Profiling Yemen: 'From bikinis to burkas'

[LayZie G.]

^no, I do not google topics about Burka, but the subject itself is a controversial subject, which deserves its fair share of debating(it has not happened yet). At the same time, its on the minds of people (including me) and if my favourite news portals happen to do pieces about burka's (and the effect it has on poor, third world communities), who am I to deny further exposure?(NORTH REFUSED TO ENGAGE IN A DEBATE ABOUT THE MATERIAL, HE INSISTS THAT IT IS NOT OBLIGATORY BUT ARGUES JUST THAT, IT IS A MATERIAL THAT SHOULD NOT BE BANNED? )

 

So, I asked North, why shouldnt it be banned if its not obligatorY? He said 'nay'! (not a good enough reason)

 

North and CO would rather not discuss it and take the stand against banning burka without a valid reason, instead, they want to accept things at face value.

 

Everyone reads topics thats of interest to them, for me its about espionage pieces, burka and terrorism, lol among other things...so, at the end of the day, to each his own?

[Cara.]

^A real professional doesn't google anyway, you've got an RSS feed set up right?

 

So, I asked North, why shouldnt it be banned if its not obligatorY?

It's questions like this that make it obvious you are trolling Layzie.

[Dhimbil]

^^I propose we ban hair for women also since its not really obligatory? why not? Layzie will be good sport and go first.........Cara get ready you next

[LayZie G.]

explain yourself Cara(not RSS feed but trolling)

 

 

PS: Didn't Nur expel you from the burka crowd? And why are you always questioning my motives?

 

Pss: Burka is not your battle, ee I'm after the "its not an obligation but..." crowd

[Cara.]

Actually Gustavo, I think the totally shaved look looks great on guys AND my hair is a crow's nest while other women have beautiful tresses, so I'm all for it

 

Layzie, funnily enough I consider you and Nur to be two sides of the same sexist coin. You both think you know what's best for women and get mad that women disagree with you. It's just that I'd rather scold you because you can do better dear

[N.O.R.F]

Originally posted by LayZie G.:

^no, I do not google topics about Burka, but the subject itself is a controversial subject, which deserves its fair share of debating(it has not happened yet). At the same time, its on the minds of people (including me) and if my favourite news portals happen to do pieces about burka's (and the effect it has on poor, third world communities), who am I to deny further exposure?(NORTH REFUSED TO ENGAGE IN A DEBATE ABOUT THE MATERIAL, HE INSISTS THAT IT IS NOT OBLIGATORY BUT ARGUES JUST THAT, IT IS A MATERIAL THAT SHOULD NOT BE BANNED? )

 

So, I asked North, why shouldnt it be banned if its not obligatorY? He said 'nay'! (not a good enough reason)

 

North and CO would rather not discuss it and take the stand against banning burka without a valid reason, instead, they want to accept things at face value.

 

Everyone reads topics thats of interest to them, for me its about espionage pieces, burka and terrorism, lol among other things...so, at the end of the day, to each his own?

Are you sure that is an accurate reflection of our previous discussions? I seem to recall you faffing about, making your usual snide comments and references to individuals without really addressing the issues (same here surprise surprise) in a clear and concise manner.

 

I produced LEGAL reasons why the ban on the Burka is contrary to French and EU laws. You decided to ignore that and carry on doing what you do best (faff about and wave your hands around thinking people should take you seriously). Wake me up when you're well prepared and well read

 

I think this quote of your says it all

 

my favourite news portals happen to do pieces about burka's

Tell me how they report on yesterdays killing by Nato forces in Afghanistan of a bunch of civilians who were protesting in the streets. Tell me how they report on the allegations of Nato soldiers desecrating the Quran in Mosques (which lead to the demonstrations).

 

ps travel a little

[Cicero]

What does FGM (female genital mutilation), chastity belt, the Burka, and other mideival relics have in common? The answer is the control of female sexuality in particular and female freedom in general.

 

The fact that some muslim women - mostly ill-educated- in the West freely choose to wear the Burka does not negate the fact it has always been a backward symbol, a symbol of oppression and subjugation.

 

Men have always devised various methods and strategies to relegate the female to the status of a lesser individual. Religion has served as a useful tool in this regard. What is a poor girl to say when a preist, Imam, or Rabbi says God wants you to cover this way; or God's angels will curse you if you deny your husband sex?

 

The emancipation of women did not happen overnight, rather it was a long, arduous struggle. And women did all the heavy-lifting and fighting for women rights. Not Men. Not religion.

[Geel_jire]

^ This is the kind of garbage that amuses me.

 

Originally posted by Cicero:

The fact that some muslim women - mostly ill-educated- in the West freely choose to wear the Burka does not negate that it has always been a backward symbol, a symbol of

oppression and subjugation .

This is the reasoning skills of a mental midget.

you can do better than this .. why don't you try again.

