Female Rule: An Example

A male feminist commenter, who has now been banned, writes:

Wait a minute…there are actual people who don’t realize that asking co-workers for sex at work is incredibly inappropriate and grounds for sexual harassment?
This site his HILARIOUS!!!

What happened was that a man asked out a woman at work. He did so privately, but the woman was such an insane cunt that she told all of the women in the office. The women all pretty much hated the guy, but the guys couldn’t really care less about him. The women considered him undesirable – a creep. There was a huge uproar because this guy asked a chick out. Big deal!
The supervisor suggested that it was sexual harassment for any employee to ask out any other employee. There had already been several high profile relationships among the workforce.
First of all, sexual harassment has to do with higher ups demanding sex from those under their employ as a condition of further work. You either sleep with me or a fire you. It was recently expanded to the point where a man is persistently bothering a woman and won’t knock it off. Well, that is maybe sexual harassment, but I doubt it. The woman has to make it clear to the guy that he needs to knock it off. then if he continues, there’s a problem. What sort of a problem, I am not sure. Perhaps he will be fired.
For all intents and purposes, sexual harassment does not exist among co-workers at the same work level.
It is certainly not sexual harassment for a male coworker to ask out a female coworker. It never has been. It’s not even sexual harassment to flirt with coworker.
People are spending more and more time at work, and many coworkers start dating each other. It happens all the time. No one is going to stop it or do anything about it.
This is a clear example of Female Rule. The commenter, who supports Female Rule, feels that all relationships among coworkers should be banned. It should be sexual harassment for any man to ask out any female coworker. If women ran the world according to female rules, this is exactly the sort of law or rule that would be put into place.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

136 thoughts on “Female Rule: An Example”

  1. ‘Creeps’ didn’t really exist in days of old. Yeah, there are always those weirdo types that collect locks of hair, but this creep thing is overblown in this day and age.
    What specific thing occurred (other than the broad term of feminism) that gave so much power to women? What law? Why in this day and age?

    1. It was the whole feminist movement, I am afraid. It’s empowered women to a tremendous and often fatal degree. Women have basically been unleashed and they are running wild. They are feral.

      1. This is bugging me Robert.
        Can we pinpoint which element from feminism is the problem?
        Economics: I think we agree that women have a right to work and serve in politics, equally. With equal salary for equal work.
        Politics: I think we agree that women have a right to vote
        Social: Very hazy. Fems believe gender is a social construct (it’s not). And they try to be on equal footing with men, to the point of destroying classical order (religion structure, social structure) of old.
        Social/Sexual: Due to abortion and birthcontrol (specific) they have too much sexual freedom. Therefore, their biology is thrown out the window by not worrying about pregnancy, keeping them on equal footing with men on the sexual field. Then, you get the labeling of creeps and feminist control.

        1. I support equity feminism, equal pay the right to vote. Feminism empowers women to the point where they see themselves at war with me. They overturn Male Rule with Female Rule. Society becomes ruled by female thinking instead of male thinking. It unleashes women to the point where there is mass rule breaking, conniving, conspiring, grossly amoral behavior, and a tremendous amount of acting out on the part of the women.
          My Mom’s generation did not do this shit. They didn’t connive and conspire against men to break their rules and get their way. There was not a lot of grotesque acting out. Men would not put up with that shit. My Mom admits her generation was controlled, and she says basically women need to be controlled. She also admits that women nowadays are basically feral and out of control.
          Feminism says it’s ok to be female in all that that means: conniving, conspiring, grossly immoral behavior to get your way, grotesque acting out, it’s all ok. Why? Because it’s female behavior. All female behavior is ok.

        2. I see.
          Kind of like Black Right’s movements that blame everything on Whitey and blame them for living in the ghettos when similar income Koreans dig themselves out of the whole in one or two generations.

        3. “Kind of like Black Right’s movements that blame everything on Whitey and blame them for living in the ghettos when similar income Koreans dig themselves out of the whole in one or two generations.”
          Well, at least Blacks have a core reason to “blame whitey” unlike Desis who come here, make a million bucks (at least), live in the best neighborhoods, go to the best schools, get the best jobs and whine about “the White man”.

        4. Feminism says it’s ok to be female in all that that means: conniving, conspiring, grossly immoral behavior to get your way, grotesque acting out, it’s all ok. Why? Because it’s female behavior. All female behavior is ok.
          Interesting. I have noticed some feminists celebrate the character of Scarlett o Hara as some sort of proto feminist despite the characters gross amorality. Any movement which stresses empowerment exclusively for its own members at the expense of morality should be viewed with contempt. Anti-universalism goes against the very heart of western values.

        5. “I support equity feminism, equal pay the right to vote.”
          Robert, in a society where woman have equal rights and equal pay (so obviously they work) and can have economic independence, and where it is considered illegal and immoral to hit them, how are men supposed to control woman?

        6. If a woman wont do what you say, what are you supposed to do? “Stop or I’ll say stop again”.
          If you don’t have force, you don’t have religious ideology (codified ancient patriarchy) or ‘the word of God’ telling a woman her role, and she isn’t dependent on you, what power do you have left over her? There’s nothing left.
          Men ruled by force, they ruled by religious ideology, and they ruled by having disempowered, dependent woman. Take those away and there’s nothing left to control them, is there?
          It probably all came down to force in the first place. Men were just bigger and stronger and more aggressive and naturally assumed a dominant role (assuming men were dominant in pre-history). This was assumed natural and eventually codified in religious texts.
          The religious ideology is on its way out, practically gone in the UK, woman have formal equality and are not dependent, and men are no longer allowed to use force. So, what now? “Stop or I’ll say stop again”.
          The modern world has liberated woman in the west from male control by science and the decline of Christianity, by giving woman formal equality and the protection of the law. This is not something that just accidentally happened; it is an essential part of western modernity. There isn’t really any going back.
          The only possibility now is that men and woman together somehow come to the conclusion that men and woman are naturally suited to different roles and a gendered division of labour. But actually controlling woman, that’s over.

        7. “The modern world has liberated woman in the west from male control by science and the decline of Christianity, by giving woman formal equality and the protection of the law. This is not something that just accidentally happened; it is an essential part of western modernity. There isn’t really any going back.”
          Thankyou Jezuz! Amen to that! Preach it brotha! Oooh-weee take it to church!

        8. Robert, in a society where woman have equal rights and equal pay (so obviously they work) and can have economic independence, and where it is considered illegal and immoral to hit them, how are men supposed to control woman?
          I don’t know.
          Culture maybe. Hispanic women and many other traditional groups of immigrants in the US have these rights, and the women don’t need to be controlled because they are not yet feminist-ruined.
          I do not have any solutions to any of these problems.

        9. bobby ji, you keep bringing up hispanic women as some sort of paragon of virtue? how is that? they have high std and oow pregnancy rates in new york, miami and so cal.

        10. They are not paragons of virtue. They are just not feminist-wrecked. They are nice, and they don’t challenge men or try to start shit with us.
          Around here, I doubt if they have much VD. There is a lot of unwed pregnancy, yes. But generally the guy moves in with the girl, at least around here anyway. There females don’t do a lot of sleeping around that I can see anyway. Once they’ve been here a few generations, some can get pretty whored out, but the less assimilated ones don’t do that too much.

        11. If Muslim countries want to keep their patriarchy, they better keep their religion. If they lose that, they lose the biggest ideological and cultural support and justification for it.
          Men and woman will feel free to question patriarchal ideas, which will be eroded. More woman will enter the workforce and not be dependent. They will certainly gain full formal equality. Woman themselves will be freer and feel emboldened to fight for their own interests. Next minute, you could have a situation not a million miles form the west.
          or not?

