Honour Killing Trial kicks off.

[guyser]

Not that it's common in a broad sense. I am specific with my language for a reason.

Must be common in a narrow sense....er which makes it not common.

Good thing for being specific bs bob.

[cybercoma]

He stated that we shouldn't accept the filth of the world from barbaric societies, not that all people from barbaric societies are the filth of the world. It's funny how you leftists are so dedicated to misrepresenting words. Or perhaps you're simply incapable of reading English accurately through your ideologically-stained glasses.

Yet you follow it up comparing cultures, rather than calling individuals "filth". Cool story, bro.

[g_bambino]

I stated that the threat of violence that keeps females in check in Mohammedan families is much more common than the media lets on. Not that it's common in a broad sense. I am specific with my language for a reason.

Apparently you're specific with a language specific to yourself; for most other people, "common" can be a synonym of "broad" (e.g.: "broadly accepted" = "commonly accepted"). Regardless, you were focused on violence and said it was "the left" that downplays the prevalence of the misogynistic type in Muslim families. I asked if, perhaps, you could be overplaying it, given that there isn't really a way to tell for sure, one way or another. Your only defense for your position, so far, has been a circumstantial observation of the difference between male and female garb in some Islamic cultures. I reiterate: differences between men's and women's dress do not confirm the presence of violence, either threatened or committed.

[+, sp]

Edited October 21, 2011 by g_bambino

[Tilter]

No wonder you have to accuse others of ignorance, given how much you yourself show. This is a tragedy caused by backwards ways, yes,

While I disagree with the statement

but it doesn't show that multiculturalism is a failure.

it doesn't need to show it, there is enough very visible evidence without this horrific contribution.

[Bob]

Apparently you're specific with a language specific to yourself; for most other people, "common" can be a synonym of "broad" (e.g.: "broadly accepted" = "commonly accepted"). Regardless, you were focused on violence and said it was "the left" that downplays the prevalence of the misogynistic type in Muslim families. I asked if, perhaps, you could be overplaying it, given that there isn't really a way to tell for sure, one way or another. Your only defense for your position, so far, has been a circumstantial observation of the difference between male and female garb in some Islamic cultures. I reiterate: differences between men's and women's dress do not confirm the presence of violence, either threatened or committed.

[+, sp]

Do you not realize what is illustrated when we examine the difference between the degree to which males and females dress religiously in most Muslim societies and families? It shows a much higher standard of expectation towards the females, while the males are not expected to dress "piously" at all. Conversely, you'll not see a religious Jewish family where there is such a disconnect between the standards held by males and females: both are held to the same standard. The point I'm making with the difference in overt religiosity between Muslim males and females is indicative of a prevalent cultural double-standard and misogyny. The same sexist double-standard that permeates Islamic culture leads males to "stray" from their culture much more freely and without fear of consequence than females (unless you're gay, of course), where you can see Muslim males in clubs and bars in Israel, but virtually never a Muslim girl. Can you connect the dots to how this is related to honour-killings in Islamic societies, which only target females, or do you need to me to spoonfeed you a little more?

Edited October 21, 2011 by Bob

[g_bambino]

Do you not realize what is illustrated when we examine the difference between the degree to which males and females dress religiously in most Muslim societies and families? It shows a much higher standard of expectation towards the females, while the males are not expected to dress "piously" at all.

As real as that inequality may be, it still isn't evidence of any prevalance of mysogynistic violence in Muslim culture. There are a number of possible reasons why a Muslim woman dresses as she does; getting her face beat in if she doesn't is only one of them, and we have literally no data that tells us how common or uncommon it is in this country.

[cybercoma]

Bob's obviously never seen how Pentecostal Christian women are required to dress or how some Jewish sects treat women as though they have the plague when they're menstruating. These traits are not unique to Islam.

[Bob]

As real as that inequality may be, it still isn't evidence of any prevalance of mysogynistic violence in Muslim culture. There are a number of possible reasons why a Muslim woman dresses as she does; getting her face beat in if she doesn't is only one of them, and we have literally no data that tells us how common or uncommon it is in this country.

It's the threat of violence that isn't uncommon. At the same time, I don't doubt the sincerity of the religious of most Muslim women wearing hijabs. Still, many of them are held in check for fear of violence. You realize that there's a difference between the threat of violence (and the influence on behaviour such threats can have) and the use of violence, right?

[g_bambino]

It's the threat of violence that isn't uncommon.

Proof?

[Bob]

Proof?

Go have some conversations with honest and modern Muslims. They'll tell you.

[g_bambino]

Go have some conversations with honest and modern Muslims. They'll tell you.

That's circumstantial. It doesn't prove the veracity of your claim.

[cybercoma]

prove the veracity of your claim.

You should make a hotkey with this response if you plan on chatting with Bob going forward.

