leave it you wont find such propganda in any other newpapers. Don't waste your time. If you insist then will provide


Advertisement