        12. “Culture maybe. Hispanic women and many other traditional groups of immigrants in the US have these rights, and the women don’t need to be controlled because they are not yet feminist-ruined.”
          If there are cultural changes and new ideas about gender become popular, I guess it would have to be top down and come from scientists and intellectuals debunking gender feminism or something.
          That wouldn’t result in male rule or male control of woman though. It would be everybody, men and woman, having the right ideas and wanting to be a certain way to the benefit of both everybody. It would be men and woman living together in a harmonious way and working together for their mutual benefit. I don’t see why it has to be a battle, a conflict, or a forcible domination of one by the other.
          Also, I don’t see why you think western feminist woman reflect what all woman would be like if not controlled. Surely feminist woman have specific ideas that result form a specific intellectual movement.
          Whatever the truth is, let it shine forth.
          p.s. needless to say, I think there are many nice, decent western woman who I could have a good relationship with, as they are. And the stuff about bad female behaviour I believe to be overblown in regards to my society.
          Peace.

        13. Men and woman are supposed to compliment each other. Not be in a perpetual war. We want sanity, gentleness and harmony. Not violent thoughts about malevolent feral woman who must be controlled.

        14. …I don’t mean thoughts of being violent to them. I just mean that kind of thinking just has a violent quality to it. No offence.

      1. You hit or miss on your comments. That was a miss, darling. I don’t see how the guy heckled at work by women in Robert’s story belongs in an insane asylum.

        1. You’ve been wondering on here for days now why “creep” is used so often, not just in relation to this specific case. There’s a lot of creeps out and about now because we no longer institutionalize people for bi-polar, schizophrenia, severe anxiety, severe depression, and other mental illnesses. The manosphere wants women to date these kooks. Why should we? They should be thankful they are not locked up getting electro-shock therapy like they would be if it were the 1960s.

        2. I know it will never happen, but men need to start being as critical about women as they are about us. How many men actually seek out crazy women? But a man who shows the slightest quirk is a “creep.” Men seem to think psycho b+_)(*&S are “cute,” until they’re not. We even back them up against other guys. We really need to close ranks. Can it happen?

        3. Bobby Ji, are you part of the “anti-sanist” brigade. Yeah, it exists, google it. If we still had crazy houses then there would have been no Aurora mass murder. Dude had been diagnosed with something serious but was an “out patient” on drugs. Its complete nonsense.
          Don’t you work with kooks all day? Are you a psychologist or psychiatrist or something like that? Then naturally you are in agreement with me.

        4. Matt
          July 30, 2012 at 8:16 AM
          I know it will never happen, but men need to start being as critical about women as they are about us. How many men actually seek out crazy women? But a man who shows the slightest quirk is a “creep.” Men seem to think psycho b+_)(*&S are “cute,” until they’re not. We even back them up against other guys. We really need to close ranks. Can it happen?
          —-
          You’re just as f*cking crazy as the “psycho-bitches” you think are “cute”. Whatever happens to you in that company is your own fault for going there.

        5. Bhabiji: i don’t think you understood me at all. I never said psycho b(((%%#$ are cute. I said that I suspect many of my fellow males do, and I’m suggesting we should stop being so tolerant of it.
          You also write:
          “If we still had crazy houses then there would have been no Aurora mass murder. ”
          You’re onto something here, although you are (I think) factually wrong about the Aurora case. There really are a lot more mentally ill people out on the street. We can see this as an example of what happens when bad ideas from the quasi-hippie left converge with those of the pull-yourself-up-by-your bootstraps right. The former thought, “Well, they shouldn’t be locked up, because they just experience a different reality is all.” The latter said, “I’m tired of spending money on these losers. I need some new guns.” The result? Seriously mentally ill people are sent out on the street with a scrip and a copy of the “Feeling Good Handbook.”

        6. He had not necessarily been dx’d with anything serious. He was seeing a psychiatrist who worked with 15-20 graduate students at the university. No doubt most of them merely had anxiety or depression type issues. We don’t even know if this guy is crazy at all. He may well be 100% sane.
          The nuthouses are not coming back, and they didn’t house that many people anyway. Mostly schizophrenics. We do have mental health facilities of course but there has been a big move towards outpatient treatment in recent decades.
          I certainly don’t refer to folks with mental dx’s as “kooks” anyway.
          The typical guy who seriously harms women does not have any sort of Axis 1 disorder at all. He’s quite sane.

    1. Cristina Rad gets viewers because she’s hot, but she keeps viewers and readers by being entertaining and insightful. But this brings up an interesting point. Most attractive women I’ve met or encountered have no time for gender feminism, and will call b&*($[+ on it if pressed. They know the rules, and they know they have more privileges and advantages than just about any other living human, and they like it. Not that they won’t use feminist sensibilities to their advantage when necessary or convenient… But I can’t really blame them for that. Life is tough all over, to quote the sages Cheech and Chong…

  2. Surely we have to strive for balance, not one sex being controlled by the other. On what grounds women should be controlled more than men should be controlled?

    1. Both sexes need to be controlled.
      My Mom’s generation were controlled women, and they were better off for it.
      This new generation is a bunch of out of control wild women.
      Many of them act out and out insane. My Mom’s generation referred to these women as “crazy women” and they were despised by both sexes. Now it’s the fucking norm.
      And female entitlement has given rise to epidemics of grotesquely amoral behavior on the part of women vis a vis epidemics of women threatening and actually assaulting men, mass female abuse of domestic violence laws via false allegations, mass abuse of sexual harassment law by women, and mass abuse of the laws against child molestation by women coaching children to make false child molesting claims against men. Hardly any of that shit happened in my Mom’s day, and none of it would be tolerated in modern Arab society. Arab men won’t put up with any of that shit for one minute. Good for them!

      1. So? Arab women and etc. women in your mother’s society and indeed today still have to put up with a lot of shit. I was abused by my father and cousin, my grandmother was a victim of domestic violence – I don’t make a big deal out of it but it but this is a fact, this is hapening. Why do you think women puting up with things like this is justified when men putting up with shit like false allegations etc. is not?

        1. Obviously, I don’t support the sexism that my mother’s generation had to live under. On the other hand, I must say that they were healthier. I have known many such women. Hardly any of them act insane. They don’t attack or assault men. They don’t pick fights or start shit with men. They don’t attack men’s masculinity as a rule. They didn’t engage in grotesque abuse of the laws in order to get even with men. In a word, they were healthier.
          Understand that I am an equity feminist. I just think that feminism has unleashed the very worst in modern women. Who wants a modern Western woman? Why would anyone? Why do you see all these guys heading overseas for a Latin American, East European or Asian woman? Guys have had it with this shit.
          Bitches on steroids!

        2. “Why would anyone? Why do you see all these guys heading overseas for a Latin American, East European or Asian woman?”
          They’ve watched too much gold-digger-fetish porn and can’t get it up for women who don’t want them just for their money.

    2. We have a lot of Hispanic women here in my town. The recent immigrants come from a very patriarchal culture. But they are very liberated here in the US compared to Latin America, so for them, it’s paradise. These traditional women seem way happier and more importantly, are way more pleasant to be around than your typical American feminist-wrecked psycho bitch. To put it briefly, these Hispanic women don’t go out of their way to challenge men or start shit with men. They are submissive in that sense. Believe me, it’s a breath of fresh air!

      1. You’ve obviously never had many Hispanic girlfriends. Those women are the biggest drama queens on the planet, on par with or surpassing Desi parents.

  3. Sorry but can’t bring myself to cry over the plight of men faced with false allegations, when the reality is that women still face a lot of shit from men ( and this is the state of affairs in a “men’s world”) probably disproportionately more compared to any “false allegations” they’re faced with.
    Surely we have justice system to decide whether allegations are falso or not, and if it’s imperfect then needs to be worked on.

  4. “Sorry but can’t bring myself to cry over the plight of men faced with false allegations, when the reality is that women still face a lot of shit from men…”
    Gender equality is not a zero sum game, an either-or scenario. The fact that women have to ‘face a lot of shit from men’ does not make the issue of false rape charges to be taken less seriously.
     
    That kind of apologist white knighting feminism is counter-intuitive to ethics. The male gender in general doesn’t owe women for the ‘shit they put up with from men’.

    1. And white people don’t owe non-white people shit either. Something so many of my fellow “peoples of color” can’t get through their noggins.

