|
How odd, this story isn't on Al Jazeera at all, not sure if A-J is just not reporting it or what. That's worrysome, I usually go to A-J for my depressing Muslim news.
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 12:19 |
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:well you say it's liberal but you also said that women have more rights in islam than anywhere else sooooooo Well, different flavors of rights. Ancient Islam definitely was very progressive towards not just women but rival religions as well during Muhammad's (PBUH  ) time. Women could hold titles, inherit, own land, own businesses, have property, receive/pursue education, reject marriages and such. At this time, early Christianity was downright jackasses in comparison. While Muslims permitted shared exposure to holy places with their religious rivals Christians were heavily anti-Semitic.So yeah, early Islam was very good for women comparatively once upon a time, but as Christianity continued to PROGRESS as time marched on, Islam actually REGRESSED and got very repressive (largely attributed to tribal and cultural influences on the religion.) So while Islam started off ahead, it stayed the same/ grew worse while Christianity continued on. In Modern Christianity, women can work, inherit, own property, have titles, own a business, reject marriages, never have children, vote, pursue an education, etc. The shittier Christians would see women shackled to kitchens spurting out babies and all kinds of "nice" things. Whereas the lovely aspects of Islam often finds ways to ignore those passages in the Quran which gave women rights and poo poo all over them. More liberal Muslims don't wear hear coverings, occasionally drink, worship lazily and aren't far removed from lazy Christians. I cannot speak with any authority on whether or not the assholes of Islam are a minority or a majority, though I have been told by Muslims they are a loud minority with a lot of power. I don't even want to get into the Sunni/Shia divide right now but suffice to say they have not been at war for forever or so I have heard/read.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 21:43
|
|
|
Dugu Wu Di posted:doesn't the quran expressly suggest that women should be uncovered in order to secure their identity when testifying in court or being witness to a contract? THAT'S COMPLICATED.  below, to skip look for the next bold line. I am wordy and opinionated.This is the translation of the point in the Quran where modesty in service to God is demanded: “Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty: that will make for greater purity for them: and Allah is well acquainted with all that they do.” [Q 24:30] “And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands’ fathers, their sons, their husbands’ sons, their brothers or their brothers’ sons, or their sisters’ sons, or their women, or the slaves whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex; and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O ye Believers! Turn ye all together towards Allah, that ye may attain Bliss.” [Q 24:31]" (For those would-be scholars this is from the Yusuf Ali translation of the Quran.) Two other passages I dredged up: “O ye who believe! Enter not the Prophet’s house, - until leave is given to you, - for a meal, (and then) not (so early as) to wait for its preparation: but when ye are invited, enter; and when ye have taken your meal, disperse, without seeking familiar talk. Such (behaviour) annoys the Prophet: he is ashamed to dismiss you, but Allah is not ashamed (to tell you) the truth. And when ye ask (his ladies) for anything ye want, ask them from before a screen {hijab}: that makes for greater purity for your hearts and theirs. Nor is it right for you that ye should annoy Allah’s Apostle, or that ye should marry his widows after him at any time. Truly such a thing is in Allah’s sight an enormity.” “O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should cast their outer garments {jilbab} over their persons (when abroad): that is most convenient, that they should be known (as such) and not molested. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” So, no mention of the hair or head at all whatsoever. Just a "I know it's hot here but please don't flash your titties and guys, don't ogle hot ladies, especially ones who are flashing their titties." My interpretation/observation? The words 'hijab' and 'jilbab' were probably written in by the translator. The first is actually in reference to the multitudes of men who trolled about the Prophet, making themselves at home rudely at all hours and sniffing around his daughters. Y'know, pursuing them for their own political benefit as marrying one of his girls made you a big deal. The traditional cultural norm of the time was that the suitor, in speaking to the woman he pursues, was to do so with a curtain between them. That is what it is referencing, not a veil or covering she wears. BTW, this tradition is still practiced in many areas and even in weddings. The second one is again a restating of the edict from earlier with one addition which boils down to, "Ladies do continue to not flash your titties and cover yourselves, but more importantly, please take extra care covering yourselves while abroad because So some rear end in a top hat inputting words establishes a bullshit precedent that really isn't bluntly stated anywhere. Compare the tame vagueness of these passages to ANY passage of a thing truly condemned and forbidden, the language is very different. So, where did this head covering poo poo spring from? Well, along with the interpretation bullshit above we also have the Hadiths to blame. What are the Hadiths? Well, basically after the Prophet died a bunch of shitheads and non-shitheads started writing down things Muhammad (PBUH) was claimed [by them and/or others close to them] to have said and claiming this poo poo was as good as the stuff in the Quran and gently caress them. Abu Bakr in particular was a massive dick who denied Fatima the inheritance rights that were guaranteed her by the Quran with such a Hadith. The Quran was supposed to trump the Hadiths and the authenticity/adherence of any Hadith is often hotly contested and situational. My understanding of it as an outsider looking in is it's pretty much a way to give Muslims a way to cherry pick the Quran the same way Christians cherry pick the bible. Hadiths are such a joke that each one is basically referred to as a strong Hadith or a weak Hadith based solely on presumed/assumed the closeness of the quoter to the Prophet. Some of the strongest Hadiths are those of Aisha, every bigot's favorite [9 year old] wife of the Prophet, and the daughter of above rear end in a top hat Abu Bakr. While the Muslims I associate are Sunni it's worth pointing out that a certain number of Hadiths that are very "gently caress Women" are attributed to Abu Bakr who faced a great deal of political threat from Muhammad's (PBUH) daughters during his time. Thing is Muslims take these Hadiths hella serious and they matter. As such, even though it's not obvious in the Quran there's enough Hadiths emphasizing it that it counts. If you skimmed/skipped all that the short version is below. tl;dr No you gotta cover your heads ladies because a dozen+ assholes said the Prophet said so decades after his death even though it's not in the Quran. PS gently caress you. In closing I must state my bias, I am close to many people who follow this religion and thus I have a great deal of contempt for it. I can directly see how the toxic cultural not-in-the-Quran-but-gently caress-you aspects of it are ruining the lives and dreams of the people I love. (Some things in the Quran totally loving suck too.)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 23:13
|
|
|
/\/\/\
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2014 00:32
|
|