Kuwait Takes Some Small Steps...

The reason Saudiland and Egypt for example do not like Iran, is because Iran is tronger than them militarily. They fear a Middle-East where Iran will be the powerful Muslim state, as they rightly should, because Iran knows the BS the House of Saud has pulled and it knows about the Egyptians helping Israel kill and torture the Palestinians. It doesnt matter that some states dont want or like Iran, what matters is that Iran is a sovereign nation, with its own structure, where people vote for who they want and its Parliament includes people from different religions and walks of life.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Most other Muslim nations or their pro-US leaders? Iran is more popular with the Arabs than their own leaders.

You guys should really campaign with the cable services to get al Jazeera. Otherwise you're just dancing in the dark.

The Arab street is firmly behind the Iranian POV.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/15352/bush_fails_to_convince_arab_states_about_iran.html

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Wow.

So you're admitting the Arab street agrees with Ahmadinejad's ridiculous rhetoric?

That seals my opinion of Arabs then.

Thanks Sam.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Okay, but in that case the citation should be narrowed to something like "nationality-baiting" or just "flaming," rather than citing entire countries as off-limits.

It would be interesting if the modship here, in general, started actually cracking down on this behavior. There are several rather prolific posters that would have to permanently banned, as they do not appear to come here for any other purpose.

 

Nothing strange about it.

Feminist theory in Western countries has covered this issue quite thoroughly. The notion that voluntary choice somehow absolves the controlling powers of their role in arrangements and customs, their imposition of consequences and maintenance of cultural norms in their favor, so that (for example) the fact that genital mutilation is voluntary and performed by women on their daughters deflects any concern about its oppressive and misogynistic nature, is a strange bit of blindspot rhetoric.

Like bound feet and public deportment or travel restrictions, universal veils and chadors and such are evidence of an ugly reality.

Whoever is enforcing the laws is the State, by definition.

 

I would like to say I don't like views like this because in my opinion it (unintentally) craps on woman's right activists in these places. They have made real gains and progress. and in the west we didn't just go poof and get to where we are.

 

Except that wearing a piece of clothing and campaigning for it, does not equal actual bodily harm as genital mutilation does.

Yet the state does not change it just like that, or lay down precedents.

 

It does, actually, at least in northern latitudes - it creates vitamin D deficiency, on top of the general problems common in a restricted mobility and consequently more sedentary life. It's a quiet issue in the local clinics and among social services groups, locally here in Minnesota, for example.

Perhaps the Kuwaitis, unlike other human beings, are immune to such problems, and the obesity stats among upperclass Kuwaiti women are without their expected implications.

But surely you are not confining your conception of oppressive custom to that causing obvious and immediate physical damage? When an entire population of women "voluntarily" acts in such a self-damaging, self-restrictive, and hobbling manner, anyone educated should recognize an obvious exemplar of a familiar situation.

Whoever is enforcing laws is part of the State. That's what a State is.

 

Some quotes from sources:

The further you live from the equator, the longer exposure you need to the sun in order to generate vitamin D. Canada, the UK and most U.S. states are far from the equator.

....at least 10 minutes on 10% of the body surface (e.g., arms or legs) “followed by good sun protection,” two to three times a week. This balances the need for vitamin D with need to minimize skin cancer risk.

According to US Environmental Protection Agency. Report to Congress on indoor air quality, volume II: assessment and control of indoor air pollution , Report No EPA 400-1-89-001C. Washington, DC: EPA, 1989:

In the US and other Western countries, there has been a shift from outdoor activities to time spent indoors. In the US alone, Americans were found to spend an average of 93% of their time indoors.

Compounding the problem is the real concern that sunlight itself, the very entity that quickly creates vitamin D in our skin, has deleterious health effects when exposure occurs in high concentrations or for sustained periods, especially in individuals with lighter pigmentation. In order to limit exposure to ultraviolet light, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, with the support of many organisations including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Cancer Society, have launched a major public health campaign to increase public awareness about sunlight exposure and the risks of various skin cancers.

Looking at non-Muslim parts of the world, 18% of pregnant women in the UK and 61% in New Zealand have been shown to have the deficiency. It would also seem aboriginals suffer from it.

So we see that regardless of whether they wear a full body cover or not, women suffer from vitamin d deficiency all over the world.

