Support NeoGAF

[rokkerkory]

Not really the right way to help your cause?

 

[Fenderputty]

I think what counts for that article is if they're Muslim or not. .

Then they shouldn't have written the article as it FEMEN is unaware of what actual Muslim women feel / go through. They're not all happy their religion tells them to cover up lest another man get excited.

EDIT: I also like how GAF's Muslims are coming the rescue here. "THIS CONFERENCE WAS THEM TELLING THEM NOT TO BEAT THEIR WIVES!"

Like this is something that should be ever used as a defense to, "Islam has inherent issues with sexism".

 

[Azih]

Many of those views, including that of the article, are dangerous and destructive in that they encourage stagnancy in the face of real problems that need to be solved.

Really? The whole point of the article isn't pointing out that 'a lot of Muslim women are happy' (did you even read it?) the point of the article is that Muslim women are fighting for their rights not by refuting Islam but embracing its precepts (as they see them). She gave the historical example of Aisha and the contemporary example of Asifa Qureshi and I'll add another one in Malala Yousafi. It's these women that FEMEN are making invisible with their reductive binary point of view that all Muslims are misogynist Salafi types.

Then they shouldn't have written the article as it FEMEN is unaware of what actual Muslim women feel / go through.

Well the article is written by a Muslim woman who feels like her point of view is made invisible by FEMEN so....

It is Salafism and is retarded cousin wahabbism what must be stopped at any cost.

Thank you so much Ikael. It is so hard to focus on the problematic sects when all the time we have to spend refuting "ALL ISLAM IS THE SAME". I would say that you have to be a bit more specific than just salafis though. Even Salafis who are 'live and let live' are fine after all.

 

[SturokBGD]

Imagine getting that angry about boobs.

 

[Sami+]

Really? The whole point of the article isn't pointing out that 'a lot of Muslim women are happy' (did you even read it?) the point of the article is that Muslim women are fighting for their fights not by refuting Islam but embracing its precepts (as they see them). She gave the historical example of Aisha and the contemporary example of Asifa and I'll add another one in Malala Yousafi. It's these women that FEMEN are making invisible with their reductive binary point of view.

Well the article is written by a Muslim woman who feels like her point of view is made invisible by FEMEN so....

Than those women need to get up and do something about the problem, because trying to trivialize FEMEN's actions as reductive and binary does nothing but maintain the status quo.

I've seen this argument millions of times. I've actually given it myself back when I was Muslim. It leads to nothing and never will. It's a total cop out argument. Saying "well I'm just moderate so these two opposing sides make me feel invisible!" accomplishes literally nothing. You want progress? Fight radicalism. At least FEMEN is fucking trying.

Thank you so much Ikael. It is so hard to focus on the problematic sects when all the time we have to spend refuting "ALL ISLAM IS THE SAME". I would say that you have to be a bit more specific than just salafis though. Even Salafis who are 'live and let live' are fine after all.

What is your solution to dealing with the problematic sects?

 

[Fenderputty]

Well the article is written by a Muslim woman who feels like her point of view is made invisible by FEMEN so....
.

Are we going back to square one now? The women protesting were from Muslim families. They know what it's like to be a Muslim woman as much as the author.

 

[RustyNails]

Are we going back to square one now? The women protesting were from Muslim families. They know what it's like to be a Muslim woman as much as the author.

So...femen protestors negate the author's views? I'm not sure what you're getting at. Is it that Femen views should be held in a higher regard?

 

[RustyNails]

What is your solution to dealing with the problematic sects?

More conferences like the one femen ruined? Education and dialogue is the only method. Its fun to say fuck religion and idiots that follow them. But practically speaking you need people to learn. That is the point of a conference. Unless you're advocating banning religion or burning bibles, I don't think that will work.

 

[Mael]

Ah...
the infamous "Should you beat your wife" conference by shitty imams.
If the conference is anything more than :
"ARE YOU FUCKING STUPID?
THE ANSWER IS NO!
STOP ASKING STUPID QUESTIONS!"
Then it doesn't deserve to take place.
Police should have arrested the people holding the conference, the rabble that proved that some muslims are scums and released the protesters while apologizing to them for the way they were treated by the scummy women beating crowd.

 

[Sami+]

More conferences like the one femen ruined? Education and dialogue is the only method. Its fun to say fuck religion and idiots that follow them. But practically speaking you need people to learn. That is the point of a conference. Unless you're advocating banning religion or burning bibles, I don't think that will work.

I'm advocating movements that condemn the fact that the question of wife beating is even being fucking dignified with an organized conference.

 

[RustyNails]

I'm advocating movements that condemn the fact that the question of wife beating is even being fucking dignified with an organized conference.

Better than sweeping it under the rug in my opinion.

 

[Sami+]

Better than sweeping it under the rug in my opinion.

Which is exactly what the "we're not like them" people are doing.

 

[Mael]

I'm advocating movements that condemn the fact that the question of wife beating is even being fucking dignified with an organized conference.

It's pretty fucking illegal to beat your spouse in France.
It's not even a contest, in the same way we don't need to have a conference to explain how revenge killing is pretty fucking illegal.

 

[kruis]

Femen's topless condescension towards Muslim women only helps sexism

I love how two thousand Guardian readers make minced meat of that nonsense article. The Guardian's readership is a lot more intelligent than the editor who published that apologist nonsense.

