Support NeoGAF

[jaxword]

Not really. No ruler has ever gone to war over women covering up. Believing in the wrong skydaddy though... plenty

The rules regarding women are definitely about controlling them.

 

[Kayhan]

I don't think I've ever seen a Saudi Arabian woman, they're that heavily covered up.

Maybe they are so beautiful that men just go mad with lust and thats why they have to be covered up?

 

[Kinitari]

Can't even be arsed to mock this. It's just too easy.



I'm thinking she pointed at her crotch and then gyrated back 'n' forth. Possibly whilst gurning.

I just assumed she recognized him and flipped him the bird.

The dude sounds like he is trying to actually stealth brag as he makes his proclamation.

"So bro's, I was at this cafe the other day and this chick was TOTALLY sending me the 'I want you' signal!"
"OH shit son! What did she do? Give me details"
"Uh... you know... she did this thing with her hair. She touched it, WHILE she was looking at me. Gurl was totally DTF"

*picture retracted*

I'm going to tell you this right now guy - if this is your picture, there was no girl.

Edit: it wasn't him... it was the king of Saudi. I still wanna see his picture

 

[CrankyJay]

I don't see the correlation especially since plenty of girls I know lost their virginity before they had licenses.

Heh, are you trying to give a reasonable and rational response to something this heinously irrational and illogical? =P

 

[Wazzim]

These guys are totally ignorant when it comes to social interactions.

 

[Psychotext]

Can anyone redo the gif with just a small square showing the eyes? Just for comparison.

 

[SKINNER!]

Professor Subhi described sitting in a coffee shop in an unnamed Arab state where “all the women were looking at me“.

“One made a gesture that made it clear that she was available,” he said. “This is what happens when women are allowed to drive.”

Holy shit, a glance and an invitation...in a coffee shop!? what a stud.

 

[Gustav]

I don't see the correlation especially since plenty of girls I know lost their virginity before they had licenses.

What's with the serious post?

 

[Ikael]

Waited till someone starts the 'true Islam is not like that' train.

But most of what people consider today "Islam" is in really twisted version of what the original prophet practiced, it with lots of intentional omissions, added content (hadiths), and downright retrogade cultural bullshit (burkhas, female circumscision) poured into it. On the other hand, this is also the case with most religions in the world, mine included.

 

[Castor Krieg]

I don't think I've ever seen a Saudi Arabian woman, they're that heavily covered up.

You can imagine how they look like, if the whole society does everything they can to prohibit display of physical appearance.

But most of what people consider today "Islam" is in really twisted version of what the original prophet practiced, it with lots of intentional omissions, added content (hadiths), and downright retrogade cultural bullshit (burkhas, female circumscision) poured into it. On the other hand, this is also the case with most religions in the world, mine included.

I agree, but you cannot just go out and say "PERFECT Islam is nowhere like that, hence this is just a minor problem". It is not. The thing is - in the Islamic word the rights of women are severely limited when compared to the rest of the world. So all the "Islam Defence Brigade" can go take a hike.

 

[SquiddyCracker]

Ah, this makes a lot of sense!
If women are blindfolded due to having too tempting eyes, then they'd be a danger on the road!

 

[Kinitari]

Holy shit, a glance and an invitation...in a coffee shop!? what a stud.

Guarantee you the dude is old and wrinkled, no lady is going to see him in a coffee shop and give him any kind of signal.

 

[Mr.Squirrel]

No virgins? Great. Virgin sex is the worst sex ever.

 

[yn-neko hates a cat]

I almost imagine that in the Saudi mind, based on this statement, that virgin is state of being used to describe only females.

 

[-COOLIO-]

But most of what people consider today "Islam" is in really twisted version of what the original prophet practiced, it with lots of intentional omissions, added content (hadiths), and downright retrogade cultural bullshit (burkhas, female circumscision) poured into it. On the other hand, this is also the case with most religions in the world, mine included.

But wouldn't their side claim the same?

 

[Platy]

"...WHAT ?"

Is the only possible answer for this

Professor Subhi described sitting in a coffee shop in an unnamed Arab state where “all the women were looking at me“.

“One made a gesture that made it clear that she was available,” he said. “This is what happens when women are allowed to drive.”

