Goddess

Bingo.

Anything to divert attention from what she actually says, right?

She seems like a reasonable one.

The author is a well-traveled Muslim woman. She knows the differences between the coverings.

It's an excerpt from a book. She explains how she uses the words at the start of the book. Maybe read the book before you start nitpicking a word the author uses. No matter what you want to call the coverings, they are all for the same purpose. To keep women in their (supposedly inferior) place.

She's not. Her book talks about all of it. It's all coverings exclusively for women.

For some things. Marina Lazreg ("author of Questioning the Veil") says this about the deicison to cover: (And I agree with her) I also agree with her legal view of veiling:

My children both went to French Immersion, despite us not living in a "French" province. My son has used his French fairly extensively and my daughter works for a government agency that pays her extra $$/hr because she speaks French - which she uses every day. Both have also learned enough Spanish to converse because the languages are so similar. Neither of them has expressed any regrets or feel abused for having to learn another language. It's only been a benefit to them as they grew up and began working.

I dont' know how you and MH couldn't find anything. I found the articles in French - in an easy, no-brainer search, but felt QOC could supply the links for his own thread and wanted to see how far you and MH would go in screeching "Fake News!!!!".

Women would never "choose" this for themselves. They are coerced, either domestic abuse or religious abuse. Women do not "naturally" want to never be outside in the sunshine, feel the breeze on their hair and faces. Women do not "naturally" want to deprive their bodies of the healthy effects of being outside. They are always required to do it - either by their family or by their religion. The fact that most cannot "choose" to take it off, tells me it is not a choice at all.

I don't believe it's in women's best interests that they are required to be covered in public.

I was reading an article last night about violence against women (the Polytechnique massacre anniversary is coming up). I won't post the article unless someone asks because it's not really pertinent to this topic, but it made some interesting points about the misogyny that is a threat to half the world's population and says that we must start calling it what it is - terrorism. The article made points that apply equally well to how we view Islamic terrorism and ideology. The public at the time (1989) was encouraged to think about the killings not with anger and protest, but with "reflection and silence" - much the same as we are told to think about Islamic massacres. Definitely dont' talk about it. We are starting now to recognize these massacres of women for what they are - extremist acts, hate crimes against an identifiable group - women. Up til recently the connection between extremism and misogyny has been mostly overlooked in studies and in the law. The author suggests we start looking at misogyny for what it is - an ideology that is deadly to half the population. Of course, we recognize Islamic extremism as a deadly ideology but we refuse to look at its roots. Like crimes against women, we have to stop looking at Islamic extremism as crimes of an individual and see it for what it is - the consequences of an interconnected and poisonous ideology. These violent acts of religious extremism are intended to be sequential - one killer drawing inspiration from another, drawing inspiration from an ideology that is already full of misogyny and hatred of others. Misogyny and hatred are the core ideologies that bind almost all forms of Islam together. More than that, they are world views, not individual attitudes. That is very different.

You're talking in circles. We were discussing which system women would prefer - Western society or Muslim-ruled society. You indicated most Muslim women prefer Muslim society. Why they would prefer living in a Muslim-majority country is beyond me, seeing what's going on in 57 Muslim countries, but ok.

Individual Germans were mostly silent and looked the other way as the extreme and radical elements of their belief/political system rode roughshod over the Jews and the rest of the world. I see the same in Islam.

Well, you certainly don't call her out on anything. Who cares? I dont' call her out for her benefit.

This is your statement. YOU are asserting that Muslims prefer Muslim majority countries over Western societies. I'm not saying they are wrong to prefer that. I'm just asking why - if the majority prefer Muslim ruled countries, as you assert - do they come to Western countries instead of going to other Islamic countries.

So far I think every person here representing Islam has contradicted most of what Dia insists Muslims believe.

Yes, and another one on another thread smugly celebrating the establishment of Sharia law in Belgium.

Why are you screeching at me? I'm not the one who said the majority of Muslims prefer Muslim-ruled countries. I just asked why are they coming if they don't like Western society. Seems like a reasonable question based on the assertion that the majority of Muslims do not prefer Western society.

False. It banned street drinking in the city center. Lots of countries and cities do not allow street drinking. It's not Sharia. It's common sense. (Quite a few news reports say that the ban was imposed due to excessive criminal activity by drunken migrants. Other reports omit that but still allude to gangs of intoxicated transients attacking people and police.) It's not Sharia.

We're talking about which system women would prefer to live under, not asking them about moving to another country in general. Try to follow the conversation. If they don't like Western culture, then why are they coming? Why not stay in the countries which have the religious rules they prefer?

Some Western conservatives may think women are inferior but they are not trying to keep women covered, in the house or take away their rights to inherit, to vote, to be seen, to have a voice, etc. They are not stoning women for (supposed) adultery or for refusing to cover. Wife beaters in western society do not enjoy the applause of their peers. Western conservatives may not like gays, but they are not tossing them off rooftops. Women and gays still have a little ways to go, but no. Not the SAME at all. Smarten up. Ask any Western woman if they would prefer living in Western society or in a Muslim-ruled country and there's your proof.

Another one https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/dutch-police-several-wounded-in-stabbing-in-the-hague/ar-BBXw26O?ocid=spartandhp

Lo and behold: https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/man-shot-by-police-in-major-terror-related-incident-on-london-bridge/ar-BBXvNuZ?ocid=spartandhp Don't you just hate it when you are in the midst of denying something is happening and then it does?

ISIS depends on it. When they instruct individual Muslims to terrorize and many do, yes, it works perfectly. Few will clue in that it's actually a group effort.