 

[Azih]

Than those women need to get up and do something about the problem, because trying to trivialize FEMEN's actions as reductive and binary does nothing but maintain the status quo.

What makes you think they aren't? The article pointed out one. I pointed out another. Maybe you're just not looking for them?

What is your solution to dealing with the problematic sects?

Well a major roadblock is the idea that "All religion is the same" or "All Islam is the same" because it puts all religious people in the same boat as the problematic sects. It lumps neutral parties in with the extremists and undercuts the parties best placed to refute the problematic sects which are other Muslims that are struggling with the problem people over what true Islam really is (Malala Yousafi style for example)

The idea that 'the more problematic the sect is the more representative it is of TRUE ISLAM' is another common idea that is even more dangerous because it gives the problematic sects exactly what they crave. Complete authorship and ownership over the faith. Obviously that's not good. And it's incredibly frustrating that so many Western pundits/intellectuals/protesters play right into the hands of the problem sects and help the problem sects in undercutting and belittling moderates who have a very different opinion on what 'TRUE ISLAM' is.

So those are two huge things that are happening in this very thread. It buttresses the intellectual position of the problem sects and it makes regular Muslims feel isolated and beleaguered/besieged as they're constantly seen as the same as the actual problem people and feel they need t constantly defend themselves for things that they haven't done/do not believe.

Now if we can get away from that kind of reductive analysis that elevates the problematic people to a position they really don't deserve what can be done and needs to be done is understand how their ideology is spreading. Speaking of ISIS/Al-Qaeda types it's spreading to a small but certainly not insignificant portion of beleaguered and besieged young Muslims though social media where they are able to create a echo chamber and replace traditional Sunni leadership with their own and promulgate a view of a "Clash between civilizations". That this bullshit is repeated by Western pundits also helps the problem sects with their recruitment but what needs to be done is an organized response to these people on youtube and instagram and facebook to cut down the 'consensus' that they're building in their bubbles.

I have other ideas on how to work against them but you know some of it is pie in the sky or out of anyone's control. (Getting the hell off of our dependence on oil for example would do a whole hell of a lot). But really a problematic ideology needs to be cut off from the ground it feeds from and starved. Not screamed at from outside. (They love that especially in situations where people in Muslim Majority countries are suffering partly due to outside intervention as it feeds their narrative).

And Fenderputty the point is that FEMEM protesters being from Muslim families or ex-Muslims makes no difference to the points the article is raising that you seem to be dismissing.

Which is exactly what the "we're not like them" people are doing.

Nope. We're not like them is the necessary first step towards working against them (I mean how do you work against someone who you're exactly like?). Unfortunately as soon as that step is taken a whole hell of a lot of Non Muslims or Ex Muslims seem to pop up and scream "YOU TOTALLY ARE EXACTLY LIKE THEM YOU APOLOGIST NONSENSE MUSLIM! WE MAKE MINCED MEAT OUT OF YOUR ARGUMENTS ON WHAT ISLAM REALLY IS CAUSE WE'RE SO MUCH MORE INTELLIGENT THAN YOU ON WHAT ISLAM REALLY IS. STOP YOUR APOLOGIST NONSENSE AND STOP BEING MUSLIM! ONLY SOLUTION!"

Edit: And yeah that's aimed at you kruis. Fucking nonsense.

 

[K.Sabot]

Hey at least they don't just pick easy targets, props to them for their bravery.
Shame on the violence being perpetrated when they should have just been removed from the stage after their "protest".

 

[RustyNails]

Which is exactly what the "we're not like them" people are doing.

Who are the we are not like them people? The conference? Not the conference, since it is addressing the issue head on instead of the organizers being all taboo as fuck about the problem. Which is your original point of contention was, why even dignify such a ludicrous concept with a conference. Think of it this way: 100 people in the audience who thought maybe domestic abuse was ok now are ideally 100 people that now think domestic abuse is not ok. Isn't that positive? I know the topic is disgusting, but dont let your emotion override logic.

 

[Crash Station]

I'm advocating movements that condemn the fact that the question of wife beating is even being fucking dignified with an organized conference.

Yeah, an ideology that forgives or even encourages domestic abuse has no place in the modern world. And based on this and a few other threads, it isn't even the worst thing Saladfist/Wasabi Muslims are prone to believe (whether part of the greater teachings of Islam or not).

Better than sweeping it under the rug in my opinion.

Sure, but if something so obvious to the rest of the modern world even requires a conference, it's safe to say the movement is so far behind in terms of progress that the conversion process toward modern values (not to mention respecting actual laws) will be extremely slow with several snags along the way and potential moments of regression. It sounds like a big problem for Europe in general that might get worse before it gets better.

 

[Bala]

Far right wing is gaining more voters precisely because moderate parties refuse to even acknowdegle the problem posed by the surge of radical islam schools such as salafi and wahabbi in Europe. So rather than lamenting how this is giving votes to Le Pen and his acolytes, I would very much rather if the conventional parties would get their shit together and deal with this issue.

agreed. i also think it doesn't help when moderate muslims throw out the "these people aren't "true muslims " no true scotsman fallacy. when people hear that it just sounds like people in denial about the innate dangers of their religious dogma. has anyone ever really convinced anyone that the terrorist are not inspired by islamic religious dogma. it comes off more as a person trying to convince themselves that they are not following relgious dogma that directly influenced these depraved acts. like a defense mechanism with no basis in reality . the entire western world is shifting to a more conservative right winged position . i can see this both in the recent election results and anecdotally as well. it all starts with lumping racism with fear of islamic relgious /cultural practices that are not acceptable . (domestic abuse/heirachy , honor killing , depictions of mohammed /allah) . you can't live your life according to your beliefs if they contradict secular laws of that country. just because your a muslim women who is comfortable with the level of domestic abuse /lack of freedom in families doesn't give you the right to argue for its acceptance in a secular society.

