U.K. Islamist Women Agree: "Slavery is Freedom"
U.K. Islamist Woman (Left Photo)
In a recent article, "U.K. Islamist Women: Kidnapped Nigerian Girls' Conversion to Islam Is No Surprise – Islam Liberates Women" (Memri, Special Dispatch No. 5750, May 20, 2014), we learn the views of two Islamist women who feel 'liberated' by 'Islam' and explain that the kidnapped Nigerian girls who were forced to convert to Islam also assuredly feel liberated:
[An anonymous] U.K. Islamist woman, face covered by niqab . . . [is questioned about the] kidnapping of 276 schoolgirls in Nigeria by Boko Haram[, which] has once again focused the world's attention on Islam and the treatment of women. Images of the girls covered in khimar [head scarf] and jilbab [robe], declaring the Testification of Faith, have raised the question of whether these girls have been forced to convert to Islam . . . .Right. No surprise there, because "slavery is freedom," as George Orwell noted in describing totalitarian ideologies. And obviously, as these two Islamist women also demonstrate very well, "ignorance is strength," for their ignorance is surely invincible. And, of course, "Islam" means "peace," but "war is deceit," so "war is peace," and we simply have to accept these equivocations in a humiliating state of submission, or else . . .
"The U.S., Israel, Britain, France, and others have offered their support and assistance in locating the girls[," says the first Islamist woman, speaking through her niqab. "]But why are they so bothered about 276 Nigerian girls? . . . The truth is that the allies fear the growing support in African countries for the establishment of an Islamic state. The truth is that the U.S. and the U.K. don't care about the welfare of women even in their own countries."
[A s]econd U.K. Islamist woman, face [also] covered by niqab . . . [adds,] "In light of this, it is no surprise that tens of thousands of women around the world embrace Islam every year -- because Islam is the only religion that liberates women from the shackles of slavery, and subservience to human beings . . . . [No] one should be surprised at the conversion to Islam of the Nigerian schoolgirls."
posted by Horace Jeffery Hodges @ 6:00 AM
26 comments
26 Comments:
You may be interested in this story an American defense lawyer trying to use cultural differences to defend a Pakistani immigrant accused of beating his wife to death after she didn't cook lentil properly. "It is customary for men to beat their wives," explained the lawyer. Hopefully, the judge understands the American legal concept of equality under the law and rejects the culturalism defense. Immigrant women are entitled to the same legal protections as Americsn women.
Sonagi
Thanks for the link. I'd heard of this case, though I hadn't seen anything substantive.
But the husband would seem to have violated sharia by striking his wife on the head. If I recall, some hadiths specify that a man is not to strike his wife on the face (or head generally).
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
I think these women are genuinely searching for freedom but have found only an illusion and we know, we are convinced that without Christ Jesus there is no freedom. I hope this will motivate me to try to reach out with the Truth to those women and not only be moved by the story and stop there.
Islamist women like these might be difficult to talk to, but I wish you success.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
We? As in the royal we? I liberated myself from Christianity years ago and eventually progressed to the level of sublime joy and peace known to those who are guided by logic and reason, not ancient myths.
Sonagi
I also wondered whom the "we" referred to. It sounds like a biblical verse paraphrased.
But that aside, how do "logic and reason" lead to "joy and peace"? I use logic and reason to reach the truth (or try to), but does the truth necessarily entail joy and peace?
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
The reason these women feel liberated is for the simple reason that Islam isn’t hopelessly self-contradictory regarding civilization and its relation to sex.
Civilization oppresses men in order to maintain its monopoly on violence. The only way to not counter-balance this with oppression of women is to take control of reproduction ala Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. We've liberated women without liberating men, creating an increasingly vicious environment in which any so-called "nice guy" is perceived as a dead end by women's liberated instincts. Islam of course balances the oppression of men under civilization by oppressing women and making the ordinary "nice guys" of civilization worthy in the eyes of these women.
Anonymous, you might find this interesting: Demographics and the Culture War.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
I feel joy and peace when I am Abel to make sense of the world around me and use science and reasoning to resolve or cope with life's problems. I feel joy and peace in accepting my natural preference for reasoning over faith in a country where a significant percentage of the population would not vote for an atheist running for public office and overstate participation in religious worship to telephone interviewers.
Sonagi
"We've liberated women without liberating men, creating an increasingly vicious environment in which any so-called "nice guy" is perceived as a dead end by women's liberated instincts. "
Modern contraception has liberated both sexes, allowing us to enjoy sex without worrying about bringing into the world another mouth to feed. Most people I know are nice and pleasant, regardless of sec or relationship status. You appear to perceive yourself and/or your friends and acquaintances as nice guys who cannot find nice women looking for nice men. Nothing repels potential partners like bitterness and anger towards past partners.