      1. And white people don’t owe non-white people shit either. Something so many of my fellow “peoples of color” can’t get through their noggins.

        Where did Atheist Indian ever suggest that? He’s never come across as one of those “you owe me, white man!” types.

        1. Was just sayin’. That attitude is mainstream out in the SF Bay Area, isn’t it? The academic institutions out there are all up in that, aren’t they?

        2. @ Bhabiji
          I lived a couple of years close to the Bay of Bengal. Don’t know where the SF comes from.
           
          @ AM
          I responded to your casual dismissal of the false rape charges as a gender crime against men. I am not a fan of men ruling women; I wouldn’t be comfortable in a world where people are denied legitimate choices about living their life by those who feel a need to maintain a social order that they prefer.
           
          @ Bhabiji
          Immigration in general has very little to do with whether a society is feminist or not. More on that later. Gotta go for pre-flight briefings.

        3. Atheist Indian
          July 30, 2012 at 4:28 PM
          @ Bhabiji
          I lived a couple of years close to the Bay of Bengal. Don’t know where the SF comes from.

          That was a reply to Bay Area Guy, buddhu.

    2. You misunderstood me – I’m not trivializing false charges against men. It’s just incomprehensible to me how this should be used to argue that we should go back to the time when men ruled women because the men won’t have to “put up with this shit”. How about the abuse against women that goes on in such a society – are we happy with that?
      Incidentally funny Robert Lindsay should talk about western guys marring east European women – but the same western men are not that keen to move to Russia – a society where the stronger rules the weaker and abuse of power is rife. Somehow the same men are not happy with this.

      1. Good point AM, the only countries that are worth living in long term today are those that have had Feminist movements.
        There’s a reason why Americans, Canadians, Swedes, the Swiss, the Germans, etc, etc, etc, are not clamoring to move to Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, India, Afghanistan, etc, etc, etc, whereas the those people are clamoring, by the multi-millions, even billions, to get out.

        1. the only countries that are worth living in long term today are those that have had Feminist movements.
          There’s a reason why Americans, Canadians, Swedes, the Swiss, the Germans, etc, etc, etc, are not clamoring to move to Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, India, Afghanistan, etc, etc, etc, whereas the those people are clamoring, by the multi-millions, even billions, to get out.

          Sorry, but I had to LOL at that comment.
          The various countries that you mentioned were already well established wealthy, modern, and advanced countries, and various people throughout the world were clamoring to move there (by “there,” I specifically mean the U.S) well before the feminist movement took hold.
          If anything, feminism has made these places much worse, and to the extent that people want to move to the West, it is almost exclusively for its affluence and economic opportunities. Aside from some persecuted asylum seekers, I don’t think too many people are moving here for its “freedom” of culture.

        2. @ Dota
          Yeah, that was a pretty absurd comment. Even though I disagreed with her for the most part, I could at least take Bhabiji somewhat seriously. Not anymore.

        3. Interesting you mention those Muslim countries.
          Most Muslim women happily wear their hijab. They don’t see it as Man’s domination. Western feminists think they’re some oppressed group that gets raped every day by a big scary shiekh when they see them walking in the mall or street.

        4. BAG, even pre-feminism, the female citizens were treated far better back then than women are treated in Pakistan and India today, despite those countries being overrun with “feminazis” if the desi mama’s boys are to be believed. And that is in large part because those women wouldn’t stand for that kind of treatment. And the family structure, which is tied into the treatment of a culture’s women, and young men too, which is why I the South Asian joint family system is just as problematic for men as it is for women, of not more so. My generation of Indian women is plowing through, but the men are holding on to the old ways, to their own detriment, unfortunately.
          Please see this video and for the desi guys here PAY CLOSE ATTENTION
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jfv0xg01i8&feature=plcp

        5. “Aside from some persecuted asylum seekers, I don’t think too many people are moving here for its “freedom” of culture.”
          Are you kidding me? You must not know a helluva lot of immigrants then. I do. And believe you me, “freedom” is a very large part of why people want to get out of their repressive countries.
          And like other MRAs you equate “feminism” solely with 2nd and 3rd wave. Women have been working at equality for hundreds of years, not just since the 1960s care of wealthy housewife Betty Friedan.

        6. Ishmael, “Interesting you mention those Muslim countries.
          Most Muslim women happily wear their hijab. They don’t see it as Man’s domination. Western feminists think they’re some oppressed group that gets raped every day by a big scary shiekh when they see them walking in the mall or street.”
          Are you kidding me? Muslims are a protected class amongst lefty feminists in the West. Bobby Ji already wrote about this pc nonsense not too long ago (link, Ji-Ji?)
          And how have you qualified and quantified what “most” muslim women want?

        7. Yeah, Muslims are given preferrential treatment by lefties due to their minority status – but feminists like that somali girl working with theo van gogh (he’s dead) in holland worked really hard to portray Muslim women as oppressed.
          “Qualified and Quantified” Lol..Bhab. The evidence is in the thousands of Muslims living in Western countries that still wear the hijab. They’re protected by feminist laws, and still choose to wear them. Muslim families are much more stable. Things have to change in terms of equal work, but they’re much more stable than loose western ones.

        8. “Yeah, Muslims are given preferrential treatment by lefties due to their minority status – but feminists like that somali girl working with theo van gogh (he’s dead) in holland worked really hard to portray Muslim women as oppressed.”
          She didn’t have to work too hard.
          “Qualified and Quantified” Lol..Bhab. The evidence is in the thousands of Muslims living in Western countries that still wear the hijab. They’re protected by feminist laws, and still choose to wear them. Muslim families are much more stable. Things have to change in terms of equal work, but they’re much more stable than loose western ones.”
          Hijab, and moreover niqab, are a political statement in the West. Its a big fuck you middle finger to “the white man” and the “Imperial West”. Not for all, but for many Muslim women who start wearing hijab or even niqab (Desi muslimaas of all people doing this in UK!) by their own adult or teen choice, its about identity politics and a geo-political statement. They know what they’re doing, cunning biotches.
          Now go to Saudi Arabia or Iran, where women are required by law to wear full niqab (Saudi) and hijab/chadoor (Iran), its a whole different story. When they come West that niqab and hijab comes off faster than you can say haindavakeralam. Then there’s the Afghan refugees I worked with (and dated a few, those guys are hot!) and believe you me, they can’t get out of their tents fast enough! A few of the men wanted to go back but not a single one of the women.
          Please don’t compare spoiled, coddled by the left, big gubmint and welfare dole MEPs and MAPs (Muslim European Princesses and Muslim American Princesses) to the truly oppressed women living in Muslim majority countries.
          Its chalk and cheese, or aval and athippazham.

        9. BAG, even pre-feminism, the female citizens were treated far better back then than women are treated in Pakistan and India today
          No argument from me there. However, I still fail to see how feminism somehow attracts immigrants. I once read an article about Hmong American women, and how older Hmong male immigrants were complaining about how Hmong women were become too independent, too Americanized, etc. In other words, a bit too uppity. I don’t think that those Hmong men, who presumably would have been responsible for their family’s decision to move to the U.S., came here for the feminism.
          Are you kidding me? You must not know a helluva lot of immigrants then. I do. And believe you me, “freedom” is a very large part of why people want to get out of their repressive countries.
          Well, without wanting to respond with the typical “one of my best friends is _” line, I have known many friends and contacts who were either 1st generation immigrants, or they were second generation Americans whom had immigrant parents (that I eventually got to know).
          I don’t see too many of them going on about how they love life here because of the freedom of women to wear miniskirts, or sexual harassment laws.
          They come to enjoy this country’s economic opportunities, and I don’t think too many of them care for certain aspects of American culture.
          Re: different kinds of feminism
          Believe it or not, I support equity feminism. By that, I mean that I believe in equal pay for equal work, the right for women to choose abortion, equal opportunities in education, etc.
          What I don’t approve of is the identity/cultural feminism. I don’t think I need to list examples of that.
          Unfortunately, most feminism in the West nowadays is that kind of gender based identity feminism.