I wonder what that gesture was.

 

[Gouty]

Dude thinks a woman is interested in sex, then snitches in an effort to stop it from happening again.

That isn't a man.

I honestly believe if these Saudi rulers had an Xbox, cold beer and casual sex once in awhile there'd be no way to maintain their hate boners and their entire region would prosper.

 

[SKINNER!]

I almost imagine that in the Saudi mind, based on this statement, that virgin is state of being used to describe only females.

you are absolutely correct. Some older generation people that I have spoken to in that region claim that the word "virgin" is only used for females. "No such thing as male virgins".

 

[jaxword]

But most of what people consider today "Islam" is in really twisted version of what the original prophet practiced, it with lots of intentional omissions, added content (hadiths), and downright retrogade cultural bullshit (burkhas, female circumscision) poured into it. On the other hand, this is also the case with most religions in the world, mine included.

Well, yeah, you could substitute "Christianity" in place of Islam and it'd fit perfectly.

 

[Gustav]

Well, yeah, you could substitute "Christianity" in place of Islam and it'd fit perfectly.

Yup, perfectly. All dem burkas and female circumcisions up in dem Christian nations.

 

[shanshan310]

I wonder what that gesture was.

She probably touched her hair. The internet has told me that women do that when they're interested in you.

 

[soul creator]

I'm guessing Rena Sofer would basically be considered the devil there

 

[SquiddyCracker]

But wouldn't their side claim the same?

Pretty much.

 

[soul creator]

the thing about "the real version of the religion" discussions is that if someone claims faith, spiritual revelation, etc. matter more than evidence, they pretty much have no standing when it comes to saying their version is "real" while other versions are "fake".

The notion of faith being a virtue essentially short circuits the rules of debate, making it effectively meaningless. Which is why religious "debates" throughout history never actually resolve anything (either wars are fought, or everyone "agrees to disagree", or you get thousands of splinter groups and denominations)

 

[jaxword]

Yup, perfectly. All dem burkas and female circumcisions up in dem Christian nations.

I would think most people would be smart enough to not include the parenthesis-specific things.

 

[Azih]

Which is why religious "debates" throughout history never actually resolve anything (either wars are fought, or everyone "agrees to disagree", or you get thousands of splinter groups and denominations)

That's kinda true for every idealogical debate of course. Are you a left Libertarian, a minarchist, an anarchist, social democrat, democratic socialist, Conservative, republican, Marxist, Marxist Leninist, Communist, THIRD WORLD MAOIST?

 

[7aged]

I don't think I've ever seen a Saudi Arabian woman, they're that heavily covered up.

Nor will you ever!

I am tempted to derail this thread into a hot saudi women photos. What say you gaf?

 

[Christine]

you are absolutely correct. Some older generation people that I have spoken to in that region claim that the word "virgin" is only used for females. "No such thing as male virgins".

This makes perfect sense as soon as you realize that this is an issue of political control over an economic resource of unparalleled value. Views concerning the morality of bumping crotches are a means to this end, no matter how genuine they seem to those who've adopted them.

 

[InvincibleAgent]

That unnamed Arab state, I must know which one it was

 

[phosphor112]

I understand a lot of things, but this is one of those things that I don't.

 

[Castor Krieg]

I am tempted to derail this thread into a hot saudi women photos. What say you gaf?

That unnamed Arab state, I must know which one it was

I would bet my money on Kuwait.

 

[Gustav]

I would think most people would be smart enough to not include the parenthesis-specific things.

Sorry, man. I'm not smart. Messed with the wrong guy.

 

[Smiles and Cries]

I laughed at the thread title but sheesh this stuff is always depressing

 

[SKINNER!]

That unnamed Arab state, I must know which one it was

I'm guessing that he's refering to the only liberal one in the Middle East:

Spoiler

Lebanon

 

[7aged]

Ouch

 

[soul creator]

That's kinda true for every idealogical debate of course. Are you a left Libertarian, a minarchist, an anarchist, social democrat, democratic socialist, Conservative, republican, Marxist, Marxist Leninist, Communist, THIRD WORLD MAOIST?

to some extent that's true, but there are key differences between religious ideologies, and other ideologies

After all, religion isn’t the only belief that’s armored against criticism, questioning, and self- correction. Religion isn’t the only belief that leads people to ignore evidence in favor of their settled opinion. And contrary to the popular atheist saying, religion is not the only belief that inspires good people to do evil things. Political ideology can do all that quite nicely. People have committed horrors to perpetuate Communism: an ideology many of those people sincerely believed was best. And horrors were committed by Americans in the last Bush administration… in the name of democracy and freedom.

