A little while ago a picture of some women from Sweden's "feminist government"

[Burney]

Yes, quite possibly. Although I expect that is just one of many influences, the others being historically and culturally oriented.

But to simply say that women cover up because Islam forces them to is incorrect and reinforces a prejudice which is unhelpful.

You're trying to treat culture and religion as though they are wholly distinct entities when they plainly are not. Culture is a reflection of religion and vice-versa. That there may be other cultural factors does not make the point that Islamic cultures and societies are violently oppressive towards women in terms of their rights and freedom of behaviour any less valid.

On the other hand, if you are attempting seriously to argue that the cultural and religious norms in predominantly Islamic societies are not violently prejudicial to the rights and freedoms of women, I can only assume you to have been recently lobotomised.

[World's End Stella]

WES is, of course, making the accurate - albeit entirely disingenuous - point that Islam per se does not require the veiling of women. This does, however, ignore the fact that the increasingly dominant and reactionary forms of Islam such as the form of Shia practised in Iran and the Wahabbism propagated by Saudi Arabia very much do insist on veiling - be it officially or unofficially enforced - which is why you see so many women in this country of South Asian origin (where such veiling isn't really a tradition) dressing in this way.

It isn't disingenuous in any way. I disagreed with the blanket statement that Islam forces women to cover up and suggested that there are many influences in that regard.

Which is entirely consistent with your post, BTW.

[Burney]

But we know that the pervasiveness of head coverings in Islamic societies is rooted in the Islamic teachings on female modesty.

Or to put it another way, just because slavery was once pervasive in non Islamic societies does not change the fact that the current use of slavery by ISIS is rooted in Islamic teachings.

Of course. Nor does it change the fact that the approval of sexual slavery and rape are endorsed in Islamic teachings. Islam is explicitly a religion in which violent conversion and conquest are hard-wired into the DNA. These reactionary forms of Islam are simply back to basics versions of the religion that strive to return to what they see as the pure form of the religion untainted by ghastly western ideas of decency.

[World's End Stella]

You're trying to treat culture and religion as though they are wholly distinct entities when they plainly are not. Culture is a reflection of religion and vice-versa. That there may be other cultural factors does not make the point that Islamic cultures and societies are violently oppressive towards women in terms of their rights and freedom of behaviour any less valid.

On the other hand, if you are attempting seriously to argue that the cultural and religious norms in predominantly Islamic societies are not violently prejudicial to the rights and freedoms of women, I can only assume you to have been recently lobotomised.

Again, I did not say that, I pointed out that you had to consider the historical and cultural influences as well as the religious influences, whereas Monty and Charles simply want to blame Islam.

And yes, Islamic societies are largely very misogynistic, I have never claimed otherwise. And the solution is communication, understanding, patience and integration - in that order. But we've done that one.

[Burney]

It isn't disingenuous in any way. I disagreed with the blanket statement that Islam forces women to cover up and suggested that there are many influences in that regard.

Which is entirely consistent with your post, BTW.

But your premise is - as I've pointed out in my other reply to you - utterly flawed in that it presupposes that religion, culture and society are or ever can be distinct entities that can be taken in isolation.
Equally, there are existing Hadiths that are interpreted by many Islamic scholars as recommending the veiling of women, but they are not explicit. However, since these cultural norms have come about by virtue of the interpretations of those religious verses, it seems genuinely bizarre to claim that veiling has nothing to do with Islam.

[World's End Stella]

it seems genuinely bizarre to claim that veiling has nothing to do with Islam.

You think I said that? Seriously?

[Burney]

You think I said that? Seriously?

Errrr...yes. Yes I do. Mostly because you wrote:

Nor, for that matter, am I convinced it has anything to do with Islam.

It quite clearly does have to something to do with Islam, since it is based on an interpretation of a Hadith that, taken in conjunction with the Q'uran's exhortations to female modesty in dress, has been understood to mean women should cover their hair and in some cases their faces and bodies.

[World's End Stella]

Errrr...yes. Yes I do. Mostly because you wrote:



It quite clearly does have to something to do with Islam, since it is based on an interpretation of a Hadith that, taken in conjunction with the Q'uran's exhortations to female modesty in dress, has been understood to mean women should cover their hair and in some cases their faces and bodies.

Er...nice edit. The full paragraph copied below paints quite a different picture, I think. Not to mention that saying you aren't convinced of something and saying you explicitly don't believe something are quite different.

'Nor, for that matter, am I convinced it has anything to do with Islam. As far as I understand it, Islam only mentions that women should dress modestly, the rest of the dress restrictions are entirely cultural and have very little to do with religion. '

[Burney]

Er...nice edit. The full paragraph copied below paints quite a different picture, I think. Not to mention that saying you aren't convinced of something and saying you explicitly don't believe something are quite different.

'Nor, for that matter, am I convinced it has anything to do with Islam. As far as I understand it, Islam only mentions that women should dress modestly, the rest of the dress restrictions are entirely cultural and have very little to do with religion. '

No. That's böllocks, I'm afraid. I didn't edit anything, simply quoted exactly what you said, namely you suggesting that it didn't have anything to do with Islam. You're now squirming.

And I dealt with the fact that it is not merely a cultural issue, but explicitly a religious one based on the interpretation of religious texts.

Basically, your argument is entirely exploded and you're now trying to argue that you never said dem fings.

[World's End Stella]

No. That's böllocks, I'm afraid. I didn't edit anything, simply quoted exactly what you said, namely you suggesting that it didn't have anything to do with Islam. You're now squirming.

And I dealt with the fact that it is not merely a cultural issue, but explicitly a religious one based on the interpretation of religious texts.

Basically, your argument is entirely exploded and you're now trying to argue that you never said dem fings.

Nope, nice try, though. Just because you say it is so, doesn't make it so.

Show where in this quote I said it had nothing to do with Islam:

'Again, I did not say that, I pointed out that you had to consider the historical and cultural influences as well as the religious influences, whereas Monty and Charles simply want to blame Islam.'

I expect you're as bored of this as I am now. And if I'm honest, I've lost track of what we were arguing about.