        10. BAG, you are applying tunnel vision to this, thinking of 2nd and 3rd wave feminism. Step back and view this in a wholistic way.
          All countries that are, generally, organized, clean, economically stable (well that’s relative these days, but you know what I mean), safe, etc are Western or Westernized countries where women have equal legal and social rights as men. The converse is also true.
          The one goes hand in hand with the other. You will not find a country with the above pervasive qualities that treats its women like shit, legally, socially or both.
          You simply cannot separate how a country or culture treats 1/2 of its population from its socio-economic standing in the world. You cannot.
          And if money were the only thing immigrants were after here, as soon as they made enough they’d leave, but they don’t! Now some Desis or Palestinians might poke their heads out and say, “hey, my uncle-aunt are ‘India returns’ or ‘Jordan returns'” and it does happen to a very small degree, but by and large, the immigrants who come here want to stay, and bring their parents, siblings, in-laws, etc with them!
          Its not just the money, its the way of life. And believe you me, talk to some of the young, single women and see what they have to say about it vs their life back in the “old country”. Mmmm hmmmm. There you go!
          Anyone here up to relocating to Pakistan? Thought so!

        11. “Unfortunately, most feminism in the West nowadays is that kind of gender based identity feminism.”
          That’s far left academic feminism. Far removed from your average American woman, even your average American female college goer. In the same category as “whiteness studies”.

        12. You’re clueless about people of that part of the world, Bhab.
          If you think the headscarf is worn as a political statement, you’re out of your mind. Tradition, culture and religion. It’s about modesty.
          ‘Dated a few afghan refugees’ Wow, you sure date all different kinds of people. Makes you a super expert on the issues! Aren’t you dating a negro now too? I find it hard to believe an Afghan would be sexually attracted to a Dravidian; you must be some bombshell.
          And your little hindi comments make you sound stupid. I don’t see any other Indians making stupid little comments like yours.

        13. Ishmael, my comments are not Hindi. There are many more languages in India besides India, did you know?
          And also, re-read my comment, slowly. In the US, UK and Europe many Muslimaas do in fact wear hijab or niqab as a poltical statement and “fuck you Whitey/Western Imperialism” statement. I’m not talking about Iran/Saudi/Afghanistan, I’m talking about some (many actually) MUSLIMS IN THE WEST.
          The Saudis – that niqab COMES OFF once they get here, and so does the Iranian chadoor or Afghan dupatta cum hijab or tent. Those women can’t get out of that garb soon enough, let me tell you!
          You are really clueless about identity politics and it seems you don’t know very many Muslims at all, particularly not the 2nd generation Paki and Bangladeshi Muslims of the UK.
          Let me ask you this – if its not a polticial/fuck you statement why would a Desi-British Muslimaa don the Saudi niqab? Hmmm? Saudi niqab is neither English garb, Desi garb, or pan-Islamic garb.
          Please do some research on the “saudiization of global Islam” the “Arabization of South Asian Muslims” and the “politicization of Islam” and the “radicalization of UK and European Muslims”.
          You are in the USA with no experience whatsoever of these people, and our country is not facing the same epidemic as UK and other European countries are facing with this.
          That you are unaware of it does not mean its not happening. Look it up. Watch the videos ( I posted a few on this site myself).

        14. “Ishmael, my comments are not Hindi. There are many more languages in India besides India, did you know?”
          Typo, should read “besides Hindi”
          Hindi ain’t the only damn language in that country. Why would you assume the words I wrote were Hindi anyway?

        15. The Saudis – that niqab COMES OFF once they get here, and so does the Iranian chadoor or Afghan dupatta cum hijab or tent. Those women can’t get out of that garb soon enough, let me tell you!
          Ok, you just proved Ismael’s point dumb ass. If Muslim women cannot wait to get out of the Hijab, and many do, then the remaining women that continue wearing it are doing it out of their own free will no?

        16. ” I find it hard to believe an Afghan would be sexually attracted to a Dravidian; you must be some bombshell.”
          Watching non-desis try to place a desi is interesting. First we have “indo-aryan north” ah ok. then some desert dweller comes out with “dalit” conflating it with an ethnicity in South India. ah ok some more. then we have “anti-dalit high-caste” LMAO. Then you come with “Dravidian that should speak Hindi”
          You people’s concept of India, its regions, languages, people and cultures is a clusterfuck of confusion!
          Get a map, India has a lot of states and many languages. You’ll have to do better than mixing them all up if you’re going to attempt navigating it and figuring me out. Otherwise just leave it alone and save yourself the tomfoolery.

        17. And PS Ishmael, please explain to me what a “dravidian” is. does it have anything to do with “dalit”? now you people are confusing me! Is there a region in India called “Dravida Desh” How about “Dravidasthan”? How big is it? Is it a state? is it a cluster of neighboring states? Is it a cluster of neighboring states filled with “dalits”? And where do I fit in in all of this? Explain away! I’m all ears to hear from you my identity, language, skin hue, hair texture, etc.

        18. Then you come with “Dravidian that should speak Hindi”
          Then tell us what Indian language you speak you coward. I asked you point blank.

        19. When he means “Dravidian”, he means the lower caste Indians as well as the Indians that are “dark brown” Caucasian or have Australoid features, not the Persian/Arabid looking ones that are in bollywood or the ones that usually fill the upper castes of India. Afghans are an extremely racist bunch of people, especially the Pashtuns that hate all types of Asiatic people and kill them (the genocide of Hazara’s), so it would be a big surprise if they would be attracted to someone resembling a quintessential sub-continental Indian Bhabijii.

        1. “Please do some research on the “saudiization of global Islam” the “Arabization of South Asian Muslims” and the “politicization of Islam” and the “radicalization of UK and European Muslims”.
          You have a tendency to unnecessarily expand things. Like kicking an anthill. The Hijab as a political statement was a poor argument, you know that …(just like your insane asylum bit). That is all, I don’t need a full cultural analysis. One bite at a time, Bhabi ji.
          Dravidian is a blanket term for darker skinned native indians. Assumed such since you were dating a black guy – but…that’s all irrelevant and this thread does not need to go on an ‘India’ course like every other article you comment on. I also don’t care about the languages you speak; I simply think your little hindi (ji/ja/etc.) comments are stupid. What else is stupid is claiming that you know about races and cultures by fucking them. And please spare us regarding your personal appearance – don’t scar us.
          Stick to the topic – it’s about female rule and what’s better for society. I’m simply disagreeing that women come here in droves to be released from the chains of the hijab. I’m simply disagreeing that the hijab is a big political stand. All we’re doing is providing a contrast to the West – and if you spread false information, you distort the points we’re trying to make. And the point is, the majority of women are happy in their position in those countries.

        2. * edit: Last sentence. Reworded.
          Women are largely accepting of being under patriarchal control in those societies. There are many injustices, sure, but women largely know their place. People like you give the impression that Muslim women are kept in cages, which is not the case.

        3. “The Hijab as a political statement was a poor argument, you know that ”
          Are you that daft? Watch the BBC sometime, Oi Boi!
          ” One bite at a time, Bhabi ji.”
          You wish 😉
          “Dravidian is a blanket term for darker skinned native indians.”
          Is that right? Says who?
          “Assumed such since you were dating a black guy”
          Really now? That’s odd. Besides, I said the Afro-centrist was ONE of the guys I’m currently dating. And by the way, did you know there are non-Black Afro-centrists too? Da Troof Brah!
          One Love!
          Legalize It!

        4. “And the point is, the majority of women are happy in their position in those countries.”
          And you know this…. how?
          Again, google what I told you too, watch some BBC documentaries on what is going on in the UK wrt Desi Muslim ghettos. I can vouch for all of it because I lived there and moved amongst the Desi communites – Sikh, Hindu, Muslim, all of them.
          Do some research on Saudi, Iran and Afghanistan.
          You are a naive well-meaning western man who is in complete illusion. Take the red pill.