But even the most stubborn political ideology will eventually crumble in the face of it, you know, not working. People can only be told for so long that under Communism everyone will eat strawberries and cream, or that in an unrestricted free market the rising tide will lift all boats. A political ideology makes promises about this life, this world. If the strawberries and cream and rising boats aren’t forthcoming, eventually people notice. (The 2008 election was evidence of that.) People can excuse and rationalize a political ideology for a long time… but ultimately, the proof is in the pudding.

Religion is different.

With religion, the proof is emphatically not in the pudding. With religion, the proof comes from invisible beings, inaudible voices. The proof comes from prophets and religious leaders, who supposedly hear these voices and are happy to tell the rest of us what they say. It comes from religious texts, written ages ago by prophets and religious leaders, ditto. It comes from feelings in people’s hearts that, conveniently, tell them what they already believe or want to believe. And the proof comes in the afterlife, after people die and can’t come back to tell us about it. Every single claim made by religion comes from people: not from sources out in the world that other people can verify, but from the insides of people’s heads.

So with religion, even if God’s rules and promises aren’t working out, followers still follow them… because the ultimate judge and judgment are invisible. There is no pudding, no proof — and no expectation that there should be any. And there is therefore no reality check, no self-correction, when religion starts to go to the bad place.

In fact, with many religions, that idea that you should expect to eat the pudding is blasphemy. A major part of many religious doctrines is that trusting the tenets of your faith without evidence is not only acceptable, but a positive virtue. (“Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.” -John 20:29)

In other words: The belief in invisible beings, undetectable forces, and events that happen after we die, provides a uniquely effective armor against the valid criticism, questioning, and deflation of ideas and institutions that do serious harm.

That's what can make religious (the authoritarian types that are most popular, more specifically) mixed with political ideologies more dangerous than just political ideologies on their own (although obviously political ideologies can have issues as well). Hence, all the fun Saudi Arabia posts.

Would removing the religious influence from Saudi Arabian politics instantly make everything puppies and sunshine? No. But it would remove a huge justification for a lot of the sillier ideas, such as the topic of this thread, and make it more difficult for something like this to gain traction.

 

[Vagabundo]

That coffee shop sounds interesting. Full of women. Looking. Gestures... mmmm

edit: hold on! I bet he was in a strip club by mistake.

 

[liger05]

there is no functioning Islamic state anywhere

religion and politics do not and should not mix

Religion should only be on the personal level, and never used to control people.

We just recently (almost) got rid of religion as a state influencer in Europe, lets hope it never happens again.

Islam and politics have gone together from the start. Secularism and Islam do not go together.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Just give every Saudi Arabian female over 13 one of these.

Please cover the eyehole though. It's too tempting for me right now.

 

[Famassu]

Yup, perfectly. All dem burkas and female circumcisions up in dem Christian nations.

Well, there's still male circumcision, which is fiercely defended by Jewish people, even if it isn't as harmful as female circumcisions. Those kinds of practices aren't perhaps meant for controlling one gender, but that doesn't really make them any less stupid.

Also, Christianity isn't devoid of all kinds of shit. Maybe not in the west, but in other places it can cause horrible shit like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXbwmINpGJA

 

[Demon Ice]

That logic is just....wow.

It's like a Republican wet dream.

 

[Ikael]

I agree, but you cannot just go out and say "PERFECT Islam is nowhere like that, hence this is just a minor problem". It is not. The thing is - in the Islamic word the rights of women are severely limited when compared to the rest of the world. So all the "Islam Defence Brigade" can go take a hike.

