Accommodating male/female segregation for Muslims?

[DogOnPorch]

Here's and interesting bit of history from Egypt in the 1950s. The Muslim Brotherhood demands that every Egyptian woman wear a head scarf...Nasser's and the crowd's response is classic. How things were...how they are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TX4RK8bj2W0

Edited August 28, 2016 by DogOnPorch

[?Impact]

It [hijab] is a symbol of oppression for sure.

I suggest you spark up a conversation with the multitude of women who wear a hijab, you will find that your uninformed prejudices are just that.

Edited August 28, 2016 by ?Impact

[DogOnPorch]

I suggest you spark up a conversation with the multitude of women who wear a hijab, you will find that your uninformed prejudices are just that.

Are Muslim women permitted in Islam to fraternize with males not of their family without a male family member in attendance?

Allah's Apostle said, "It is not permissible for a man to be alone with a woman, and no lady should travel except with a Muhram." Then a man got up and said, "O Allah's Apostle! I have enlisted in the army for such-and-such Ghazwa and my wife is proceeding for Hajj." Allah's Apostle said, "Go, and perform the Hajj with your wife."

[?Impact]

Are Muslim women ...

I was talking about women who wear the hijab. Yes, most of them are also 'Muslim', but it is questionable about how devote.

[Guest]

I suggest you spark up a conversation with the multitude of women who wear a hijab, you will find that your uninformed prejudices are just that.

I would suggest you do the same, and assess your own uninformed prejudices, but I doubt you could tell the difference between those who wear it because they want to, and those who wear it because they have to.

I certainly can't, which is why I am against any banning of clothing, but I'm not naive enough to believe that all women wear the clothes they want to wear.

[DogOnPorch]

I was talking about women who wear the hijab. Yes, most of them are also 'Muslim', but it is questionable about how devote.

Then they are wearing it for political Islam...the other facet of 'being Muslim' in the West.

Pick and choose which religious laws are trumped by secular laws...but wear a burqa, hijab, et al to set themselves apart physically...visually.

[?Impact]

I would suggest you do the same

I have, and what I found out is there are a multitude of reasons. Ignorance never helps, get out and meet the world.

[Guest]

I have, and what I found out is there are a multitude of reasons. Ignorance never helps, get out and meet the world.

I have. I've tried to help burka clad women carry water in 35 degree heat and been told I'd better not, if I wanted to live. I can't imagine they are doing that through choice. Is the only choice that matters the one you agree with?

[DogOnPorch]

I have, and what I found out is there are a multitude of reasons. Ignorance never helps, get out and meet the world.

But, as we've already determined, how devout these women are towards the religious aspects of Islam is very questionable. Which makes their motives for wearing the thing in the first place rather suspicious.

[CITIZEN_2015]

I suggest you spark up a conversation with the multitude of women who wear a hijab, you will find that your uninformed prejudices are just that.

What the hell is that supposed to mean. How uninformed and ignorant you can be I am here in Canada where wearing hejab is not mandatory so those who wear it are doing it by choice. So whoever I spark a conversion who wears hejab is likely doing it by choice and hejab here likely in most cases does not indicate a symbol of oppression but even here in Canada it can happen though not widespread since the law protects them. Remember the Afghani honor killings when the fucking father and brother killed the daughter and step mother in Ottawa a few years ago? Because the daughter adopted western life? As much as I don't like it though I recognize it is their choice and I respect a woman's choice.

But You want to see that hejab is a symbol of oppression then travel to those countries where they forcefully put hejab on women's head or forced them to cover their faces in the heat of the summer. Where women are arrested and put in jail or subject to lashes and worse simply for refusing to wear this symbol of oppression. If you are too lazy to travel then read about it since there are plenty about this symbol of oppression on the net. If you can travel then Speak to those women and they are millions Where women are beaten and sometimes murdered in so called honor killing for refusing to wear burka.