      2. “When he means “Dravidian”, he means the lower caste Indians as well as the Indians that are “dark brown” Caucasian or have Australoid features,”
        How do you know what he means? What you said makes no sense whatsoever.
        Look at a map of India.

        1. No it makes perfect sense, he means all the Indians that don’t resemble Anatolians/Central Asians/Middle Easterners which would be a majority of the lower castes in India. Most North Indians resemble the above phenotype of location and past invasions. I have never heard of Iranians/Afghans forming ghettos in overseas countries. In L.A there is a huge Persian community and they shape the surroundings around them them, not form insular ghettos. They are in fact the richest minority there and form an integral part of the upper class/higher niches of mainstream America life there. Afghans are in a similar position to Persians/Lebanese, which is PRETTY GOOD, compared to other minorities.
          I wonder why “desi” muslims form ghettos, hmmm what are the reasons for this?

        2. I believe when populations of immigrants come in large enough numbers, they have a chance to hole themselves up from greater society and keep themselves poorer. Strict family/religious values are also enforced and accepted in large population, insular, immigrant groups.
          Couple that with welfare, and you got a boiling mess.
          America has the same problem with Mexicans, even though ‘isolated’ Latinos like Chileans or Cubans do much better. Pakis/Algerians/Turks are largely a disaster in UK,France and Germany. Even though if you take smaller numbers of pakis or turks and bring them to America, they will do much better. Pakis in America do fine compared to their UK counterparts, and are typically less ‘radical’ shall we say.
          The most successful immigrant groups assimilated and monopolized a certain service or industry and sold to the broader community. Jews = textiles/clothing. Koreans = grocery/dry cleaning.

        3. “No it makes perfect sense, he means all the Indians that don’t resemble Anatolians/Central Asians/Middle Easterners which would be a majority of the lower castes in India. ”
          Hold on. You’re now saying “Dravidian” is a phenotype? Before you were saying Dravidian meant “lower castes” but you never named the specific castes. So did you mean ALL lower castes are “Dravidians” or did you mean “Dravidians” are comprised of only specific castes (which you failed to name. I’m confused! Then it was a skin hue (dark brown) and now its a phenotype?
          WHICH IS IT? And from whom did you get any of this conflicting info. Couldn’t be the same person because its all very different.
          “I have never heard of Iranians/Afghans forming ghettos in overseas countries.”
          I never said anything about Iranians and Afghans forming ghettos you idiot. Is cousin marriage common in your gene pool or something, sheesh! Go back and re-read my post slowly. Google the terms I said to google. Watch some documentaries.
          You can’t be that reading impaired. Unless cousin marriage is multi-generational in your family…..

        4. No, Dravidians and both the non-Dravidians are both phenotypical similar when you consider the populations in India. The Dravidians were just neo-lithic middle Eastern farmers that settled India in a second migration and then it was followed later on by the Indo-Aryan invasion. The upper castes of India have outside Aryan/Semitic/Anatolian ancestry which is visible in their looks and phenotypes. This is unique to their class and racial group and no other racial group in India shares this look or visible ancestry. The Dravidians were put and organized in the same manner as they were put in a lower category, despite their Caucasoid ancestry but due to their brown looks. Therefore when referring to Indians that don’t resemble the usual Indian which would be a Dravidian/Austroloid mix, but to a more Europid resembling one, then they are referring to the Indo-Aryans that formed the basis of the upper castes as well as the so called Muslim invaders that settled later on. Most North Indians, not all, but a majority have outsider blood from past migrations which include Scythians, Persians, Afghans, Turks, Greek etc this is unique to their location and looks which is the reason why they are described as being “Aryan” looking and part of that race. This is scientifically proven by genetic samples, and by science of course. Robert agrees with this and even provided various links/photos of “Aryan” looking Indians in the North up to the Afghanistan/Pakistan/Iran area. This really is common sense and isn’t really that hard to understand.
          “I never said anything about Iranians and Afghans forming ghettos you idiot. Is cousin marriage common in your gene pool or something, sheesh! Go back and re-read my post slowly. Google the terms I said to google. Watch some documentaries.
          You can’t be that reading impaired. Unless cousin marriage is multi-generational in your family…..”
          I used Iranians/Afghans as an example of immigrant groups migrating to the Western world, who don’t resemble Northern Europeans or Nordics, and barely resemble Greeks or Italians, putting them as a fringe group without much of a past history in America; who also happen to come from insuler, conservative, “Islamic” societies but so far haven’t had much trouble assimilating or reaching the upper echelons of the Western world. I put them in the same category as “desi’s” in the West, in terms of a sociological group because of similar backgrounds/societal positions, yet however only “Desi’s” seem to have problems assimilating and even being worth something in this world.

        5. As a diaspora groups, Iranians tend to be very successful, and also seem to assimilate much better than other Middle Eastern or Muslim groups.
          Give me 100 Iranians over 10 people of any other Middle Eastern group any day.

        6. Oh, in case anyone is wondering about the numbers, the reason why I listed the Iranian number as much higher is that generally speaking, I’m opposed to immigration.
          I guess then the point I was trying to make is that even though I am generally against immigration, I would be willing to take 100 Iranians over 10 people of any other Middle Eastern group, even though that would mean more immigrants.
          I have a generally high opinion of Iran and its people.

        7. Why exactly do Persians have little trouble assimilating to American society though, perhaps Cyrus can answer this?
          Why exactly do you like Iranians more then other Middle Eastern groups?

        8. BAG, Lebanese, Syrians, and other Middle Eastern groups resemble Southern Europeans, so why would you not want these immigrant groups coming?

        9. Xera, first you say, “No it makes perfect sense, he means all the Indians that don’t resemble Anatolians/Central Asians/Middle Easterners”
          Then you say, “The Dravidians were just neo-lithic middle Eastern farmers that settled India in a second migration”
          So first Dravidians are not supposed to “resemble middle easterners” and now you are saying they are descendents of those same middle easterns they somehow don’t resemble”.
          Dude, stop. Just stop.
          BAY AREA GUY wrt IRANIANS.
          Many Iranians in the States are Bahais and 2nd generation children of immigrant Bahais who escaped great persecusion in Iran.
          Many of the “muslim” Iranians in the States hate their Government and the shitty Shia fanatics just as much as the Bahais. That country is really fucked up.
          Shame, shame.

        10. “Why exactly do Persians have little trouble assimilating to American society though, perhaps Cyrus can answer this? ”
          I’ll answer that for you. Many of the Persians in USA are Bahais, like I explained above. The others are secular, muslim in name only, and sometimes not even that, who hate the Iranian government and religious freaks. They’ve escaped that shitty country and are totally grateful to be out of there and so they apply themselves to succeeding in the USA, which requires assimilation and integration.

        11. Then you say, “The Dravidians were just neo-lithic middle Eastern farmers that settled India in a second migration”
          So first Dravidians are not supposed to “resemble middle easterners” and now you are saying they are descendents of those same middle easterns they somehow don’t resemble”.
          When did I say Dravidians were “supposed” to resemble Middle Easterners? I am saying they are Neo-lithic farmers that migrated around the Ice age, hence the Caucasian and Caucasoid traits found among the dark skinned Indians and among a majority of Indians. However they were put in a lower strata, when later invasions took place, of which the Indo-Aryan and Central Asian invasions come to mind.

        12. “When did I say Dravidians were “supposed” to resemble Middle Easterners?”
          Goddamn you nitwit, you really can’t read can you? Fuck, Xera, are you daft, high or just the product of cousin incest?
          Xera, “No it makes perfect sense, he means all the Indians that DON’T resemble Anatolians/Central Asians/MIDDLE EASTERNERS”
          Me, Xera, first you say, “No it makes perfect sense, he means all the Indians that DON’T resemble Anatolians/Central Asians/MIDDLE EASTERNERS”
          Then you say, “The Dravidians were just neo-lithic middle Eastern farmers that settled India in a second migration”
          Your reading skills suck ass, dude.
          And here’s a map of India. Please tell me where the Dravidians and/or Dalits (you conflated the two) are from on here;
          http://www.mapsofindia.com/maps/india/india-political-map.htm

        13. PS Xera, someone said you are Egyptian, is that true? What’s the status on Bahais currently in your country? At the local Bahai Center here they have frequent discussions about this;
          “One of Egypt’s small religious minorities, the Baha’is, remain without their citizenship rights. They are poorly treated by the authorities. They are discriminated against in education and employment, and to this day, many of them remain without identity documents as described earlier in this blog.”
          From: http://www.bahai-egypt.org/
          So what’s the deal?