[Shwa]

Let me help you out, go look up Baruch Goldstein, Bernie Madoff, Roman Polanski, and Bill Surkis. That should give you a little more ammunition in your amusing attempts to portray Jewish communities in a negative light. Oh, before I forget, you can also try to use David Berkowitz as some sort of indicator of how Jews are just as bad as everyone else, including Mohammedans. Because, according to your worldview, all societies and cultures are equal. So I just wanted to give you a few more tools towards advancing that false narrative.

Wrong again fluffy. Not trying to portray any religious or culture group in negative light because of the shitty behaviour of some of their shitty adherents. Because I know better.

But like I said earlier, everyone knows how you view the extraordinary, you have become a caricature of yourself.

[Boges]

Sure people of all faiths do things that are totally horrible.

The difference with this is that similar treatment of women is lauded in much of the Muslim world. It's rare in Canada which is good, but we should be use this incident as a warning.

This event isn't morally equal to say a crime of passion that comes from a domestic incident. It was far more insidious.

People who come to this country should know that treating women as possessions is totally unacceptable in the West.

Europe is having lots of trouble trying to assimilate Muslims with similar views of this man to their society.

[Shwa]

Sure people of all faiths do things that are totally horrible.

The difference with this is that similar treatment of women is lauded in much of the Muslim world. It's rare in Canada which is good, but we should be use this incident as a warning.

This event isn't morally equal to say a crime of passion that comes from a domestic incident. It was far more insidious.

People who come to this country should know that treating women as possessions is totally unacceptable in the West.

Europe is having lots of trouble trying to assimilate Muslims with similar views of this man to their society.

Interesting hearsay on one news channel or another, but someone asked Prime Minister Harper if there should be special laws about honour killings and such and he said no, there are already laws to address what was done. Good answer.

[Boges]

Interesting hearsay on one news channel or another, but someone asked Prime Minister Harper if there should be special laws about honour killings and such and he said no, there are already laws to address what was done. Good answer.

Sure. Murder is murder. It's like a hate crime. Why should a crime have an additional punishment tacked on because it was rationally motivated or because the victim was gay.

But deaths like this provide a warning about how Muslim women in this country should be treated.

[capricorn]

Interesting hearsay on one news channel or another, but someone asked Prime Minister Harper if there should be special laws about honour killings and such and he said no, there are already laws to address what was done. Good answer.

Indeed.

Had the cries for help from the deceased daughters been handled differently by the authorities would this tragedy have been avoided? As they say hindsight is 20/20.

In fact, what was most galling about the prosecutor's overview of the evidence to come was how very openly the teenagers had rebelled against their parents — once, from a street corner in Montreal where the family lived, they begged a stranger to call 911 for them because they were so afraid to go home — and how little Canadian authorities and Canadian law helped them.

In fact, Quebec child protection authorities twice investigated complaints from Sahar's school, once little more than three weeks before the four bodies were found.

In the first instance, Lacelle said, the social worker deemed the complaint to be "founded" — true, in other words — but closed the file anyway when Sahar wouldn't talk to her once she learned that the worker would be obligated to tell her parents what she'd told her.

The next time she interviewed the girl, two days later, "Sahar was wearing the hijab" and claimed things had improved at home.

http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/canada-in-afghanistan/Child+victims+begged+outside+authorities+help+honour+killing+trial/5583255/story.html

Social workers and educators should take note of this trial. One can only hope that in circumstances similar to these, they will recognize the life and death situation faced by victims before it's too late.

[Argus]

The difference between men's and women's dress is not evidence of misogynistic violence.

I haven't read anything on the subject, but I don't think it's much of a stretch to say the Muslim world is Misogynistic. And violence is pretty integral to such societies and cultures.

I remember reading an article by a female journalist describing the handout of food someplace in Afghanistan. Afghan cops were using whips and clubs to keep the mob at bay, openly swinging at mostly women and children to drive them back or kick them away. The Canadians tried to get them to stop, and the Afghan cops were totally confused. They had no idea what the objection was. They were simply maintaining order, the way they always did. As for the women and children, none of them was outraged, surprised, or even bothered by being clubbed or whipped. They run back and then ran forward again, almost shrugging it off. Such violence was perfectly normal to them.

And for what it's worth I used to work in an office populated largely by young women (sigh, the good old days) and their opinion of Muslim men was unanimous. They were all arrogant misogynists, and they all acted like pigs in the clubs and bars.

[scribblet]

It is one of the saddest stories imaginable, and the two men and one woman who murdered these children would do it again if given the chance. The depth of their ignorance is frightening.

That's one of the worst things about this, they have no regrets and would do it again.

[g_bambino]

I haven't read anything on the subject, but I don't think it's much of a stretch to say the Muslim world is Misogynistic.