Edited August 28, 2016 by CITIZEN_2015

[?Impact]

Then you realized how ignorant and stupid your comments are,

Right back at you

[DogOnPorch]

Well, the Quran does say the following about modesty for women. This is : Sahih International's English...

And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, their brothers' sons, their sisters' sons, their women, that which their right hands possess, or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed.

https://quran.com/24/31

[CITIZEN_2015]

Right back at you

You are clearly blinded to see the logic. So read what I responded again and try to answer if you can rather than running away from response (since you had none).

But You want to see that hejab is a symbol of oppression then travel to those countries where they forcefully put hejab on women's head or forced them to cover their faces in the heat of the summer. Where women are arrested and put in jail or subject to lashes and worse simply for refusing to wear this symbol of oppression. If you are too lazy to travel then read about it since there are plenty about this symbol of oppression on the net. If you can travel then Speak to those women and they are millions Where women are beaten and sometimes murdered in so called honor killing for refusing to wear burka.

Edited August 28, 2016 by CITIZEN_2015

[Argus]

I was talking about women who wear the hijab. Yes, most of them are also 'Muslim', but it is questionable about how devote.

This makes no sense. Why would anyone other than a devoted Muslim where it, unless forced to.

So anyone in Canada who wears it is either a devoted Muslim woman, or a Muslim woman browbeaten into wearing it by her family and community.

In the first case, she is expressing her 'otherness' to Canada, her determination to retain her old cultural values and to ignore ours, her determination to remain separate. Why would I approve that?

In the second case, it is her family and community which is expressing this determination. Why would I approve that?

More importantly, even if I agree that it is not up to the state to forbid such a thing, why would I believe the state should be bringing in hundreds of thousands more with this same backward, primitive social view?

Edited August 28, 2016 by Argus

[CITIZEN_2015]

This makes no sense. Why would anyone other than a devoted Muslim where it, unless forced to.

So anyone in Canada who wears it is either a devoted Muslim woman, or a Muslim woman browbeaten into wearing it by her family and community.

In the first case, she is expressing her 'otherness' to Canada, her determination to retain her old cultural values and to ignore ours, her determination to remain separate. Why would I approve that?

In the second case, it is her family and community which is expressing this determination. Why would I approve that?

More importantly, even if I agree that it is not up to the state to forbid such a thing, why would I believe the state should be bringing in hundreds of thousands more with this same backward, primitive social view?

Shame on anyone who tries to minimize or distort the facts or hide crimes against innocent defenseless women and children like this anywhere in the world. Even more shameful that this happens in Canada or if these people are in Canada, the civilized land.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shafia_family_murders

Edited August 29, 2016 by CITIZEN_2015

[taxme]

I am glad you agree. I believe that in most cases in developed countries it is the individual who seeks the religion. Not everybody is "religious" to the point where their religion begins to dictate their life style. Most people are "cafeteria" Catholics or Protestants or Muslims or Hindus, Buddhists, Jainisms or Sikhs or ...

I believe that those who subscribe to any particular religion cherry pick parts of their tenets as guides for their lifestyle. There are millions of divorced Catholics and millions of Jews who do not eat only kosher food.

There are more and more people on this earth who are seeking answers and are not finding them in any specific religion so they choose to create their own around some traditional base. The need for spirituality is very personal and can be personalized to individual need. I have found that when a person describes themselves as a Catholic or Jew or Muslim or whatever, what they are describing is the base of their personally molded philosophy of life.

Imagine a world without religion. Geez, half the worlds problems or maybe even more would be solved if it were not for religions. I got tired of religion when as a young boy i was forced to go listen to some religious guy who thinks he had the answer to everything when in fact, whether he new it or not, he was part and contributing to the worlds problems, and not a solution to the worlds problems. And I hated having to give him some of my candy money. Stealing from a kid. Classless. What a batard.

[dialamah]

Imagine a world without religion. Geez, half the worlds problems or maybe even more would be solved if it were not for religions. I got tired of religion when as a young boy i was forced to go listen to some religious guy who thinks he had the answer to everything when in fact, whether he new it or not, he was part and contributing to the worlds problems, and not a solution to the worlds problems. And I hated having to give him some of my candy money. Stealing from a kid. Classless. What a batard.