This is true. Thing is, I believe that religious prophets were mostly great people far ahead of their time, the whole argument about how Islam is a yihadist religion, more evil than the rest since its inception is bogus. Unless we are talking about sects, most religions were born with pure, noble intentions of lifting up the minds and spirits of mankind. Then said mankind tends to mix that original religious message with their own cultural particularities (the Arab people and most of the fertile crescent inhabants were misoginists as fuck way before the arrival of the Islam), and then you got idiocies like this one elevated into the status of holy commandement.

Well, yeah, you could substitute "Christianity" in place of Islam and it'd fit perfectly.

Not exactly, each religion is miserable on its own way, and your previous statement falls into a false equivalence. We Christians got the whole evangelical plage, the Indus have their caste system, Jews think that they are the choosen people and the Muslims have their creepy obsession with controlling vaginas. Multiculturalism!

 

[ReBurn]

Nice to see the expected false equivalencies. GAF doesn't disappoint.

I think that if I ever want to experience the middle ages I'll take a trip to Saudi Arabia.

 

[soul creator]

Unless we are talking about sects, most religions were born with pure, noble intentions of lifting up the minds and spirits of mankind. Then said mankind tends to mix that original religious message with their own cultural particularities (the Arab people and most of the fertile crescent inhabants were misoginists as fuck way before the arrival of the Islam), and then you got idiocies like this one elevated into the status of holy commandement.

Just out of curiosity, what is the evidence of the bolded? I see this said a lot, but it never really made sense to me.

After all, since all religions were created within those same "cultural particularities", you decry in your following sentence, were does the idea come from that they were originally pure and noble? Religions don't just pop up out of thin air, after all.

Of course, this isn't meant to say that they were necessarily created inherently "evil" or whatever, but just that...humans gonna human. Religions are part of culture, not some pure holy thing that culture somehow came along and dragged down.

 

[Demon Ice]

This is true. Thing is, I believe that religious prophets were mostly great people far ahead of their time, the whole argument about how Islam is a yihadist religion, more evil than the rest since its inception is bogus. Unless we are talking about sects, most religions were born with pure, noble intentions of lifting up the minds and spirits of mankind. Then said mankind tends to mix that original religious message with their own cultural particularities (the Arab people and most of the fertile crescent inhabants were misoginists as fuck way before the arrival of the Islam), and then you got idiocies like this one elevated into the status of holy commandement.

Hahaha, you really think so? That explains why so many religions are so blatantly anti-science today.

Religion is the result of the world's first con artist meeting the world's first gullible fool. It is and will always be a method of the rich and powerful to control the uneducated masses, nothing more, and nothing less.

 

[jaxword]

Not exactly, each religion is miserable on its own way, and your previous statement falls into a false equivalence. ]

Not at all, I stand by my statement, the term inserts just fine (minus the obvious specifics in the parenthesis).

 

[Ikael]

Just out of curiosity, what is the evidence of the bolded? I see this said a lot, but it never really made sense to me.

In my country sects are different from religions, are illegal and very well defined by our penal code. The sect's prime goal, unlike a Religion, is financial, and the tactics that they employ rely on the supression of personality. Sect's definning characteristics and modus operandi are very well documented and studied by our criminologists.

After all, since all religions were created within those same "cultural particularities", you decry in your following sentence, were does the idea come from that they were originally pure and noble? Religions don't just pop up out of thin air, after all.

Thing is, religions tends to be born out of... well, freaks. Most prophets were similar, in the sense that they were mostly dettached from their own societies in one way or another, even if they were not necessarily living in isolation, hence why most of them clashed with the stablishment of their respective cultures: they behaved like truthly extraneous elements of societies despite of living inside them.

 

[Dark Octave]

So Saudi Religious Council is saying that all Saudi women are whores if given the chance?

 

[Mindwipe]

“One made a gesture that made it clear that she was available,” he said. “This is what happens when women are allowed to drive.”.

Clearly she was blinking "I would like to sexytime you" in morse code. Happens all the time.

Saudi Arabia is currently considering a law for women to cover up their eyes if they are deemed too "tempting."

Given rule 34, we should be able to send the "professor" a link to some kind of specialist clips4sale store that features blindfolded women walking into things and watch his head explode.

 

[travisbickle]

So Saudi Religious Council is saying that all Saudi women are whores if given the chance?

Wow, the Saudi Religious Council and the Men's Rights Movement have something in common!