        14. This girl is a complete idiot, who doesn’t understand human group evolution:
          “When did I say Dravidians were “supposed” to resemble Middle Easterners?”
          Goddamn you nitwit, you really can’t read can you? Fuck, Xera, are you daft, high or just the product of cousin incest?
          Xera, “No it makes perfect sense, he means all the Indians that DON’T resemble Anatolians/Central Asians/MIDDLE EASTERNERS”
          Me, Xera, first you say, “No it makes perfect sense, he means all the Indians that DON’T resemble Anatolians/Central Asians/MIDDLE EASTERNERS”
          Then you say, “The Dravidians were just neo-lithic middle Eastern farmers that settled India in a second migration”
          Your reading skills suck ass, dude.
          No you fucking dumbshit, the group that migrated OUT of the Middle East towards India, during the NEOLITHIC, are not same as the ones that occupy the Middle East TODAY. They were a proto-med race that hadn’t evolved into it’s phenotype until they moved to their locations. Modern Middle Eastern people are completely different and had a different line of development then that of “Dravidians”, who originated within the Levant but didn’t evolve until settling in India. Notice the time difference and location difference, do you not know how to fucking read? As for the Indo-Aryan invasions which primarily took place within the Northern provinces as it was the gateway to the sub-continent, that’s where the later Indo-Aryans/Central Asian invaders settled and mixed with the original Dravidians/mixed tribals who were pushed south or assimilated into a permanent underclass in the North. Anatolians/Arabids/Iranic groups are radically different with a different line of physical evolution/traits then that of the “Dravidians” that migrated out of the Levant, hence why I was mentioning a resemblance toward those groups moron.
          “One of Egypt’s small religious minorities, the Baha’is, remain without their citizenship rights. They are poorly treated by the authorities. They are discriminated against in education and employment, and to this day, many of them remain without identity documents as described earlier in this blog.”
          What the fuck does this have to do with anything? Every single minority that didn’t fall in line with Western funded corrupt cronies under the veil of Islam, was treated like shit and this includes the Copts infamously.

        15. Nice find Ishmael, and Bhabi fails again. This chick makes too many emotional statements.As for Hijab, you were right, it is primarily about modesty:
          “O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused(molested/annoyed). And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.”
          (Quran 33:59)

        16. @ Dota
          Exactly. Most Muslim women don the hijab out of a sense of religious obligation or ‘modesty’, as they call it. It is the western opposition to hijab that is political (which I agree with, for the reasons Matt stated apart from the counter-intuitive objectification of women that an abaya/hijab creates in a Muslim society).

        17. Bay Area Guy, you write:
          “If anything, I feel more comfortable around a Muslim who dresses like a Muslim and openly prays like a Muslim, rather than the outwardly assimilated, clean shaven, suit wearing type who’s a closet anti-Western radical.”
          Definitely if I’m flying with them! It’s the ones you can’t spot that you have to worry about.

      3. Dota: It’s interesting to read the rationale for the hijab and compare it to the practical consequences of the practice today. Wearing the hijab or (Allah forbid) the niqab, the abaya (sp?) or the burkha puts a Muslim woman on the front line of the clash of civilizations in the west. As such makes them more subject to scorn, suspicion, and even violence than Muslim men, who can simply blend in. Somehow, I think that this was the opposite of the original intent, don’t you?.

        1. Believe me Matt, the irony isn’t lost on me. This is why I would prefer that any wife of mine not wear it in the west. Ofcourse I cannot force my will on her free choice should she choose to wear it. But in the attempt to “liberate” Muslim women the Jew media/Feminists tend to infantalize them so that their choices do not matter. They essentially mimic the patriarchy that they so despise.

        2. Matt, its more than just that. Please google “saudization of Islam”. Throwing a scarf around your head while wearing clothing that is normative to ones country is one thing. Donning the complete niqab, which is not “Islamic” per se but Saudi Wahabi, when you do not come from that country nor are required to do so by law (like Saudi citizens are) is something else.
          Ishmael lives in Connecticut of all places. Not in Birmingham UK or Paris, France. He has no idea and obviously has not watched the documentaries and news reports of whats going on in UK and Europe.
          Niqab is not Desi Muslim attire. Desi Muslim women in the UK are indeed choosing to wear this horrific Saudi dress as a political statement. Do the research.
          Niqab is the new black, heh.

        3. Ishmael, Matt, you can start right here on this very website
          http://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2012/01/10/the-islamicization-of-paris-a-warning-to-the-west/
          Robert Lindsay, “Is there anyone besides me who thinks it is stupid that only rightwing assholes are sounding the alarm about this oh so obvious problem? The problem with Islam is it’s very intense conservatism, among other things. The Left thinks this reactionary religion is oh so dandy. Our own garden variety reactionaries think this reactionary religion of the East is a real problem. Does that make sense?
          Of course those Muslims are taking over the streets around that mosque as a show of power. Islam is and has always been a supremacist religion par excellance, and once they get a certain % of numbers, they start engaging in muscle flexing like this. When they take over the streets like this, it means, “We own the streets.” I am very glad that the French are having pork and wine celebrations in the streets of their own, but that won’t stop this mess. The French need to stop importing Muslims right this minute.”
          Watch the videos.
          http://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2012/01/10/the-islamicization-of-paris-a-warning-to-the-west/

        4. @Dota: I basically agree, except with regard to the burkha. You can wear a burkha, or live in western society. You can’t do both. Yes, I know it is more an Afghani (specifically Pashtun?) custom than an Islamic one, so don’t bother to point that out. It is of course a local interpretation of Islamic practice, but that is irrelevant to the social evils we would be countenancing in permitting it.

        5. @Bhabaji I’m sure you are correct. I also suspect that many younger British Desi women are not doing it of their own free will. You’ve heard of hot hijabis? I saw hot niqabis when I traveled in the UK.
          But you make a decent point that is often lost on the serious haters out there: If you live in a certain place where people dress a certain way, you’re probably going to dress that way too. An Egyptian woman in Egypt wearing hijab is probably not making a statement. She may not even be more religious than the norm. It is remarkably boneheaded to take that alone as a sign of oppression, although gender based oppression does exist in such places. Is it oppression that I have to wear pants, especially in this beastly hot weather?

        6. “Niqab is not Desi Muslim attire.”
          A walk in Delhi’s Jama Masjid area, Kolkata’s Mirza Ghalib Street or Hyderabad’s Mecca Masjid area proves otherwise. You really need to stop preaching what you learn from documentaries and internet research. The real world is far more nuanced; a woman’s reasons for donning the hijab is far more nuanced and personal than the ‘making a political statements against whiteys’ kool aid that you come up with. It is as idotic as the suggestion that women wear mini skirts to entice men (which may be true for some women, but not all).

        7. “Yes, I know it is more an Afghani (specifically Pashtun?) custom than an Islamic one”
          No, it is not Afghani. This niqab crap is coming from Saudi Arabia, with an agenda. Again, google “wahabization of Islam”.
          Watch the BBC documentaries.

        8. ““Niqab is not Desi Muslim attire.”
          A walk in Delhi’s Jama Masjid area, Kolkata’s Mirza Ghalib Street or Hyderabad’s Mecca Masjid area proves otherwise. You really need to stop preaching what you learn from documentaries and internet research. The real world is far more nuanced; a woman’s reasons for donning the hijab is far more nuanced”
          Blah, blah, blah, you idiot! That’s exactly what I’m talking about! Google the “wahabization of Islam”.
          The niqab and hijab are two different things you idiot. And no, the niqab is NOT “islamic dress” and certainly not Desi muslim dress.
          Fuck it! Does nobody here have reading skills?