Sonagi
Just got back from browsing the doomsday scenarios spun by Stanley Kurtz, who appears to see a linear cause-effect relationship between population growth and economic growth and assumes that without economic growth, living standards will drop significantly,providing no actual global data to support this belief. Moreover, Kurtz completely overlooks the issue of sustainability. More people mean increased demand on agriculture and water resources while spewing out more pollution into the environment through increased production of goods to satisfy wants and needs. I googled Stanley Kurtz to verify my suspicions that he is a social conservative, and indeed he is. His lame arguments against marriage equality are a delight to read, and his writings in eye real confirm my perception that social scientists like him are intellectually inferior to biologists, chemists, physicists, and other real scientists.
Sonagi
His writings in general confirm my perceptions that as a group, social scientists are intellectually inferior...
Sonagi
I liked "writings in eye real confirm my perception" better -- but I like experimental writing.
As for truth leading to "joy and peace," I find knowing the truth to be intellectually satisfying, but often not especially comforting -- who knows when the next enormous space rock will strike the earth and wipe out all life. The more we know, the more we know to fear.
But I agree that knowing is better. Knowledge at least allows us to prepare.
Whatever his limitations, Kurtz is surely right to point to the crisis we potentially face in funding social welfare systems by raising taxes ever higher on an ever smaller workforce. Like you, though, I also see the problem of an ever increasing population.
I'm hoping that we'll find a way out of the dilemma through science and technology.
Unless all our problems are solved by the next big space rock . . .
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
"Whatever his limitations, Kurtz is surely right to point to the crisis we potentially face in funding social welfare systems by raising taxes ever higher on an ever smaller workforce."
In the US, proposals to fix Social Security and Medicare involve raising FICA taxes on the highest income earners. This would have little if any effect on the consumer spending that drives economic growth. Medicare costs and health care costs in general could be reduced by eliminating legal oligopolies like the ban on imports of joint replacement parts, which keeps US joint replacement surgery artificially high, as much as 500% higher than in other OECD countries. Funny how conservatives like Kurtz overlook these solutions that help everyone and hurt no one. Even health care industry CEOs would not be demonstrably harmed if their $12-18 million compensation packages were cut in half.
Sonagi
"As for truth leading to "joy and peace," I find knowing the truth to be intellectually satisfying, but often not especially comforting -- who knows when the next enormous space rock will strike the earth and wipe out all life. The more we know, the more we know to fear."
I do not know what is meant by "the truth." I do understand demonstrably true statements that guide us in recognizing what is within our control, what is not, and how to control what we can to have a satisfying life given our uncontrollable circumstances. My simple goal is to live long enough to experience all stages in the human life cycle and to live so that others can do the same. Right now I am coming to accept that life in middle-age involves giving increasing care to an elderly parent in declining health. Large meteors are not one of the many things I worry about. I, too, draw hope from science and technology and believe in lending a helping hand by living and voting responsibly.
Sonagi
Not "the truth," just "truth." That would include true statements, but also true systems of true statements.
I don't spend my time worrying about space rocks either, but I'm glad that there are professionals who do.
As for whether social welfare systems will be fundable in the future, I suppose we'll find out soon enough.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Modern contraception has been important, but it's been important with respect to the liberation of female sexuality, not male sexuality. Remember that violence is the fundamental aspect of male sexuality, Male sexuality of course has not been liberated. Man gives up this fundamental part of his sexuality to become Civilized Man. His natural right to violence is forfeited to the state which holds a monopoly on violence. This is the primordial "contract" if you will which comprises the foundation of civilization, and the restriction on male sexuality has been counter-balanced throughout history by restricting female sexuality. We've just been living under civilization for so long that we've lost sight of this primordial contract.
Now the contract has been breached—the foundation shattered. Pandora’s box has been opened. Nothing like this has happened before in history.
Anonymous, I'm not sure I follow you. Are you saying men have a natural right to violence against women?
