Go back to previous topic
Forum nameGeneral Discussion
Topic subjectIf you are offending you probably didn't understand my point.
Topic URLhttp://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13102661&mesg_id=13102793
13102793, If you are offending you probably didn't understand my point.
Posted by Buddy_Gilapagos, Tue Dec-06-16 09:53 PM
>She's a single, non-muslim, white woman; surrounded by other
>non-muslim white men and women. If this were an issue to be
>decided, it should be by muslim women.


That all sounds lovely in theory but that's not how any of this works. Women in societies where they wear burkas are the most oppressed women in the world so they don't get to vote as a block to determine whether they have to wear burkas. If you go to a society dominated by women wearing burkas, you can be assured that it was men who decided that they should be wearing burkas.

Even in the West you can not begin to make the assumption that the women wear burkas are doing so by choice. I think you will find that if a woman is wearing a burka she is probably submitting herself to the command of her husband.

Of course there will be women who tell you otherwise but I side eye any woman saying she is pro burqa of her own free will and not because of societal or familial pressure the same way I'd side eye a victim of Domestic violence who changes her mind about pressing charges against her husband.

But hey, provide me with one example of a pro-woman, pro-Burka muslim woman defending the practice free of male or societal pressure and I am all ears to hear from her.

Otherwise you are just some non-muslim dude arguing for the tool used to oppress alot of muslim women.


Your thinking on this is kind of like chalking up low women voter turnout after the passage of 19th Amendment to women choosing not to vote and not societal and familial pressure not to vote.



>
>Nothing about us without us (is for us).
>
>And this whole shit right here offends me "minority religious
>freedom outweighs societal values or the minority religious
>rights outweighs the societal values"
>
>"Societal values" should not be set in stone. They should be
>constantly be in negotiation as the people, times, knowledge,
>and understanding move and change. Unless you're advocating
>that we should just have slavery because we did before or
>you're a xenophobe.


I don't understand what offends you here. Maybe because you quoted part of it out of context. I never set societal values are set in stone (I think by definition they change). I don't know what the slavery or xenophobe line even means. Maybe you should read my statement again and understand it before shooting from the hip.



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"