        9. “You can wear a burkha, or live in western society. You can’t do both.”
          Agree completely. However, I am not sure if conservative Muslims will buy it, since conservative Islamism heavily emphasises living a life in accordance with sharia rather than trying to fit into a society of supposedly ‘infidel values’. Islam, like Judaism, is religiously isolatonist – it celebrates a Muslims defiance to the culture and society of ‘infidels’ as a form of piety.
           
          For the record, the niqab is in accordance with Islamic values. If anyone wants to argue this point, I can quote a number of verses from hadiths (prophetic traditions) which emphasise on women covering themselves in such a way that the curves/shapes of their bodies are completely indecipherible.
           
          That the ‘niqaab is not Islamic’ is actually a Muslim apologist’s remark to western inquisitiveness on the subject, so that conservative Muslims might appear more progressive than they really are. A form of taqiyya, if anything.

        10. “For the record, the niqab is in accordance with Islamic values. If anyone wants to argue this point, I can quote a number of verses from hadiths (prophetic traditions) which emphasise on women covering themselves in such a way that the curves/shapes of their bodies are completely indecipherible.”
          This is Saudi niqab
          http://www.google.com/imgres?um=1&hl=en&sa=N&biw=800&bih=431&tbm=isch&tbnid=QyPdk-5MFrBnTM:&imgrefurl=http://americanbedu.com/2010/04/26/saudi-arabia-more-on-the-niqab-and-beyond/&docid=fk_r4-D-fvsKqM&imgurl=http://delhi4cats.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/niqab-women.jpg&w=600&h=392&ei=bB8YUIqdEY688wS0oYGYDQ&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=71&vpy=120&dur=1368&hovh=181&hovw=278&tx=164&ty=163&sig=101872549283275437621&page=1&tbnh=105&tbnw=140&start=0&ndsp=10&ved=1t:429,r:5,s:0,i:92
          Something that British-Desi-fuck-you-imperialistic-west muslimaas are donning, on purpose with a political agenda.
          One can cover the curves of ones body just find without it. There is no dearth of baggy, plus sized clothing available now that people are becoming so fat. Throw a dupatta on your head and voila!
          Salwar kameez and saris with long sleeved blouses that cover the stomach do it just as well.
          Here’s a nice long, big, baggy skirt. Throw the dupatta around your chest and over your head and voila! You are covered without looking like Darth Vadar and offending the society around you in which you are supposed to assimilate and integrate.
          http://www.google.com/imgres?num=10&hl=en&biw=800&bih=431&tbm=isch&tbnid=fvwOjMFZ3M9s5M:&imgrefurl=http://rgfashions.com/gray-blue-with-yellow/&docid=czWEKyWEv3Fs6M&imgurl=http://rgfashions.com/wp-content/themes/shopperpress/thumbs/563999_447347298619255_786170872_n.jpg&w=781&h=960&ei=ISIYULn-HI2O8wTfzYHgBA&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=356&vpy=4&dur=83&hovh=249&hovw=202&tx=124&ty=74&sig=101872549283275437621&page=2&tbnh=111&tbnw=96&start=14&ndsp=19&ved=1t:429,r:16,s:14,i:172

        11. @ Bhabiji
          As per the Hadiths and Quran, which are pretty much the foundations of Sunni (=! Wahhabi) Islam, niqaab and hijaab are pretty much the same thing. Garments meant to cover a woman’s body to such an extent that her body, its curves and features are not distinguishable. This is how it is understood in most conservative Muslim societies, including the Deobandi Islamic seminary (which makes up the majority of Indian/Desi Muslim populations).
           
          But you wouldn’t know that, since like the rest of your cognitively challenged and socially impaired fellow desis, you can’t comprehend religion, people and cultures beyond what you see in TV shows and gather form internet ‘research’.
           
          Don’t ask me to Google research or watch a documentary on this subject again, you ignorant sewermouth.

        12. Atheist Indian: I am completely down with making the burkha illegal as they did in France. It could be justified on many grounds.
          Bhabaji: I wrote that the burkha is specifically Afghan/Pashtun, not the niqab. I think I was clear about that. This isn’t the first time I or someone else has written something that zoomed right past you. Just saying. I don’t think the niqab is a Saudi invention, although your statements about the Wahabiization of world Islam are certainly true and even self evident in my observation.

        13. Leave it to Bhabhi to drag a debate into the gutter.
          Hijab as AI correctly pointed out is a practice and not a particular outfit. The Abaya, Niqab, Chador, Burka are merely cultural interpretations of this practice. Neither the Quran nor the Hadith explicitly outline any sort of outfit in particular. According to some modern scholars, the Veil was a Persian custom which the Arabs eventually adopted. This is plausible given the enormous cultural influence that the Persians exerted on the Abbasid dynasty in the 8th century. My personal feelings? Don’t ban the veil as it hinders freedom of expression; even tho I personally would not want my woman to wear one, principles cannot be opportunistic.

        14. My mother tried the Abaya once for a couple of months, found it to be culturally alien (she won’t admit that tho lol) and went back to the desi shalwar kameez and occasionally Jeans with a kurti top. The veil is culturally alien to India and the more conservative Muslimas wear it. Most of the Muslims I’ve grown up around do not bother with it and I’ve also seen Muslimas wear the Hindu Mangalsutra. Although I have a low opinion of HInduism, I prefer a syncretic Hindu Islam to Wahabism. Down with these saudi dogs.

        15. “Bhabaji: I wrote that the burkha is specifically Afghan/Pashtun, not the niqab. ”
          Its not Afghani.
          Look people, this not rocket science. From the get-go I have specified “niqab” and Saudi culture, the Wahabization of Islam worldwide, including Desi Muslims in the UK. There is plenty of documentation available on the internet for those of you with no experience in Muslim communities in the UK and Europe right now.
          Now you want to get into a detailed analysis of, and differences in between the hijab, burkha, niqab and abhaya? What, are you a bunch of old Desi muslim grandmas or something?
          Shit, I don’t know how I could be any clearer. I posted pics of the Saudi niqab, which is WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
          Such dress has no place outside of Saudi (where it is so despised it has to be enforced through law!).
          ” I don’t think the niqab is a Saudi invention”
          You are wrong about that.
          “although your statements about the Wahabiization of world Islam are certainly true and even self evident in my observation.”
          You are right about that and HELLO! was my original point.
          (I tell you Amartya Sen was correct about the “argumentative Indian”. One of the main reasons I can’t stand being within 10 feet of another Desi. )
          ” My personal feelings? ”
          Nobody gives a fuck, particularly not France, see here;
          http://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2012/01/10/the-islamicization-of-paris-a-warning-to-the-west/#comment-76036
          “Don’t ban the veil as it hinders freedom of expression”
          Freedom of expression my ass. When is Saudi Arabia and Iran going to start caring about that? What kind, liberal Western people don’t understand is that they are extending “freedoms” to people who would not under any circumstance extend “freedoms” to them. These niqab wearing, face covering Muslimaas are giving a big middle finger fuck you to Western Civilization and liberal Westerners, either being too naive, stupid or kind don’t even see that.
          Face covering has NO PLACE in Western cultures, and no place anywhere, but especially in the West, it is blatantly offensive and should be completely banned.

        16. “The veil is culturally alien to India and the more conservative Muslimas wear it.”
          Exactly. And yet here you have Atheist Indian arguing that niqab is “Desi muslim attire”.
          There are million ways to dress modestly and saris, salwar kameez and other forms of Desi dress are modest enough, or can be made so depending on style, yet the Muslims on the streets of Kolkata, Delhi, etc that Atheist Indian cited are wearing black niqab OVER their desi clothes underneath. Does this make any sense whatsoever, particularly in a hot climate? NO. And it is NOT traditional Desi muslim attire. There is a Wahabization of Islam going on worldwide and Desis are amongst those stupid enough to fall for it.