 

just in case you do not see how utterly ridiculous your femenazi rant sound read it again

 

Originally posted by Cicero:

The fact that some muslim women - mostly ill-educated- in the West freely choose to wear the Burka does not negate that it has always been a backward symbol, a symbol of

oppression and subjugation .

basically you think that any woman who does not conform to your idea of "emancipated" out of her own free will is just too ignorant to know any better .... what happened to women rights ? not to your liking when it doesn't produce results to your taste eh .. the irony

 

 

I think Cara pegged her very well L.G cannot be taken seriously she has started half a dozen threads on this very same issue and every time she is called on her over the top drama, and illogical rants she runs away only to come back after a while and posts the same rubbish.

[N.O.R.F]

The fact that some muslim women - mostly ill-educated- in the West

freely

choose to wear the Burka

Thank you for that FACT. Everything else is your opinion

[Cicero]

A muslim woman in Greece or Germany does not have to wear this hideous form of hijab. That's a truism. Liberal democracies have at their core the principle of freedom of conscience and religion. What befuddles me is why faith-heads become giddy when the patently obvious is mentioned?

 

My comment about general illiteracy - perhaps even mental infirmity - was meant to highlight the plight of muslim women in the West: mental servility. The only solution to that problem is education and empowerment.

 

Although no one holds a gun to her head, a burka-binded woman in the West feels that she needs to conform with the desert dogma of her parents and relatives. Yes, she freely chooses to don this dreadful, demeaning attire because she operates under the delusion that God, who apparently only whispers in the ears of men, requires this of her. To be sure, it's an effective form of disenfranchisement. What better way to shear away the autonomy and freedom of women than to appeal to the heavens.

[N.O.R.F]

So let me get this right. In one breath you’re championing the ‘core principles of freedom of conscience and religion’ and in another you’re educating Muslims on the practice of their faith whilst at the same time mocking it. On top that you’re adamant Muslim women who wear the Burka are ill educated without any basis and you’re doing all this as a leaver of the faith (correct me if I’m wrong there).

 

How do you suggest we ‘faith-heads’ take you’re OPINION (ill informed at that) seriously?

[Johnny B]

^Championing the core principles of freedoms is one thing,defending that demeaning Tent as an act of freedom-expression is like defending suicide as an act of freedom-expression, it simply defeats the purpose.

 

Muslim women DO the Burka thing (in the belief of satisfying their God ), despite Islam not 'officially' demanding it or distancing it. period.

 

Now,don't you dare start all over again and go " Aren't they are free to shoose so ?" , cause then, the risk of me believing that you're actually an Alien will be overhanging.

[LayZie G.]

Cara, as much as I had a good laugh reading your post just now, I couldn't help but ask, who is better representative of women issues? A woman ofcourse, for man has only his interest to look after.

 

For instance, in the early and mid 19th Century Canada, the generation who had written about the Canadian life only concentrated on what interest them at the time, which was men and the role men played in pre-confederation Canada, their activities in the fur trade, fishery, political participation and the everyday life of the family but when the early 20th century historians looked back on these very same generations, they found the writings to be full of biased, one in which de-franchised not only the most important group of all, women but natives. So, they re-focused and started looking into finding out role natives played(both men and women), along with ordinary canadian women of the period.('Women and the Escheat Movement' comes to mind)

 

They started discussing the impact natives had on the fur trade, for without them, there would not have been a fur to trade, because the bulk of the labour was completed by natives and native women specifically looked to keep these white, european men away from harm and helped them survive the wilderness.

 

Now, I ask you, was it the fault of the first generation of historians for writing exclusively about men and men interest? Were they biased? No, they were human beings, who only wrote of things they knew and it didn't hurt that they discussed men, because frankly, the elite group who restructured Canada as a dominion were white men too, so its only natural that they would right about the impact white men had in the former British North American Colony and the bulk of the work with be about 'White Men'.

 

Furthermore, these historians had to have considered the accounts of the middle and upper class families and their women, for the silent majority were silent and their struggles were none-existent in the textbooks for a very long time.

 

Was it fair for the well off women to represent all Canadian women? I think not, so for some to speak on behalf of the minority about the Burka and Burka related issues does injustices to the silent majority.(especially if men are the champion, who only would continue the hold they have on these said women)

 

Now, how can I do better than that? Changing views not changing minds? What is your recommendation? I promise to entertain all and every suggestion you throw my way.

 

And as for brother North, Geeljire and everyone else, if I may ask of you to not engage in personalities, instead engage the subject, Burka in full swing.

 

North, your previous arguments were unsatisfactory, thats why I went to the Guru, Sheikh Nur to directly engage him but he promised to address it in good time and I told him to take his time. You can dig up the brief exchange in the Islamic Section.

 

As for the subject, I would love nothing more than to simplify the debate for everyone.