 

[Bala]

Who are the we are not like them people? The conference? Not the conference, since it is addressing the issue head on instead of the organizers being all taboo as fuck about the problem. Which is your original point of contention was, why even dignify such a ludicrous concept with a conference. Think of it this way: 100 people in the audience who thought maybe domestic abuse was ok now are ideally 100 people that now think domestic abuse is not ok. Isn't that positive? I know the topic is disgusting, but dont let your emotion override logic.

the ones who are the we are not like them people are the ones not willing to accept that islamic religious dogma has some innate correlation with anti secular , terrorist actions. that it has some conflict with western society. the ones who keep trying to convince themselves more than others that islam is only to be judged by the good things done in its name and not by both its positive and negative influence on western society. the ones who keep trying to give the impression that people like jihadi john and (3400 other) who had a degree from the university are products of their cognitive deficeincies and not by the common denominator that seems to be linking all these people which is islamic relgious dogma "those journalists were behaded in the name of allah because they are crazy people and the religion and dogma we practice is completely different from theirs even though we both read the same dogma. i wonder if those western isis fighters went through this cyle of acceptance trying to practice islamic dogma in western societies . first denying that islamic dogma contradicts the society they live in . then get angry , leading to depression , then bargaining , and finally acceptance

 

[Bala]

Well a major roadblock is the idea that "All religion is the same" or "All Islam is the same" because it puts all religious people in the same boat as the problematic sects. It lumps neutral parties in with the extremists and undercuts the parties best placed to refute the problematic sects which are other Muslims that are struggling with the problem people over what true Islam really is (Malala Yousafi style for example)

The idea that 'the more problematic the sect is the more representative it is of TRUE ISLAM' is another common idea that is even more dangerous because it gives the problematic sects exactly what they crave. Complete authorship and ownership over the faith. Obviously that's not good. And it's incredibly frustrating that so many Western pundits/intellectuals/protesters play right into the hands of the problem sects and help the problem sects in undercutting and belittling moderates who have a very different opinion on what 'TRUE ISLAM' is.

So those are two huge things that are happening in this very thread. It buttresses the intellectual position of the problem sects and it makes regular Muslims feel isolated and beleaguered/besieged as they're constantly seen as the same as the actual problem people and feel they need t constantly defend themselves for things that they haven't done/do not believe.

Now if we can get away from that kind of reductive analysis that elevates the problematic people to a position they really don't deserve what can be done and needs to be done is understand how their ideology is spreading. Speaking of ISIS/Al-Qaeda types it's spreading to a small but certainly not insignificant portion of beleaguered and besieged young Muslims though social media where they are able to create a echo chamber and replace traditional Sunni leadership with their own and promulgate a view of a "Clash between civilizations". That this bullshit is repeated by Western pundits also helps the problem sects with their recruitment but what needs to be done is an organized response to these people on youtube and instagram and facebook to cut down the 'consensus' that they're building in their bubbles.

you really need to deal with reality . there is so much denial in these answers . those western pundits aren't doing any reductive analysis. this is just you desperately trying to convince yourself not others that your culture/relgious dogma is has no conflict with western society/ideals. the fact that there are thousands of western foregin post seconary isis fighters are a testatment to that factor. ignoring this just because of your subjective opinon of your doctrine is more than disingenous. you need to start by accepting fault within islamic dogma /cultural attitudes and stop scapegoating the problem onto the people. islam is both a compilation of both its positive and negative influences it has on the world. you can't isolate the bad just because you feel like it. try to be objective about this . in what world do we discuss true americans., or true westersns or true anything . so why would does this idea of true muslims come from ?

 

[CaLe]

As an European and a Christian, I have absolutely zero fears and reticences towards welcoming muslims such as yourself into my country. It is Salafism and is retarded cousin wahabbism what must be stopped at any cost. Religious freedom means not only be free of practizing your religion, but also being free from fundamentalists taking over your own religion too.

I agree with you. Any form of radicalization / extremism, violent behavior and integration problems in regards to a country's laws or co-existence with its populace should not be tolerated. I feel angry in regards to the damage done to my religion by backward-minded / sexists / violent individuals.

I bet the guy kicking that woman doesn't have a daughter or a sister. I'm surprised he even has a mother, I'm sure she'd be proud of him.

As to everyone else mocking religions in this thread, that's cool bro. To each his own ? I'll still sleep at night (or not, with a baby on the way) and you're not changing anyone's mind (just like we won't change yours).

 

[Azih]

Alright. Let's go again.

Bala: So you're saying Malala Yousafai is the same as the skinny guy who tried to kick the protesters? That her culture/relgious dogma is in conflict with western society/ideals?

 

[orochi91]

Wouldn't FEMEN be better served by holding a publicized conference of their own, in this case with female Muslim hosts, in order to counter the misogyny spewed by fundamentalist imams?