Sedantary lifestyle is not related to wearing a piece of clothing. Compare and contrast my non-Muslim neighbours with a sedantary lifestyle to my mother and sisters with an active and busy lifestyle outdoors. Overall, sedantary lifestyles are rising more in Western non-Muslim communities and populations due to various technological advances and changes in society.

Obesity stats can be found here in the UK as well. Fact: Muslim women dont wear a full body cover all the time, everytime. At home or with family, in the garden or outside, they dont wear it. Fact: Middle-East is closer to equator, less sunlight exposure needed, otherwise harmful skin cancers may rise.

I disagree that its self-damaging, self-restrictive or hobbling. I see far more non-Muslim women being self-damaging, self-restrictive and hobbling due to their health problems than I do Muslim women.

The branches in a country are divided. We are talking about that branch that is tasked with maintaining and where encessary amending and or creating new laws. That task is up to the judiciary.

 

You are wrong. Try wearing an outfit like that when you are doing chores on a farm or around the house, for example, or playing down by the lake, or working around machinery.

The physical fact of that kind of clothing is not reasonably deniable.

That's bad. Wearing that kind of clothing in the remaining 7% would make it worse.

Yes it is. You cannot do what the active women of my acquaintance do, physically, dressed in a pup tent like that.

And in such circumstances, the men wear such clothing as well. We are not talking about that.

So? Your vision seems imperfect in this respect (the medical stats say otherwise), and even if your judgment were not suspect (an "active physical life outdoors" does not happen in a little walled garden) that does not change the nature of that kind of clothing.

The deficiency, and its effects, is compounded by such clothing, especially at higher latitudes.

The physical circumstances in which such clothing is reasonable are not universal, in time or in location. Neither are the social circumstances, of course - any religion that prohibits the Finnish sauna in Finland has a screw loose, and needs amending in the principles from which that prohibition arose.

 

This is hilarious. You should look from Eastern Europe, to the Middle East, Turkey, Iran, Central Asia, Russia, India, and African societies. These women manage to cover their hair and the major part of their bodies and yet preform all the tasks related to gathering crops, water, and cooking. Humans have been doing these tasks for thousands of years. The Westerners seem to have lost touch with their past, indeed not even realizing that wearing a head scarf has no effect on one's ability to perform work. Muslim men and women, wearing headgear and long robes, are able to continue this work. Some of the ideas put forward in this thread are laughable.

 

Nobody's making an issue with a head scarf. Shit, my grandmother's wouldn't leave the house without some kind of head covering. The real issue is in the cumbersome "figure covering" tents that women are required, by law, to wear on top of their clothing and the face coverings they have to put into place before leaving their house. If a woman wants to wear something, that's one thing, but being force to wear these ridiculous outfits, which they obviously are, is quite another.

~String

 

You cannot wear the clothing required of women in many Islamic countries and lead the "physically active outdoors" life of most women of my acquaintance. You'd drown, if you didn't kill yourself from heat exhaustion.

If women are capable of performing their assigned chores to community standards despite cumbersome clothing, good for them - in the US, men in chains have been found capable of building roads, etc, as well. So not only women can overcome the imposed handicaps of lower status.

 

I have grown up in such a society, I have rarely heard of women dying from exhaustion or drowning. The rhetoric on this forum is quite infantile.

As for women wearing tents, this is quite a simplistic view of some societies in the Middle East. Borne out of prejudice and racism. In Syria and Lebanon, Christian women wear the same sort of dress and it has more to do with culture than religion. In such societies, men also wear what you would describe as tents or sheets.

Furthermore, what people do not understand is that the style of dress in Muslim societies differs significantly depending on the culture of the region. As indicated before, Khaleeji dress differs from Turkish dress, which differs from Sudanese dress and Pakistani dress. Furthermore, women wear completely different clothes depending on their residences in villages or cities. To completely neglect the cultural and historical practices of these regions, one can never grasp the full reality.

Furthermore, before commenting, I would like to ask if anyone on this forum has ever visited any Muslim society and mingled with the people there. This is extremely important in objectively finding truth, especially in concerns with social practices in particular areas.

 

But they do die from Honor Murders if they don't tow the mark.

 

Only in your dreams friend.

 

Yes, in my dreams, but lets wake to the horror of reality

1.In April 1991, 20 years old Fatima Ahmedwho lived in Pishdar area was killed by her brother for honour.
2.At the end of March 1991 Sagul Ismael 40 years old and the mother of nine children was killed in Sulaimaniya by her cousin’s son named Kawa Muhammed Kowloz.
3.In 1991, Khaj Hassan Hama, 25 years old from Nawdashty was murdered because she was pregnant out of marriage.
4.On the 2nd of October 1991, Nihayat, 26 years old, worker in a tailoring factory, was killed by her ex-husband. She had married again and was four months pregnant when she was murdered.
5.On 18th of August 1991, Ayesha Abdulrahman, 45 years old and an activist of PUK, was murdered in her own home.
6.On July 1991, a family based on love was destroyed in Erbil; the woman’s father, brother and some other defendants murdered the woman named Ziryan, the reason being that this woman loved her husband and she married him but her relatives didn’t agree to the marriage.
7.In March 1992, Mleeha Faris burnt herself in the collective town of Samood. She died after few hours. She had been forced to marry an old man.
8.Mihabed Haji Abdulla, 16, was killed by her brother in 1992 because she loved a boy.
9.In 1992 Fakhria Salim Fattah, 28, who lived in Pishdar area, was killed because of adultery.
10.Sabiha Youseif Mustafa, 18, from Pishdar, burned herself to death in 1992 because she had been forced to marry a man she didn’t love. She had been exchanged for another woman, each forced to marry the other’s brother.
11.Zilekhan Muhammed, 30, from Hiran area was killed by her relatives in 1993.
12.Khatun Raouf Mirza, 24 years old, from Qaladiza, who had divorced and then remarried, was killed by her ex-husband in 1993.
13.Nigar Muhammed Haji, 20, from Rania, was killed in 1993 because she was in love with a man.
14.Khadija Saleman Ali, 21 years old, was killed by her brother in law in 1993.
15.A woman named Fatima from Shorish quarter was killed by her husband on 25.08.1993.
16.Bafrin Ahmed Muhammed, 21, from Rania was killed in 1993 for adultery.
17.Astry Omer Abdulla, 35 years old, was killed by her husband in 1993.
18.Sakina Haji Beg, 35, was killed in Sheih Wasan village on 20.08.1993 by her brother because fell in love and married her lover; her brother killed her after seven years of marriage.
19.Bayan Ali Sofi, from Rania and a mother of 6 children was killed by her brother because she loved another man, not her husband. He tied her to a stone and threw her into Sirwan River. She was found after a week between Chinara and Darbandikhan.
20.On 27th August 1993, Nazaneen was killed by her husband ...............................................................

 

If you want, I can dredge up atrocities implicating Christianity (current) in deaths based on (Christian) superstition, customs and dogma.

But, what would the point be? To create anger and outrage against the remaining 99.99% of normal, loving, rational Christians by tarring them with the same brush?

In your dreams, and ONLY in your dreams, is what you are attempting to portray above, "normal" and "everyday" practice, in Muslim society.

ALL societies have ignorant extreme idiots. This is a flaw in human nature.

 

Of course not, They don't do such things as the physically active women around my town do.

They can't.

I am judging from the Muslim women who have immigrated to my society, and mingle with the people here.

The style of dress similar to the Kuwaiti style adopted by some - not all, it depends on circumstance - of them is restrictive and cumbersome, and prevents them from leading a "physically active outdoor" life. It makes no physical sense, and creates many problems for them in their health and otherwise. They themselves explain it as a religious requirement, imposed by internalized social judgment upon violators.

If somehow this manner of dress does not have these effects, or derive from these judgments in the other societies in which that religion - and no other - imposes that kind of physical (and mental, IMHO) handicap on the local women, then please explain how that magic is accomplished.

We understand just fine. We are talking about Kuwait, and similar societies.

 

You were the one who made the claim

That Honor Killings were only in my dreams.

And guess what I don't support those either, and as a fact, that would be a short list, of those who have done so, and escaped the consequences of the Law.

Now just how rare are Honor Killings in Islam?

This is in Great Britian alone, not even a Muslim country;

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...7000-women-are-victims-every-year-780522.html

A question of honour:

Police say 17,000 women are victims every year

Ministers are stepping up the fight against so-called 'honour' crime and forced marriages. Detectives say official statistics are 'merely the tip of the iceberg' of this phenomenon. Brian Brady investigates

Sunday, 10 February 2008

Up to 17,000 women in Britain are being subjected to "honour" related violence, including murder, every year, according to police chiefs.


Yes, and?