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
The phrase "natural rights" is often bandied about in conversations. No one thus far has provided evidence of the existence of natural rights. There are natural laws like gravity and evolutionary selection but no natural rights. Rights exist only among people and only to the extent they are respected or enforced by others. What Anonymous seems to be referring to is the superior physical strength of men, which has longed allowed them to coerce women into doing things they don't want to do. However, evolution shows us that survival of a species that co-parents depends on survival of both sexes. Applying this concept, we can infer that women have developed verbal and nonverbal strategies to reduce the risk of violence. Studies of bonobos show that females dominate males in contrast to most other primate species thanks to stronger female cooperation versus weaker male cooperation. Likewise, among humans, cooperation is associated more with females while competition is associated more with males. Modern science and related changes in social values and economic opportunities have empowered women, no doubt, but not at the expense of men, who may now enjoy sex without paying a prostitute or getting married and who are no longer shouldered with the responsibility of being sole breadwinners and therefore being judged heavily on their income and wealth by potential partners.
The creepy graphic created by the Santa Barbara killer seems to communicate the same view of the sexual revolution as commenter Anonymous.
Sonagi
Thanks for the link, I guess. Some of that was quite gruesome.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
In sexual species, it is a natural right of any individual male to challenge any other individual male to combat. This is so fundamental an aspect of sexual species that secondary sexual characteristics such as horns, not to mention size, musculature, tusks, etc. are specialized for this role.
Civilization is built on the pretense that ordinary men as husbands are alpha males so that they don't revolt against those in positions of authority. The 60s with the Sexual Revolution exploded that pretense leaving the glass ceiling protecting those positions of authority as the real alpha males surrounding themselves by de facto harems. It has taken decades, but the consequences are now coming home to roost in the form of high fertility rates among patriarchal cultures like Islam. Islam is the the likely beneficiary since it dispenses with the hypocrisy surrounding de facto harems and formally sanctions harem sizes limited to a maximum of 4 females.
No one wants to even consider what the counterpart to female liberation might be. But consider: A female's godhood is exercised when she chooses which genes will pass through her to the next generation. A male's godhood is exercised when he chooses which other male he will meet in a natural duel to prevent his genes from passing into the next generation -- or die trying.
If males are liberated, the glass ceiling would be shattered along with all positions of authority and civilization itself.
Anonymous, you seem to conflate natural ability -- perhaps even natural propensity -- with natural right.
Lions have the power to attack and kill their prey. There's no natural right about it. Predation is simply what they do as lions.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Songai writes: "..I liberated myself from Christianity years ago and eventually progressed to the level of sublime joy and peace known to those who are guided by logic and reason, not ancient myths."
Songai, but consider a myth about progressing to the level of sublime joy and peace known to those who are guided by logic and reason, not ancient myths... This after all, is precisely what Milton (and others of that persuasion) has given us, and it is arguably the very essence of Christianity (and, alas, Judaism).
Actually, Carter, many world religions promise sublime joy and peace. The essence of Buddhism is joy and peace through denial of self and freedom from want. There is evidence that people's brains are wired to favor belief or non-belief. Mine is definitely the latter, a trait probably inherited from my father, who treated religious participation as a chore. Thus, it is actually my embrace of my natural brain wiring, rather than atheism itself, that brings me the same peace and joy that prayer and worship bring to devout believers.
Anonymous needs to stay from PUAHate or whichever website is filling his head with pseudo-evolutionary psychology. First, species vary tremendously in their secondary sex characteristics. Not all males physically fight other males for the opportunity to mate with females. Sexual dimorphism is a fairly reliable indicator of physical competition among males. Relative to other primates, human males are only slightly bigger than females. Second, you are mistaken regarding global fertility rates. It is human development, not religion, that primarily determines fertility rates. Compare the average number of childbirths per woman, and you'll see that women in Sub-Sahara Africa bear more children than women in Saudi Arabia, Iran, and many other countries with strict Islamic regimes.
If you aspire to understand our species and the world we inhabit, Anonymous, reading stories of interest at authentic science websites would be well worth your time.
Sonagi
Jeffery,
Yes, we don't have to use the term "natural right". It can be problematic and contentious and thus other expressions could substitute for it.
Sonagi,
I suggested earlier that not all human males physically fight other males to mate with females. I said that this was a fundamental aspect of civilization: human males give up a fundamental part of their male sexuality to live in civilization.
Human males, unlike the males of most other sexual species, are characterized by fighting with the use of tools, from simply picking up a rock and throwing it, to dueling with swords or pistols, to using more advanced weaponry like fighter jets and intercontinental ballistic missiles. So the fact that human males don't have antlers or aren't gigantic in size doesn't indicate that human males don't fight. Ultimately they don't fight by ramming their heads together and locking horns or by wrestling. When push comes to shove, they resort to weapons.
I don't think human development can be separated from religion. Presumably they can be separated in theory, but in practice they haven't been. Modern human development has often incorporated outright secularism or a certain attitude that involves weakening religion.
Post a Comment
<< Home