Who needs a man!

[Roshina]

Roshina, First you told me not to allow anyone to tell me what feminism is, then you tell me to study others' definition. Would you have said that if I had the same definition as yours?

You are new here, so you don't know this about me. Yes, I would've still encouraged you to study other possible views. I do this with everyone because I have discovered it to be a powerful and very effective means of learning and growing.

I told you not to allow others to tell you what feminism is. Yes, I did. And it didn't and still doesn't mean you stop studying other possible views. Does it?

Again, you have contradicted yourself. It is not possible for feminism to rise if they were not subjugated in the first place. Sister Amina Wadood was condemn for leading men in prayer. Why? Because it was not normal. She proved that women are equal in the eyes of god, and that what all of us are fighting for.

Yes, Amina Wadud was condemned (still is by many) for breaking tradition. I'm one of her supporters, however.

But I can't find the connection between your comment above and this "contradiction" you speak of.

Why can a Muslim man marry a Christian woman and a Muslim woman cannot marry a Christian man, is this not competing for something equal? Why is the Quran explicit about one and not the other?

No. What does that have to do with competition? That's simply reminding Muslims of the obvious fact: The Quran never said Muslim women can't marry Jews/Christians, and we have traditionally interpreted the Quran's silence on it when women are concerned to mean they can't marry them at all.

For you to live feminism is a contradiction, because you seem don't seem to understand where it rooted from. You seem to view feminism from the angle a huge happy family.

No, I don't see it from one angle, fortunately. I have met feminists like you (who impose only their own version of feminism on others and believe that all other feminisms are just not feminism but mere contradiction of ... feminism), and then I have met many like myself, and I have met many who see feminism much differently. Sure, I'd LOVE it if the entire world could live happily, but that's just not realistic.

Neither is it realistic to force all women to hate men and to tell them to stop relying on men. Why don't you tell men to stop relying on women, by the way?

Again, being independent doesn't and shouldn't mean being independent OF a certain group of people.

[faye]

less heterosexuals? ok maybe by 10% at most, 90% are still breeding, human population still increases more so than ever actually. In fact population growth has exploded more the last 10 years than in the previous 90.

sorry this is just a faulty argument.

stop wasting your time nit picking. it was just a thought, seeing as you of your indoctrination couldn't think on one.

[Roshina]

You analogy lacks logic. (no pun intended). A woman could have easily invented the computer. A man is dependent on a woman, not the vice-versa. They needs us to keep their name alive.

You missed the point: I'm independent -- not independent of man. I wish not to be independent of man. Men need women as much as women need men. This is interdependence and is absolutely necessary for society. Not (just) for reproduction purposes but for a million of other reasons.

Yes, go and remind your beloved that you love him, and stab the rest of his species in the back. You don't seem to be coherent

No. What makes you think I'd stab the rest of the men but not my own? My beloved is precious to me just as another man out there must be precious to another woman. Why would a feminist, who by definition wants the best for women, want men to die out or whatever? Wouldn't that to hurt other women because some women actually have husbands and lovers and fathers and sons whom they love dearly.

And, na, why would I do something as ridiculous and inhumane as stab all men except my own janan, guley?

[Abeille]

You are new here, so you don't know this about me. Yes, I would've still encouraged you to study other possible views. I do this with everyone because I have discovered it to be a powerful and very effective means of learning and growing.

I told you not to allow others to tell you what feminism is. Yes, I did. And it didn't and still doesn't mean you stop studying other possible views. Does it?



Yes, Amina Wadud was condemned (still is by many) for breaking tradition. I'm one of her supporters, however.

But I can't find the connection between your comment above and this "contradiction" you speak of.



No. What does that have to do with competition? That's simply reminding Muslims of the obvious fact: The Quran never said Muslim women can't marry Jews/Christians, and we have traditionally interpreted the Quran's silence on it when women are concerned to mean they can't marry them at all.



No, I don't see it from one angle, fortunately. I have met feminists like you (who impose only their own version of feminism on others and believe that all other feminisms are just not feminism but mere contradiction of ... feminism), and then I have met many like myself, and I have met many who see feminism much differently. Sure, I'd LOVE it if the entire world could live happily, but that's just not realistic.

Neither is it realistic to force all women to hate men and to tell them to stop relying on men. Why don't you tell men to stop relying on women, by the way?

Again, being independent doesn't and shouldn't mean being independent OF a certain group of people.

How is it possible for the Quran to mention that men could marry Christians or Jews and not mention whether women can or can't. Then shouldn't it have been the same for men, not be mentioned. You lack consistency in your thinking. You are bending rules in your favour so as to not alienate yourself and still be part of the rule of men. Really sad. Feminism is a fashion for you, a trend.

We, women, are self-sufficient. If we don't want to listen to a man once, then it should be consistent. Not like a on and off button, whenever it suits our needs.

[Roshina]

I hate some women for reasons I can't comprehend.

A feminist hating women? Well, this is some interesting news. And a little disturbing as well, to be frank with ye.

[Roshina]

How is it possible for the Quran to mention that men could marry Christians or Jews and not mention whether women can or can't. Then shouldn't it have been the same for men, not be mentioned. You lack consistency in your thinking. You are bending rules in your favour so as to not alienate yourself and still be part of the rule of men. Really sad. Feminism is a fashion for you, a trend.

Feel free to join the discussion on my blog where it's being discussed. It's been a little overdone here in some threads, so feel free to look into those as well when you have time.

We, women, are self-sufficient. If we don't want to listen to a man once, then it should be consistent. Not like a on and off button, whenever it suits our needs.