Rushing the stage nude and screaming like banshees accomplishes nothing, especially if the whole point in to undermine the credibility of these Wahhabbis/Salafis and promote women's right.

 

[Bala]

Alright. Let's go again.

Bala: So you're saying Malala Yousafai is the same as the skinny guy who tried to kick the protesters? That her culture/relgious dogma is in conflict with western society/ideals?

no but her being shot in the head was because of the same doctrine that she follows. shes most likely derives her influece from her father's affiliation with the Awami National Party
here you go notice the words secular

" a left-wing Pashtun nationalist party in Pakistan whose origins are linked with the Khudai Khidmatgar (aka Red Shirts), which was a secular Pashtun non-violent movement against the British Raj."

i am saying stop blaming the people and admit that the dogma needs to take some responsibility. just because malala yousafai practices peacful islam doesn't negate the fact that islam has enough of a negative influence on other western muslims to defy secular law in their home countries. islam is a not what you defined and its not defined by her or you only. it is not determined by your opinions or other mulsim women opinions. they are deteremined by its actions in the world both positive and negative. that dude who kicked the girl is a muslim. he can probably justify it with recorded doctrine/dogma as well.

 

[Bala]

Wouldn't FEMEN be better served by holding a publicized conference of their own, in this case with female Muslim hosts, in order to counter the misogyny spewed by fundamentalist imams?

Rushing the stage nude and screaming like banshees accomplishes nothing, especially if the whole point in to undermine the credibility of these Wahhabbis/Salafis and promote women's right.

its not about what they could have done . let me make it clear they can wish to protest and they have done so . if it was wrong according to the laws of the country thats fine. let them be prosecuted for it accordingly though on the other hand if muslim men wish to beat women in public for protesting . they surely can wish it but they can't do anything about it . they can prosecute according to it. freedom to protest and talk shit about any religion is a western ideal and right more improtant then your wishes or these particular mulsim mens/womens wishes

 

[Azih]

no but her being shot in the head was because of the same doctrine that she follows.

So let me get this straight.

1. You're saying Malala's beliefs aren't in conflict with the West
2. That Malala's doctrine is the same as that of the Pakistani Taliban types that shot her
3. The faith of the Pakistani Taliban is therefore not in conflict with the West?

 

[orochi91]

its not about what they could have done . let me make it clear they can wish to protest and they have done so . if it was wrong according to the laws of the country thats fine. let them be prosecuted for it accordingly though on the other hand if muslim men wish to beat women in public for protesting . they surely can wish it but they can't do anything about it . they can prosecute according to it. freedom to protest and talk shit about any religion is a western ideal and right more improtant then your wishes or these particular mulsim mens/womens wishes

FEMEN can protest all they want.

I still need to know why they ambush religious figures and institutions, all the while being nude and screaming.

What exactly does that do for their cause?

How does that not undermine their message in the eyes of the people they wish to specifically influence?

Wouldn't holding publicized conferences of their own be far more potent in countering the misogyny espoused by religious fundamentalists?

Though I feel like I should just make a separate thread about this later.

 

[Palette Swap]

"Salafi conference about how to treat women"

"Neonazi conference about how to treat jews"

"Klansmen conference about how to treat blacks"

If the last two does make you rise an eyebrow, why is the first one even legal? Seriously, why are not every single salafi and wahabbi clerics declared persona non grata in the entire EU?

As an aside, Le Monde's article taught me something I didn't know: French hate speech laws don't cover women (pun unintended). That partly explains why they didn't shut down the event beforehand, knowing there were some pretty hateful guys in there ("perfumed women are fornicators", "angels curse women who refuse [sex with] their husband") while when there's an event scheduled with openly racist speakers, they often get it cancelled.

These people are a poison to our western societies as they're the ones pushing back to prevent a more liberal minded Islam from emerging. Islam in Western Europe and North Africa didn't radicalize over the last thirty years out of nowhere. There's a strongly backed, very focused effort to distill a retrograde and vindictive vision of Islam, and it's high time we shut these assholes down.
These guys are objective allies to every far right party in the West as they share the same vision of an ineluctable clash. Meanwhile, progressives have been too busy tripping all over themselves trying to not look bad to even acknowledge how problematic it is.

I'm writing this as a secular liberal who hates that "Muslims" has become shorthand for Arabs, giving racists the opportunity to operate under the cover of denouncing religion when they're really after their neighbor's otherness, but also hates that we let asshole preachers backed by foreign countries poison entire communities.

FEMEN can protest all they want.

I still need to know why they ambush religious figures and institutions, all the while being nude and screaming.

What exactly does that do for their cause?

How does that not undermine their message in the eyes of the people they wish to specifically influence?

Wouldn't holding publicized conferences of their own be far more potent in countering the misogyny espoused by religious fundamentalists?

Though I feel like I should just make a separate thread about this later.

I can't speak for all their actions, but in such a case, they're not trying to convince these guys, they're making sure everyone knows this convention was happening so that people start asking questions about it.

 

[Bala]

So let me get this straight.

1. You're saying Malala's beliefs aren't in conflict with the West
2. That Malala's doctrine is the same as that of the Pakistani Taliban types that shot her
3. The faith of the Pakistani Taliban is therefore not in conflict with the West?

i didn't word that properly . yes her beliefs of koranic subservence are an issue . i was trying to malals's doctrine of female education are derived from her father
a left-wing Pashtun nationalist party in Pakistan whose origins are linked with the Khudai Khidmatgar (aka Red Shirts), which was a secular Pashtun non-violent movement against the British Raj
not from islamic influences. where are you getting this points from . i am saying pakitani taliban are practicing isam as well. and its irrelevant to point out that islam is good because of malala alone. did you even read my answer . please read in context .

 

[Bala]

well by the looks of this thread it got people to notice that islam is having coferences to discuss the validity of domestic abuse or the use of violence in cultural setting . i didn't know such a conference exists. nether didn't a lot of people by the posts in this thread. it exposes a negative aspect of islamic cutlure. that guy hitting them on stage during the conference was the cake though. it basically established their point. i dont think they were getting to look a lot of sympathy from mulsims if thats what you are asking . i dont think that matters though. those people beliefs are irrelevant if it goes against the secular laws of the country. just because they think its cultural to hit their wifes in marriages. do we give them freedom to do that. definetley not. we need to curb that sort of relgious /cultural freedom.

FEMEN can protest all they want.

I still need to know why they ambush religious figures and institutions, all the while being nude and screaming.

What exactly does that do for their cause?

How does that not undermine their message in the eyes of the people they wish to specifically influence?

Wouldn't holding publicized conferences of their own be far more potent in countering the misogyny espoused by religious fundamentalists?

Though I feel like I should just make a separate thread about this later.

 

[Azih]

i didn't word that properly . yes her beliefs of koranic subservence are an issue . i was trying to malals's doctrine of female education are derived from her father
a left-wing Pashtun nationalist party in Pakistan whose origins are linked with the Khudai Khidmatgar (aka Red Shirts), which was a secular Pashtun non-violent movement against the British Raj
not from islamic influences. where are you getting this points from . i am saying pakitani taliban are practicing isam as well. and its irrelevant to point out that islam is good because of malala alone. did you even read my answer . please read in context .

Ok. So what you're saying is that Malala isn't being Muslim when she says that she believes in female education? You do know that as far as she is concerned female education is completely compatible and in fact encouraged by Islam?

 

[Milksheikhs]

>"Islam is sexist and encourages people to beat their wives *see verse here and here*"
>"Okay, that's a great point let's talk about those issues. Maybe we can set up a conference to clear up some misconceptions and talk about how patriarchal cultures are abusing religion."
>"Boooooooooo! why are you even talking about if muslim men should beat their wives....it's so obvious...why can't these people have some common fucking sense."

It's like damned if you do, damned if you don't. You complain that these issues aren't talked about but yet when a Muslim speaker wants to address it. You complain about how trivial the discussion is and how everyone should already know this etc.

Honestly, I find myself hearing the same stuff over again from both Muslim and Non-Muslims.

Something I've noticed about fellow Muslims (in general not necessarily on gaf) is a lot of times we can't take criticism from outsiders, heck, even from other Muslims. As soon as you hear any sort of criticism against Islam you get defensive and say "well, not all Muslims, I'm not like that" or "Well, thoseeee people aren't true Muslims or that's just radical Islam". I mean I get it...there are people who think that it is all of Islam and think in absolute terms....but most people (I hope) don't truly believe close to 2 billion people who follow a religion are [insert whatever criticism here..radical,sexist,etc]. But there are enough people that it's a problem that needs to be addressed. Let's own up to our issues!

Some additional thoughts:

How do we get people to change? It's not by telling people oh you're religion is inherently sexist and you're stupid for following it. No, it's by educating people. By telling people they're a bunch of sheep...you're only going to raise their defenses and they aren't going to want to listen to any subsequent advice or critiques you have to offer. The best way to get people to listen to what you have to say is by disarming them with empathy and trying to come to a mutual understanding.


Edit: I know there are some Muslim men and women that are fed up with sexism perpetrated by other Muslims, and when I say "let's own up to our issues" ..I'm not trying to diminish those people's efforts. I'm saying let's double our efforts! Let's continue to speak out against sexism within the context of Islam and outside of the context of Islam, as well.

 

[Sijil]

Wait, so Salafists are allowed to hold conferences in Paris? No wonder we see Europe as a hotbed for radicals, Salafists aren't allowed that much leeway here in Lebanon and in countries like Algeria or Jordan they would end up in secret jails.

 

[Bala]

Ok. So what you're saying is that Malala isn't being Muslim when she says that she believes in female education? You do know that as far as she is concerned female education is completely compatible and in fact encouraged by Islam?

thats a great opinion which has nothing to do with the fact that the same religous doctrine /cutlural attitudes also inspire people to terrorism, and anti secular ideals. what part of that are you failing to grasp. the part where i keep saying that both the positive aspects like malala and the negative aspects like jihadi john are part of islam. islam is has a negative dtermient on people living in the west because of facts like isis western foreign fighters and to keep bringing up malala doesn't change that aspect of it. we do curb cultural freedoms if it violates people's rights / anti secular its not uneard of. remeber the ban on burqa s in france. remember the awareness of forced marriages in uk schools. this is just the next step . relgious doctrine deserves disrespect if it discuses the possibility of advocating violence against women in marriage. is this really hard to grasp. what part of those people quoting hadiths and allah don't u understand

 

[Fenderputty]

So...femen protestors negate the author's views? I'm not sure what you're getting at. Is it that Femen views should be held in a higher regard?