At least here I can agree with you.

[Goddess]

I am also 100% against hijabs being added to our Mountie uniforms.

There should be no religious affiliations prominently displayed with a police uniform. How safe will a Jewish person feel when pulled over by a clearly adorned Muslim Mountie? How supported will a female domestic violence victim feel with a Mountie who's wearing something that symbolizes her acceptance of women's subjugation to men? What happens if she has to arrest (or even deal with) a Muslim man...will he respect her authority at all when she is clearly communicating with the hijab that she is subservient to him?

The uniform and the hijab are at odds with each other.

[Guest]

I am also 100% against hijabs being added to our Mountie uniforms.

There should be no religious affiliations prominently displayed with a police uniform. How safe will a Jewish person feel when pulled over by a clearly adorned Muslim Mountie? How supported will a female domestic violence victim feel with a Mountie who's wearing something that symbolizes her acceptance of women's subjugation to men? What happens if she has to arrest (or even deal with) a Muslim man...will he respect her authority at all when she is clearly communicating with the hijab that she is subservient to him?

The uniform and the hijab are at odds with each other.

Interesting points. I favour allowing people to wear what they want, and I don't think their choices should mean they can't get a certain job.

How safe will a Jew feel? I don't know. How safe does a black person feel when arrested by a white cop? It shouldn't matter.

How supported will a female domestic violence victim feel? I would hope that she will see a woman who is making a choice, as I am assured some women do when it comes to the Hijab. I cannot imagine a women who is subjugated by male relatives into wearing clothing she does not want to wear being allowed to join the RCMP and associate with strange men.

What happens if she has to arrest (or even deal with) a Muslim man? I assume some of them will be extra stroppy if they are arrested by a woman. Tough. Jail them for longer if they resist arrest.

I don't disagree with your final point, given my view of female coverings as mandated by culture and religion, but those views are trumped by the rights of a person to choose what to wear, and I don't get to question their choice.

Welcome to the site, by the way.

Edited August 30, 2016 by bcsapper

[dialamah]

I am also 100% against hijabs being added to our Mountie uniforms.

How supported will a female domestic violence victim feel with a Mountie who's wearing something that symbolizes her acceptance of women's subjugation to men? What happens if she has to arrest (or even deal with) a Muslim man...will he respect her authority at all when she is clearly communicating with the hijab that she is subservient to him?

The uniform and the hijab are at odds with each other.

I think this is a particularly one-dimensional interpretation of women who wear hijabs. While certainly it *can* be a symbol of oppression, for some women it's become a symbol of their strength, their feminism, their sexual agency, their power. Women rise to great power in Middle Eastern countries, even women who wear the hijab. I think your beliefs about the hijab, what it means and why women wear it are at odds with the reality of many women.

Incidentally, plenty of non-Islamic men fail to show female officers the same respect they'd show a male officer. Sad isn't it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_female_political_leaders#/media/File:Hillary_Clinton_with_Afghan_female_politicians_in_2011.jpg

[taxme]

I am also 100% against hijabs being added to our Mountie uniforms.

There should be no religious affiliations prominently displayed with a police uniform. How safe will a Jewish person feel when pulled over by a clearly adorned Muslim Mountie? How supported will a female domestic violence victim feel with a Mountie who's wearing something that symbolizes her acceptance of women's subjugation to men? What happens if she has to arrest (or even deal with) a Muslim man...will he respect her authority at all when she is clearly communicating with the hijab that she is subservient to him?

The uniform and the hijab are at odds with each other.

I agree with you and what you wrote. This could create problems down the road. Those possible incidents that you mentioned above could very well happen here in Canada one day. Thanks to multiculturalism and the apathetic and lazy Canadians who always sit by and say nothing. Our Canadian values and traditions are being replaced by a small minority of people who do not believe in assimilating but want the host people to be assimilated into their way of life and culture and how things should be done their way. When I see a Mountie wearing a turban or a muslim women wearing a scarf over her head, I just want to puke. The politically correct politicians and the PC cowardly Canadians are kissing our Canadian culture and traditions goodbye without a whimper. Bloody sad indeed.