        17. Perhaps I’m the only one on this blog who sees no difference between France and Saudi Arabia as both of those states attempt to regulate personal attire. Once the state does this, where does it stop? Assimilation isn’t about dress codes, but values and worldviews. You claim that the veil is oppressive but your concerns are unwarranted as most western muslimas do not feel that way. The ones that do don’t wear it. What if the sari is concerned offensive? Or the tika? I’m amazed how you play the libertarian card to justify your whore like behavior but make a fuss about what other women (who are minding their own business) wear. Intent is in the eye of the beholder. If you think that they are giving you the finger, look the other away. I was initially under the impression that you were merely an unschooled first year child, but your duplicity leads me to believe that you are indeed a hateful little bitch who does everything in her power to inflame public opinion against a group of people that has never harmed you personally. Go fuck yourself you cunt faced whore.
          Lastly, you better hope that Afghan women are never sexually liberated. The day that happens, all of those hot Afghans that you’ve been dating will drop you like the bag of shit that you are and fly back home in a jiffy. It has nothing to do with your looks, but your overall lack of character.

        18. Assimilation isn’t about dress codes, but values and worldviews.
          @ Dota
          Exactly. In fact, if you actually look at the profiles of the “Muslims” who perpetrated some of the worst recent acts of terrorism in the West, and you’ll notice that compared to other Muslims, they were far less religious, better educated, more affluent, and many had in fact been educated in Western countries. They weren’t the types to wear Islamic garb or openly pray in mosques. More likely than not, they wore Western style business suits and were clean shaven in public.
          If anything, I feel more comfortable around a Muslim who dresses like a Muslim and openly prays like a Muslim, rather than the outwardly assimilated, clean shaven, suit wearing type who’s a closet anti-Western radical.

        19. @ Dota
          As someone who has seen the difficulties living with a large culturally alien populations who refuse to assimilate (mainland Indian [~desi] immigrants living in North East India), I can see why France made that move.
           
          While the burka or the niqab might not be oppressive per se (depending on the individual/family dynamics), it does affect a Muslim woman’s interaction with mainstream French, by symbolically isolating her from the so called ‘infidels’. Wearing a dress like niqab also implies extreme religious conservatism, which will most likely not bode well for the children’s social development (since children’s earliest understanding of the world comes from their mothers. Developmental Psych 101). I’d want Muslim children to grow up as a part of the mainstream society, not mainstream 7th century Arabia.
           
          Also, from what I have observed in Europe and how Middle Eastern people are treated there, I do think a part of this blame lies on the French and other European peoples – because of their refusal to accept Muslim Europeans who wish to integrate, as mainstream (and not as perpetual ‘brown immigrants’).The latter attitude seems to be more prevalent among Sarkozy supporters.

        20. Atheist Indian.
          You are largely spot on. Most successful Muslim women I know are typically Westernized and assimilated better.
          And regarding the problems in the UK/France, America has the same problem with Mexicans down south. One foot in America, and one in Mexico. Mass clusters of immigrants are horrible – ghettos of jews to irish slums to mexican districts in texan/californian towns. It isolates these people from the larger population and chokes them. They revert to crime. Cases from history prove it’s largely a cultural, not religious issue. But Arabs are a crazy group of people, I give you that.

        21. “As someone who has seen the difficulties living with a large culturally alien populations who refuse to assimilate (mainland Indian [~desi] immigrants living in North East India)”
          AI, can you elaborate on some of the ways mainland Indians refuse to assimilate to the Northeast when they live there?
          “While the burka or the niqab might not be oppressive per se ”
          Please note that my argument is not nor has ever been that all women who wear niqab in the UK and Europe are oppressed and forced to do so. On the contrary, many of them choose to do so on their own (after becoming politicized) with no prompting from family. In these cases it is not the Muslim women who are being oppressed but the non-Muslims in their surrounding towns, schools and workplaces.
          ” it does affect a Muslim woman’s interaction with mainstream French, by symbolically isolating her from the so called ‘infidels’. ”
          Like I said, a big fuck you middle finger to “the white man”, “kafir” and “the Great Western Imperialistic Shaytan”

        22. Dota: To equate France and Saudi Arabia because they both regulate personal attire is like equating Hitler and Gandhi because they were both vegetarians. States regulate all kinds of personal behaviors if they impinge on the interests of society, even religious practices. Try telling the Feds that smoking pot is a religious duty, for example. Women (or anyone) wearing head to toe covering with slits for eyes are a security risk, for one thing. And the practice is so harmful in so many ways to public health. We would have problems enforcing something like this in the U.S. with our out of control multiculturalism and “diversity,” but I can dream…

        23. Matt and AI
          I suppose we will have to agree to disagree. Your arguments are based on reading the intentions of a group whose culture you do not fully have access to nor understand (despite both of you being open minded). The veil issue provokes emotional reactions and that is no basis for policy. Apart from the security risk which Matt pointed out, there is no rational reason to ban the veil. I don’t care for the veil myself, but you cannot force change upon the Muslim community, they need to get there themselves. We saw such emotional outbursts in the Muslims in France thread where a public nuisance (praying on the street) was made into a clash of civilizations and a precursor to Armageddon. It’s bad enough that I’ll always be an alien in the west (I knew what I getting into so I’m not complaining) but it makes it worse when society claims they know me better than I know myself. I’m done with this debate, sorry.

        24. @ Dota
          I had 17 years of personal observations as well, particularly my religious step-mother who came from family of Pathan immigrants. Her narrow worldview, her hatred of ‘infidels’ and her propensity to diabetes in her middle age was a characteristic contrast to the native North Eastern women whom she often described as ‘women with no lehaaz and tameez’. Her obsession with her hijab and religiousity is what made her that way, which makes me wonder if conservatist Islam is such a good idea after all, especially in socially liberal societies.

        25. AI
          You know me AI, and you know that I harbour an intense aversion of Wahabi Punjabi pakis and backward Pashtuns. But the xenophobia you described is a tribal impulse expressed in Islamic terms. I have yet to see the behaviour you’ve described in non Desi and non Afghan Muslims. I see no reason to ban a religious practice unless there are some very tangible negative consequences (sati for example).

        26. @ Gay State Girl
          My father and stepmother are Muslims, so I grew up in a Muslim household. My father was socially liberal, like all other South East Asian Muslims, until the proselytising of Deobandis and Tableegi Jamaat turned him into a conservative. My stepmother was the icing on the cake, so to speak
           
          I have seen harsh conservatism among Middle Eastern Muslims. I however, agree with you if you talk of Eurasian and SEA Muslims, who aren’t more invested into their native cultures than pan-Arabic Islamism. I actually knew Turks who offered their prayers (Salaat) in the Turkish language.

        1. I don’t know what people think of me online though. Robert said I was a cool guy once but I’ve probably annoyed him since then lol

        1. Steve, that post you wrote about the abused UK woman who’s abuser tried to strangle her to death and who did not spend even 1 second in jail is DISGUSTING.
          THE NUMBER ONE RULE FOR WOMEN EVERYWHERE:
          The very first time he hits you – LEAVE – no. matter. what.
          If he hits you once, he WILL hit you again, guaranteed.
          The more women do this then the more these sick bastards will be put out of commission.
          And like I said before, since the closing of the loony bins, there’s a lot of deranged, mentally sick bastard on the loose, getting jobs, just like normal people. Except they are not normal.
          BEWARE!

    1. @GSG- “Misogynist: A man who hates women as much as women hate one another” – hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

  5. “Freedom of expression my ass. When is Saudi Arabia and Iran going to start caring about that? What kind, liberal Western people don’t understand is that they are extending “freedoms” to people who would not under any circumstance extend “freedoms” to them. ”
    Stupid argument. The west holds itself to higher moral standards. The domestic policies of other nations is not a concern. AI is right, you are an unschooled child who hasn’t travelled much. Your opinions of Desi Muslims are based on a UK sample and not that of India itself. Enough said.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *