<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Arnaud, I think you should not underestimate the impact of poverty
as compared to religion. Before the Western world became the 1st
World, the typical Christian was just as intolerant, bigoted, and
patriarchal as your most extreme Muslim. Once Westerners went from
being peasants to middle-class professionals, business became more
important than religion, and the enemies of capitalism (communists)
became the bogeyman rather than other religions. This pulled the rug
out from Christianity, which used to have a monopoly on bogeymen. So
Christianity had to go for the soft-sell and reinvent itself as a
feel-good spiritual social club rather than fire and brimstone. All
the sudden women could wear pants and run for office (and become
priests). Of course the Christian Bible still says that women are
subservient to their husbands (as Michelle Bachmann recently
reminded us). It also endorses slavery, says that adulterers must be
put to death, and requires men to grow beards. But who cares? If you
live a comfortable life, religious dogma doesn't have much appeal.<br>
<br>
Sociological studies have shown a strong correlation between
patriarchal attitudes and lack of economic development. Look at the
difference between Pakistan and Indonesia. Both are majority Muslim
countries which officially endorse Sharia law. In Pakistan,
religious fundamentalism is strong and women have little access to
education, employment, or power. In Indonesia, there is far less
religious fundamentalism and women have far more access to
education, employment, and power (though still pitiful by Western
standards). Women can even serve as Sharia judges in Indonesia,
which would be heresy in Pakistan. If you compare the GDP per capita
between the 2 counties, Indonesia's is over twice that of Pakistan.
The effect is even more pronounced if you compare rural areas to
urban areas rather than country to country.<br>
<br>
Ryan Kaldari<br>
<br>
<br>
On 9/23/11 1:56 AM, Arnaud HERVE wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4E7C49AC.8040808@x-mail.net" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
Ok I will be a bit long here.<br>
<br>
On 23/09/2011 01:07, Emily Monroe wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:CADONt8TEHJzPk7ishPHdO+c4QF95uSzOD_7h75mq118LOzoOyQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">Personally, I really don't understand why people get
upset about Islamic women <i>choosing</i> to wear hijabs, or
niqabs, under the pretense of feminism. Part of what feminism
fights for is the right to choose. This is the unintended
consequence. <br>
<br>
I get the practical arguments (ie, "I don't know who this person
is" etc.) is, though, and I think any girl or women who has
their wardrobe dictated by another person is being abused,
unless there's a non-abusive reason behind it; I doubt that
anyone wearing a work or school uniform would qualify as being
abused. <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
That is probably because you still consider the niqab as a piece
of garment only. But the niqab doesn't come alone, it comes in a
set, with Islamic law included. And that law necessarily includes
the submission of women to men.<br>
<br>
It is very important to understand that Islam is not exactly a
personal choice faith, in the sense that you would consider
tolerance between different churches of Protestantism on the
American territory. Islam doesn't do tolerance, in the sense that
we understand it. In Islam you cannot leave, it is death penalty
if you chose another religion.<br>
<br>
It is not either to be considered with a benevolent multicultural
mind, like you would tolerate the differences of Buddhist
immigrants. A law-abiding good-citizen attitude is recommended to
Muslims only if they are a minority in a Western country. If they
become a majority, then they must take power, and impose Islamic
law. This entails dividing the population into three categories ;
Muslims who have full dignity, Christians and Jews who are
sub-citizens subjected to occasional abuse, non believers or
heathens who have no rights. This also necessarily includes a loss
of civic rights for all women.<br>
<br>
During the twentieth century there were positive signs from the
Muslim world. They were due to :<br>
<br>
- local customs atoning Islamic law<br>
- The modernist mentalities of post-colonization Nation-States<br>
<br>
However this is disappearing now, due to :<br>
<br>
- New globalized generations who conceive Islam not as local
custom but as globally opposed to the Western world<br>
- The systematic destruction of the modern Muslim Nation-States by
NATO<br>
<br>
Only in the mainstream media you hear that Bin Laden was captured
because it suddenly became possible, and Lybian democratic forces
suddenly rebelled against dictator Khadafi. In fact Bin Laden's
capture was a public relations operation, which helped conceal the
fact that Nato has been promoting Al-Qaida to fight in Lybia. This
in turn helps establishing business interests in NATO-controlled
Muslim countries, with Western capital controlling the big
business, the local population subjected to religious obscurantism
and not participating to the democratic defense of their rights,
and in between a zealots mafia..<br>
<br>
In Islam women do have rights, yes, like your teenage daughter has
rights. Not like an adult professional woman has rights and can
call her lawyer. In Islam if you have no husband and no father,
then you are subjected to the authority of your younger brother,
who can decide of your life for you, and occasionally beat you up
if you don't obey. In Islam you cannot divorce if you wish, only
if the Muslim judge thinks that your husband did something wrong
according to Islamic law. In Islam you cannot be raped by your
husband, he is your husband it's the word of God that he can do
what he wants with you. In Islam if you complain that you were
raped by strangers, you have to prove first that you were not
sexually provocative. In Islam if you are found with a person of
the same sex, the community can stone you to death as they wish.<br>
<br>
The reason why I write all that is that I have talked with
feminists from Muslim countries, so I try to convey their message.<br>
<br>
The first thing is that they really would like to get rid of
Islam. Not being mildly respected as a member of the Muslim
community, but really get rid of Islam, and being actively
protected from it. They want to have a life, they cannot even
subscribe an insurance policy, buy a car, go visit friends without
the agreement of male relatives.<br>
<br>
Then there is the sociological problem, that Islam doesn't
tolerate a sexually neutral civic life. It might not be obvious in
North America because you are so used to it, but in order to have
a professional life women need to work in an environment where
there are male colleagues and clients, and therefore need laws
against sexual harassment, for the simple common sense reason that
when you work you work, you don't date. Islam doesn't do that, in
Islam a woman is either owned by the males of her family or her
husband, and if she she walks free from male authority then she is
sexually available. The male in turn is considered as immediately
sexually eager and willing to rape as soon as he sees a female in
the absence of a relative from her family.<br>
<br>
In that sense a male teacher alone with a girl is not decent,
because it is considered that the teacher will attempt to seduce
her anytime, and the girl will compulsorily feel a burning desire
as well. I know, I help the 10 years daughter of my Muslim
neighbors every week with her schoolwork, because the parents
cannot read the language. And yet I cannot be left alone with her,
the father or the brother have to be present in the same room.<br>
<br>
Walking in public spaces is tolerated if the girls are in groups
only, so there cannot be a moment alone with a man. For example a
female client talking to a male shopkeeper about a shop's product
is a moment of burning raging obscenity. Islam doesn't do free
neutral space for allowing women to develop civic activities. Let
alone professional activities.<br>
<br>
"Tolerant" Islam is gradually decreasing, and it is more and more
the radicals we will have to deal with. In dealing with women's
rights we will have to surrender to or to break Islam. Because
once more, Islam is not only a faith, it's a law, alw as in You
Don't Choose.<br>
<br>
Last, let me quote you a short "dialogue" I recently witnessed on
Facebook. There was a girl from Algeria saying "Wow the weather is
still much too hot in this month of September. Then a male
Algerian replied "You don"t chose the weather, God choses the
weather". That is the kind of cultural life most educated girls in
Muslim countries would like to get rid of.<br>
<br>
Arnaud<br>
<br>
<br>
<pre wrap="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org">Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap">https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>