Edited August 30, 2016 by taxme

[taxme]

But religious Muslim women are forbidden to socialize with men who are not family members. Or did you forget that?

Under Islamic law, it is not permissible for men and women to freely mix or socialize with non Mahram men under any circumstances. Islamic scholars are unanimous on this matter because the prophet of Islam left behind his words: “I have not left behind me any temptation more harmful for men than women”

I am going to test this out one day and try to strike up a conversation with some muslim women wearing a hijab somewhere, and see if she will talk to me or walk away. I hope at the time her husband is present to see his reaction.

[jacee]

This makes no sense. Why would anyone other than a devoted Muslim where it, unless forced to.

So anyone in Canada who wears it is either a devoted Muslim woman, or a Muslim woman browbeaten into wearing it by her family and community.

In the first case, she is expressing her 'otherness' to Canada, her determination to retain her old cultural values and to ignore ours, her determination to remain separate. Why would I approve that?

In the second case, it is her family and community which is expressing this determination. Why would I approve that?

More importantly, even if I agree that it is not up to the state to forbid such a thing, why would I believe the state should be bringing in hundreds of thousands more with this same backward, primitive social view?

Why would anyone care if you "approve" what they wear?

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/05/08/article-2321472-19AEF94F000005DC-126_308x448.jpg

.

Edited August 30, 2016 by jacee

[Scott Mayers]

Looking back at it, I might have been too harsh. I mean, firstly these are kids who just want to swim. On top of that, they're refugees trying to adapt to a new country and culture, losing their homes and communities and sometimes loved one, with some of them going through who knows what kind of nightmares back home. We're talking kids and families who've been through hell for pete's sake, and the kids just want some leisure time where they can interact with other kids & have fun and make friends etc..

So a more "reasonable accommodation" might be to allow certain time(s) in the day for segregated swims so that these refugee children can interact with other Canadian and Syrian kids, and the other times have regular swims where these refugees can participate or not as they choose. And then next year, after the refugee kids have been able to adapt a bit to Canadian culture and meet some friends, the camp goes back to non-segregated swims.

"Integration" competes with "Segregation" as a principle. While I agree with you, what is at concern is to how certain laws get implanted with permanence such that what is assume contemporary is treated permanent without clarification. Here in Canada, I'm against our CONSTITUTIONALIZED preference FOR segregational policies that permit special privileges to certain groups over others through our "Multicultural" (non-integretion/assimilation) policies. As such, our law permits segregation to be permanent rights when extended to other groups or they have to admit of their own 'right' to such protections in the Constitution as suspect.[british Anglicanism, French Catholic, "First Nations" special privileges.]

The problem was partially resolved in the U.S. by their First Amendment clause which, in light of the Enlightenment's momentum, intended to separate culture/religious/ethnic differences to be distinctly NON-government founded since ANY conservation of one group must either imply ALL cultures with distinct privileged laws (segregation). This defeated the problem of slavery since the Southerners (British Elitist) roots treated their 'culture' distinct from the African slaves.

This is why Pierre Trudeau (and supporters) opted to lock in the protection provided by a new constitution FOR ETERNITY!! This is why we HAVE the problems we do now. But the only way to 'appear' non-hypocritical, is to obscure the intent of Multiculturalism's hidden discrimination by offering other groups some certain leniency in favor of similar Segregate laws.

I think the ONLY cure will to require altering our constitution to NOT favor ANY culture, religion, ethnicity, sex, etc, through laws external to actual Natural causes, not falsely presumed innate ones.

Edited August 30, 2016 by Scott Mayers

[jacee]

This forum ... a bunch of stuffed shirt men trying to tell women what clothes they will 'allow' them to wear ...

??

.