The author tried to reduce FEMEN'S protest down to that of uniformed positions. The women protesting were from Muslim families. The article's entire premise starts from an incorrect position. I would say its safe to assume FEMEN understands that some Muslim women go along happily with covering themselves and protest anyway. Maybe the author feels these arena't real Muslim women though. If she had a point to make she killed whatever it was by exposing her own bias.

 

[Bala]

>"Islam is sexist and encourages people to beat their wives *see verse here and here*"
>"Okay, that's a great point let's talk about those issues. Maybe we can set up a conference to clear up some misconceptions and talk about how patriarchal cultures are abusing religion."
>"Boooooooooo! why are you even talking about if muslim men should beat their wives....it's so obvious...why can't these people have some common fucking sense."

It's like damned if you do, damned if you don't. You complain that these issues aren't talked about but yet when a Muslim speaker wants to address it. You complain about how trivial the discussion is and how everyone should already know this etc.

Honestly, I find myself hearing the same stuff over again from both Muslim and Non-Muslims.

Something I've noticed about fellow Muslims (in general not necessarily on gaf) is a lot of times we can't take criticism from outsiders, heck, even from other Muslims. As soon as you hear any sort of criticism against Islam you get defensive and say "well, not all Muslims, I'm not like that" or "Well, thoseeee people aren't true Muslims or that's just radical Islam". I mean I get it...there are people who think that it is all of Islam and think in absolute terms....but most people (I hope) don't truly believe close to 2 billion people who follow a religion are [insert whatever criticism here..radical,sexist,etc]. But there are enough people that it's a problem that needs to be addressed. Let's own up to our issues!

Some additional thoughts:

How do we get people to change? It's not by telling people oh you're religion is inherently sexist and you're stupid for following it. No, it's by educating people. By telling people they're a bunch of sheep...you're only going to raise their defenses and they aren't going to want to listen to any subsequent advice or critiques you have to offer. The best way to get people to listen to what you have to say is by disarming them with empathy and trying to come to a mutual understanding.

this is the first quote admitting some fault within the doctrine . i appreciate that . i dont think these people want them to change. only limit their activites which might conflict with western ideals /secular laws. hitting women in marriage is not up for discussion. if you want to practice this sort of religion /cultural freedom then do it outside the western country. its like forced marriages or honor killing . there is no leeway for beliefs only upholding of those individuals rights

i dont wan't people to change cause they want to . i and a lot of others probably want people to know that we don't respect allah/mohammed/koran/vedas/ whatever religious doctrine when it comes to practice in society. your beliefs no matter how holy or how well you hold dear is beneath the rights of the womens right to safety in marriage from domestic abuse/hierarchy etc. you belief is benath the right to freedom of speech. expect to get prosecuted for it . expect to get no sympathy when advocating those sort of religous/cultural attitudes

 

[nelsonroyale]

Fair play to these girls! Brave act!

I am not sure if discussing 'how to beat your wife' should be discussed in any public space really. There should be a rule stating that they have to pay 100 times the going rate for hiring a space.

 

[Bala]

So...femen protestors negate the author's views? I'm not sure what you're getting at. Is it that Femen views should be held in a higher regard?

i never understood this concept of holding certain views in higher regard or not. the only thing that should matter is that there is a cultural problem where people's right are being trampled or not. the fact that she's a part or not a part of the community means nothing. only the objective practices of the culture /community should be questioned. its akin to jumping bridges on account of celebrity opinions . complete utter nonsense

 

[Maleficence]

I challenge any of the muslim posters here to find a sect within Islam which is considered "real" that treats men and women as equals (and not this equal but different nonsense). Hey while we're at it why not one that treats homosexuals well?

I'll wait.

 

[Azih]

thats a great opinion which has nothing to do with the fact that the same religous doctrine /cutlural attitudes also inspire people to terrorism, and anti secular ideals.

Here's the crux of the point.

Malala's faith tells her that female education is a good and necessary thing

The faith of the Pakistani Talib that shot her tells them that female education is not a good thing.

They're not the same faith. Malala's Islam and the Taliban's Islam are so distinct that it makes no sense to lump them together.

 

[Milksheikhs]

I challenge any of the muslim posters here to find a sect within Islam which is considered "real" that treats men and women as equals (and not this equal but different nonsense). Hey while we're at it why not one that treats homosexuals well?

I'll wait.

I'm not too sure about sects of Islam (I, myself, don't really follow a particular sect), but I do know that there are Muslim Scholars and figures within Islam that promote and espouse very egalitarian ideas.

And, also, "real" is where your problem lies. Because Islam is not a monolithic religion..people within and outside the religion have different ideas of what "True Islam" or the "real" Islam is.

 

[Goliath]

I agree with you. Any form of radicalization / extremism, violent behavior and integration problems in regards to a country's laws or co-existence with its populace should not be tolerated. I feel angry in regards to the damage done to my religion by backward-minded / sexists / violent individuals.

I bet the guy kicking that woman doesn't have a daughter or a sister. I'm surprised he even has a mother, I'm sure she'd be proud of him.

As to everyone else mocking religions in this thread, that's cool bro. To each his own ? I'll still sleep at night (or not, with a baby on the way) and you're not changing anyone's mind (just like we won't change yours).

I wouldn't assume such a thing. Just because somebody shows violence towards women doesn't mean he doesn't have a Mother, Sister or even daughters. Ever heard of "Honor Killings", they kill their own daughters, nieces, sisters, etc. if they feel her behavior is dishonoring them. It's disgusting behavior that even if someone is brought up around women continues to exist because the culture, religion and people in power deem it acceptable.

 

[Bala]

Here's the crux of the point.

Malala's faith tells her that female education is a good and necessary thing

The faith of the Pakistani Talib that shot her tells them that female education is not a good thing.

They're not the same faith. Malala's Islam and the Taliban's Islam are so distinct that it makes no sense to lump them together.

like is said before its irrelevant what malala's faith tell her nor what taliban's faith tells them . only the effects of the religious dogma on societies. does this relgious dogma produce jihadi johns . yes? does this relgious dogma advocate violence in marriage on women? does this relgious dogma lead to culture where honor killing and forced marriages are evident enough for british schools to get involved? your opinon and malalas doesnt matter. who are you convincing? yourself? come up with some better points that views and opinions . you already keep ignoring that malala's had secular influence form her father being a part of the awp. not that it is even pertinent .

 

[orochi91]

I'm not too sure about sects of Islam (I, myself, don't really follow a particular sect), but I do know that there are Muslim Scholars and figures within Islam that promote and espouse very egalitarian ideas.

And, also, "real" is where your problem lies. Because Islam is not a monolithic religion..people within and outside the religion have different ideas of what "True Islam" or the "real" Islam is.

Sufi Islam is one aspect of the religion that I've seen several women, one of whom is gay, flock to. It's likely due to its insistence on a personal connection with Allah and is generally non-violent, as opposed to various other sects, but my knowledge about it all is pretty rusty.

like is said before its irrelevant what malala's faith tell her nor what taliban's faith tells them . only the effects of the religious dogma on societies. does this relgious dogma produce jihadi johns . yes? does this relgious dogma advocate violence in marriage on women? does this relgious dogma lead to culture where honor killing and forced marriages are evident enough for british schools to get involved? your opinon and malalas doesnt matter. who are you convincing? yourself? come up with some better points that views and opinions . you already keep ignoring that malala's had secular influence form her father being a part of the awp. not that it is even pertinent .

I feel that you're getting culture and religion mixed up here, as honour killings are present in numerous other cultures regardless of the dominant religion in the area.

None of what you're saying so far in this thread is unique to Islam, but you are correct that there are aspects of religions/cultures that are detrimental to women's universal rights.

I've debated with some non-Muslim friends about this stuff and I get the impression that their ideal solution would be either to rewrite religious texts (near impossible in Islam) so that there's no room for malicious interpretation or ban religion all together (which isn't possible).

This conference that FEMEN derailed is absolutely needed so that these fundamentalists potentially debate the failings in their interpretations.

 

[Azih]

like is said before its irrelevant what malala's faith tell her nor what taliban's faith tells them .

Not to the question of said faith's compatibility or lack of it with the West.

Your conviction that the 'Islam' culture/religious dogma is in conflict with western society/ideals does not and cannot account for Malala's culture/religious dogma being completely compatible with, and in fact lauded by, the West.

Malala's culture/religious dogma is compatible with the West

The Taliban's culture/religious dogma is not compatible with the West.

Your flaw is that you're not recognizing that Malala's culture/religious dogma is not the same as that of the Taliban and is leading you to the mistake of focusing on 'Islam' in the generic and not the form of Islam practiced by the Taliban in the specific.

 

[Milksheikhs]

i dont wan't people to change cause they want to . i and a lot of others probably want people to know that we don't respect allah/mohammed/koran/vedas/ whatever religious doctrine when it comes to practice in society. your beliefs no matter how holy or how well you hold dear is beneath the rights of the womens right to safety in marriage from domestic abuse/hierarchy etc. you belief is benath the right to freedom of speech. expect to get prosecuted for it . expect to get no sympathy when advocating those sort of religous/cultural attitudes

I agree with you. No practice cultural or religious practice should come before the physical and mental safety of others. I say this as a Muslim and as a survivor of domestic violence. However, people should tolerate (not necessarily agree with) other people's practices when it comes to both religious and non religious practices. So, for example, if I go to the mosque and pray...no government or person should be allowed to harm me. At the same time if a group of atheists decide to have a meeting to discuss ideas no one should harm that comes to them should be tolerated.

 

[LUFTRAUSER]

The wide spread of salafism through Europe is fucking scary. These kind of conferences only started to show up a few years ago. Five years ago you would never see such a display of radical preachers casually talking about if you should beat your wife or not.

The far-right will keep gaining more and more voters I'm afraid ...

Well it looks like if they just keep waiting then eventually this problem will solve itself. But I don't think the Europeans are going to like that final solution.

 

[Sami+]

What makes you think they aren't? The article pointed out one. I pointed out another. Maybe you're just not looking for them?

There are some, but there needs to be more. The article itself is nothing more than pointing fingers and trying to trivialize the efforts of activists. Malala is not made invisible because of FEMEN at all, but her voice alone isn't loud enough and larger movements need to be happening internationally. Western Muslims and Arabs need more exposure and need to push more for progress among their own people.