Certainly. Though, the "Muslim world" isn't monolithic; certain Muslim societies are more misogynistic than others, and even in some regions there are differences between the rural and urban cultures. It therefore would follow that the prevalence of violence also varies.

But Bob was trying to assert that misogynistic violence is a common trait amongst Muslims in Canada. We've yet to see any empirical evidence to support the claim.

[Battletoads]

Because everyone in any given society can be "filth" and "barbaric"? Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran, as an example, all have warring factions that have drastically different opinions about religion, politics and society. Your ignorance is disgusting.

Oh, I'm sure there are some exceptions folks in the backwards countries of the world, just as I'm sure there's filth in the civilized ones, but exceptions do not make rules.

I find it funny how some members of the left, and this is speaking of a member of the left, will trip over themselves to defend people who oppose, often violently, everything they claim to stand for. Eh wait, never mind, I actually find it sickening how the left has been highjacked by the political correctness movement.

[Bob]

Certainly. Though, the "Muslim world" isn't monolithic; certain Muslim societies are more misogynistic than others, and even in some regions there are differences between the rural and urban cultures. It therefore would follow that the prevalence of violence also varies.

But Bob was trying to assert that misogynistic violence is a common trait amongst Muslims in Canada. We've yet to see any empirical evidence to support the claim.

And you continue misrepresenting my own words. I've said several times now, clearly, that it is the threat of violence that keeps many women in Muslim families compliant with cultural/religious expectations against their will. I invite anyone to look at any of my earlier posts in this thread to verify what I'm saying. I admire your staunch commitment to dishonesty.

[Bob]

Certainly. Though, the "Muslim world" isn't monolithic; certain Muslim societies are more misogynistic than others, and even in some regions there are differences between the rural and urban cultures. It therefore would follow that the prevalence of violence also varies.

Why does this need to be said every time a conversation about Islamic culture arises? We cannot each write out a novel in every post to grasp all the nuances differentiating various groups of Muslims. Leftists like yourself love to destroy debates with such obfuscations, trying to draw attention away from core issues being discussed. Of course the degrees of misogyny vary between differing Islamic societies (with Islamic societies that have had more exposure to the West being more modern than those that have been insulated from Western influence), does that really need to be said? Did anyone in here ever imply that Islam was monolithic? Do you think you're portraying yourself as some sort of level-headed intellectual that is wise enough to state, as if correcting us, that there is diversity within the broader Muslim world? Do you want a congratulations for stating the obvious? I will congratulate you on one thing, however, and that's for successfully derailing the discussion from the obvious flaws within Islamic culture (misogyny, anti-pluralistic/highly tribal, anti-democratic, highly violent, and highly uneducated) towards irrelevant and obvious tangents (such the non-monolithic nature of the broader Muslim world).

[cybercoma]

I haven't read anything on the subject, but I don't think it's much of a stretch to say the Muslim world is Misogynistic.

Indeed, the policies and social norms are misogynistic and I don't much like the idea of moral relativism. If it's wrong to subjugate women, then it doesn't matter what the culture is. However, it's important to always keep in mind that even within these countries there are people that resist the norms and are fighting for freedom in whatever ways that they can. In Canada, you can't look at someone or even their passport and broadbrush them with the identity of their culture. For instance, many of the Afghanis near Ottawa were interpreters for our military during the war. They're on our "side", but still culturally Afghani. I believe it was you that said in the past that anyone from there is nothing more than a sheep-herding barbarian--I apologize if it wasn't. All I'm suggesting is that there's no way of knowing what any given individual believes. As it goes for women's dress, if you grew up in a culture that required you to be covered head-to-toe, you would probably feel like you were walking around in your underwear if all of a sudden you were in Canada and had to wear the kinds of clothing women wear here. It should always be up to the person to have the freedom to do whatever makes them feel comfortable. Just because a woman continues to cover herself, you can't know for sure that the husband is a misogynist and requires it of her.

[Bob]

I find it funny how some members of the left, and this is speaking of a member of the left, will trip over themselves to defend people who oppose, often violently, everything they claim to stand for. Eh wait, never mind, I actually find it sickening how the left has been highjacked by the political correctness movement.

Exactly, much of the left trips over itself to defend the today's greatest threat to classically liberal (and now contemporarily conservative) values: freedom/liberty, pluralism, and democracy. Much of the left, committed to suicidal and morally bankrupt cultural relativism refuses to acknowledge exactly what we're dealing with when it comes to Islamism, and even Islam in general.

A great example of this in recent Canadian political history was Justin Trudeau's criticism of the new Canadian citizenship guide's description of certain third-world cultural practises, such as honour-killings, as "barbaric". Justin Trudeau really thought "barbaric" was an offensive term when used to describe honour killings. He later retracted his comments, but his comments are typical of the leftist mindset, and their commitment towards drawing false moral equivalence between inferior and savage cultures and Western society, in the name of the doctrine of contemporary multiculturalism.