 

LayZieG says: Burka is not obligatory, therefore its irrelevant and should not be forced in women's throat. In addition, Burka is a middle east phenomena and therefore it should be dismissed, unless the few women who wear it feel that they need to continue supporting the material as a way of life, an attire that identifies the woman within the confinement of her society, other than that, total ban should be called on the attire.

 

Furthermore, LayZieG feels that dressing modestly is necessity, and every Muslim women should dress according to the Sunna, as suggested of men as well.

 

The onus is on you folks. Failure to agree with the above position will automatically result in the person showing Qur'anic verses that will support one's position against banishment on the bases that the attire is in fact a religious obligation, one that all Muslim women must adhere to. Otherwise, please refrain from commenting.

 

 

North, the ball is in your court. You have a third or was it fourth chance? dazzle, will ya?

 

PS: Geeljire, engage the subject, not the person and quit taking unnecessary jabs from the sidelines, I'm not the enemy, Burka is.(if you don't engage this subject, I will have no choice but to dismiss all your rants as just that, rants)

 

Pss:Folks who once wore bikinisi are now convinced that the burka is infact a religious obligation, one that all muslim women must adhere to at all times and failure to do so will result in hundreds of lashes etc....

 

In this instance, Burka separated the author from his family.

[Chocolate and Honey]

To LG,

I, for one, am having difficulty taking you serious because for one you’ve exhausted this topic without contributing anything of merit to the topic really. There are several aspects of this “controversial” issue and you seem to be focused on the nonissue really which is WHO(in your mind) is making women wear Burka. I want you to clarify few things(if you’re interested in genuine debate). What is your objection based on?

A) You believe it is Un Islamic or

B) You believe it is outdated regardless of its legality or

C) You believe women who wear it are oppressed by men; therefore, it is a matter of the freedom to choose(which would be ironic because what if women choose the Burka as they do?) or/and

D) You believe it’s inconvenient in today’s modern, fast-paced world or

E) You believe “others” look down upon women who wear it and you’re distancing yourself from it or/and

F) It is just plain “Hideous” as you’ve referenced it before.

Also, are you arguing it should be banned in the West or worldwide?

 

To CIC,

A muslim woman in Greece or Germany does not have to wear this hideous form of hijab. That's a truism. Liberal democracies have at their core the principle of freedom of conscience and religion. What befuddles me is why faith-heads become giddy when the patently obvious is mentioned?

OH My

you really went all out with correct grammar, spelling and even used such warm and fuzzy words like “Truism,” Liberal Democracies(wow! Liberal AND Democracy? My head is swimming!), “freedom,” and “faith-heads”(Ok. Wow! I mean this kind of English… surely, you’ve done your Liberal English teacher proud).

At the core of this debate is this trifling thing called ehem… freedom of choice(I know, I know you only understand it when the Western Media uses it but bear with me ok?). A Muslim woman in Europe or America doesn’t have to wear the Hijab but they choose to. See, it as simple as that.

My comment about general illiteracy - perhaps even mental infirmity - was meant to highlight the plight of muslim women in the West: mental servility. The only solution to that problem is education and empowerment.

 

Oh poor “illiterate Muslim women,” forever chained to their "backwarded" principles! I mean they cant even fathom what “Freedom” and “personal choice” mean. I mean how dare they choose Hijab after all the West has given them, right? :mad:

Although no one holds a gun to her head, a burka-binded woman in the West feels that she needs to conform with the desert dogma of her parents and relatives. Yes, she freely chooses to don this dreadful, demeaning attire because she operates under the delusion that God, who apparently only whispers in the ears of men, requires this of her. To be sure, it's an effective form of disenfranchisement. What better way to shear away the autonomy and freedom of women than to appeal to the heavens.

 

I cant help but laugh at “desert dogma.” And whereas God is concerned, I’ll leave you with this: There is nothing more dangerous than a fool armed with limited knowledge. You don’t have the foggiest idea of what you’re talking about.

Warning: too much television kills brain cells.

[Peacenow]

Originally posted by Cicero:

A muslim woman in Greece or Germany does not have to wear this hideous form of hijab. That's a truism. Liberal democracies have at their core the principle of freedom of conscience and religion. What befuddles me is why faith-heads become giddy when the patently obvious is mentioned?

 

My comment about general illiteracy - perhaps even mental infirmity - was meant to highlight the plight of muslim women in the West: mental servility. The only solution to that problem is education and empowerment.

 

Although no one holds a gun to her head, a burka-binded woman in the West feels that she needs to conform with the desert dogma of her parents and relatives. Yes, she freely chooses to don this dreadful, demeaning attire because she operates under the delusion that God, who apparently only whispers in the ears of men, requires this of her. To be sure, it's an effective form of disenfranchisement. What better way to shear away the autonomy and freedom of women than to appeal to the heavens.

Such a intelligent and well reasoned response. Congratulations to you for this level of thought.