Well a major roadblock is the idea that "All religion is the same" or "All Islam is the same" because it puts all religious people in the same boat as the problematic sects. It lumps neutral parties in with the extremists and undercuts the parties best placed to refute the problematic sects which are other Muslims that are struggling with the problem people over what true Islam really is (Malala Yousafi style for example)

The idea that 'the more problematic the sect is the more representative it is of TRUE ISLAM' is another common idea that is even more dangerous because it gives the problematic sects exactly what they crave. Complete authorship and ownership over the faith. Obviously that's not good. And it's incredibly frustrating that so many Western pundits/intellectuals/protesters play right into the hands of the problem sects and help the problem sects in undercutting and belittling moderates who have a very different opinion on what 'TRUE ISLAM' is.

So those are two huge things that are happening in this very thread. It buttresses the intellectual position of the problem sects and it makes regular Muslims feel isolated and beleaguered/besieged as they're constantly seen as the same as the actual problem people and feel they need t constantly defend themselves for things that they haven't done/do not believe.

Now if we can get away from that kind of reductive analysis that elevates the problematic people to a position they really don't deserve what can be done and needs to be done is understand how their ideology is spreading. Speaking of ISIS/Al-Qaeda types it's spreading to a small but certainly not insignificant portion of beleaguered and besieged young Muslims though social media where they are able to create a echo chamber and replace traditional Sunni leadership with their own and promulgate a view of a "Clash between civilizations". That this bullshit is repeated by Western pundits also helps the problem sects with their recruitment but what needs to be done is an organized response to these people on youtube and instagram and facebook to cut down the 'consensus' that they're building in their bubbles.

I have other ideas on how to work against them but you know some of it is pie in the sky or out of anyone's control. (Getting the hell off of our dependence on oil for example would do a whole hell of a lot). But really a problematic ideology needs to be cut off from the ground it feeds from and starved. Not screamed at from outside. (They love that especially in situations where people in Muslim Majority countries are suffering partly due to outside intervention as it feeds their narrative).

And Fenderputty the point is that FEMEM protesters being from Muslim families or ex-Muslims makes no difference to the points the article is raising that you seem to be dismissing.

Nope. We're not like them is the necessary first step towards working against them (I mean how do you work against someone who you're exactly like?). Unfortunately as soon as that step is taken a whole hell of a lot of Non Muslims or Ex Muslims seem to pop up and scream "YOU TOTALLY ARE EXACTLY LIKE THEM YOU APOLOGIST NONSENSE MUSLIM! WE MAKE MINCED MEAT OUT OF YOUR ARGUMENTS ON WHAT ISLAM REALLY IS CAUSE WE'RE SO MUCH MORE INTELLIGENT THAN YOU ON WHAT ISLAM REALLY IS. STOP YOUR APOLOGIST NONSENSE AND STOP BEING MUSLIM! ONLY SOLUTION!"

Edit: And yeah that's aimed at you kruis. Fucking nonsense.

Nobody's saying you're like them. Relax. What people are saying is that the nonsense lazy "we're not like them though!!!" defense accomplishes nothing, makes no steps towards progress, and never will. It never will because this crap has been all the western Muslim community has really been able to say years and nothing has changed.

""""""Real"""""" Muslims should have been protesting this event and others like these.
""""""Real"""""" Muslims should be the first ones to step up when some dumbass sheikh from Saudi Arabia starts droning on about how women shouldn't be able to drive.
""""""Real"""""" Muslims should be assimilating into the culture and becoming part of the media (like the Jews were able to do over a hundred years ago)
""""""Real""""""" Muslims should be showing America and Europe what they ARE, instead of telling them what they're not.

As someone already said above, the "real muslim" nonsense is just a True Scotsman Fallacy. It doesn't actually mean anything. There are fundamental issues regarding sexism and homophobia at the root of Islam and these issues need to be addressed, not swept under the rug as "yeah but theyre like not true muslims lol". There's a reason why these problems are so heavily associated with Muslim and Arab culture.

Who are the we are not like them people? The conference? Not the conference, since it is addressing the issue head on instead of the organizers being all taboo as fuck about the problem. Which is your original point of contention was, why even dignify such a ludicrous concept with a conference. Think of it this way: 100 people in the audience who thought maybe domestic abuse was ok now are ideally 100 people that now think domestic abuse is not ok. Isn't that positive? I know the topic is disgusting, but dont let your emotion override logic.

I'm referring to the writer of the Guardian article and people in general who parrot that phrase - of whom there are many.


- EDIT -
Also unless if I'm reading right this conference is the one where we got such meaningful insight like "the Angels condemn you if you don't have sex with your husband" and "if you're not covered you can't be surprised at what happens", no? I'm assuming the French quotes a few pages ago were from this right?

If that's the case then no I don't see the value in holding these summits.

 

[Milksheikhs]

Sufi Islam is one aspect of the religion that I've seen several women, one of whom is gay, flock to. It's likely due to its insistence on a personal connection with Allah and is generally non-violent, as opposed to various other sects, but my knowledge about it all is pretty rusty.

Yeah, I've been to a Sufi Mosque several times. I really enjoyed it there. I felt like an equal participant, and not like a silenced congregant. I've also been to Shia Mosques and Sunni majority mosques. For myself though, I don't identify with any particular sect. It's really sad how crazy people get over that stuff though. I went to this mosque for Friday prayers the other day and the speaker was talking about how we (meaning Muslims) have lost our basic touch of humanity. And that we should never abuse anyone regardless of their religion or lack of. And he was talking about how we need to stop making generalizations about others and how we should have a basic sense of brotherhood or sisterhood with humanity (everyone including non religious/athiests). I got really emotional and cried hearing his speech. We need to hear these basic reminders more often.