So, self-sufficient to you means not listening to a man? I still don't know what independence means to you, guley.

Oh, and one more thing - again, don't think you can tell me what feminism is for me, whether a trend or not. If I asked you how many gender studies courses you've taken, I wonder what you'd say; if I asked you to name 20 feminist scholars, some Muslim and some non-Muslim, I'd be interested to hear your response. If I asked you what at least two opinions about a certain feminism-related issue were, I wonder what your answer would be.

~sighs~ I must've had some time to rant here this much.

'Night, folks.

[Abeille]

A feminist hating women? Well, this is some interesting news. And a little disturbing as well, to be frank with ye.

Out of context. You are confused.

[Abeille]

Feel free to join the discussion on my blog where it's being discussed. It's been a little overdone here in some threads, so feel free to look into those as well when you have time.



So, self-sufficient to you means not listening to a man? I still don't know what independence means to you, guley.

You lack logical reasoning, and when you can't answer something you refer me to your blog? Are you for real? Why don't you answer it here?

What do you think a feminist means, if she should listen to a man? Again, incoherence on your part.

Muslim women have decided to form our own interpretation of Islam, so that we don't rely on men. You don't seem to be the sharpest tool in the shed.

[faye]

abeille, i don't know how old you are, whether you have been married or whether you have children or not but you sound to me, as though you haven't yet experienced love. love teaches empathy. if you were capable of empathy, you would also be able to see that men too are suffering. your analysis of roshinas comments shows that you don't understand that by 'needing' someone could be for the love they give her or that she has for them.
need doesn't necessarily mean dependence, like on a crutch, but can be a need to share, for the enrichment that can create.

[Roshina]

You remind me of Fatima Mernissi, Abeille. She, although considered a scholar by many, too, has this arrogant aura about her that screams, "Only my opinion matters! Only my opinion matters!" She also believes that "All women are oppressed, and it's all because of men!"

This may, however, be a misreading of her works on my part, but I highly doubt it.

Again, I encourage you to read as much as you can on feminism. If you need a list of books or article or some scholars, do lemme know. Come to think of it, this'd make a great section for my gender blog. I'll compile a list and add it there.

[ScimitarXEdge]

If men had not suppressed us, we would have been at the fore-front of all inventions. Now, do you understand why I find Roshina's way of thinking contradictory? She is a feminist, yet she thinks that women are dependent on men.

how did they suppress you? and what would have motivated you to make the type of "inventions" men have made?

[Roshina]

You lack logical reasoning, and when you can't answer something you refer me to your blog? Are you for real? Why don't you answer it here?

Because I'm scared of you, Abeille! You might challenge me, and since I don't have the logical reasoning, I can't beat you

Goodness gracious. (That was sarcasm, by the way.)

I don't answer it here for two reasons. One, dear Abeille, it has nothing to do with this thread.

And two, I would be repeating myself for the 8th time on this forum, and that's not something I'm fond of doing, though I've had to do it a lot with the folks who lack comprehension skills. That particular topic has been discussed to pieces on this forum. Ask anyone. And the discussion lasted for several months at first and was then renewed last month, I believe. Click here to go to that thread. Or you may simply go to my gender blog! (Get it? :D)

Now, I'm not afraid of discussions -- because I don't enter the discussion in which I believe I lack deep knowledge. I'm also not afraid of saying something that's going to contradict everyone's belief. I don't care if it shatters the pillar upon which they are built. I will say what I believe needs to be said. Everyone on this forum knows that about me as well. However, if you wanna start a discussion on feminism or anything else gender-related, I welcome you to it! As I said before, I live feminism! And quite happily so!

[randolph85]

when women have been dependent on men in every culture, and in every time, and in every race, and every nation.....its not oppression, its called the natural order.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Feel free to join the discussion on my blog where it's being discussed. It's been a little overdone here in some threads, so feel free to look into those as well when you have time.



So, self-sufficient to you means not listening to a man? I still don't know what independence means to you, guley.

Oh, and one more thing - again, don't think you can tell me what feminism is for me, whether a trend or not. If I asked you how many gender studies courses you've taken, I wonder what you'd say; if I asked you to name 20 feminist scholars, some Muslim and some non-Muslim, I'd be interested to hear your response. If I asked you what at least two opinions about a certain feminism-related issue were, I wonder what your answer would be.

~sighs~ I must've had some time to rant here this much.

'Night, folks.

Respectfully, since I admire your zeal and attempts at balance...

I would say its a disservice to claim the marriage debate was overdone here. I believe you had great difficulties answering my issues with your interpretations on the verses God revealed on the subject per the series of last exchanges:

http://www.pashtunforums.com/religio...5/index17.html

Remember, its not about subjugation or wanting to maintain a power hold in the minds of many of us, men and women alike. Rather, we wish to avoid the fate of Ahle Kitaab in terms of playing fast and loose with our texts, per the below warnings from God himself regarding this. I am sure many science minded Muslims living in the common era are having their Abu Bakr moment. I reference the famous miraaj incident where Abu Bakr was told about the miraaj and was astounded... he could not fathom it but subsequently was resolute when he heard it from other sahaba. He said: "If my friend (meaning Muhammad (S)) said it happened... then it did." So we too grow up in a society that has certain mores that do not reconcile with the Quranic edicts. Some of these ideologies, for example, the solar calender, makes sense to us and was all we knew. However, the Quranic text declares: "God has ordained these 12 months" in regard to the lunar calender on which all Islamic holy rites are based. Yet we accept it because we accept the book as divine revelation.

As an example, this fast and loose reinterpretation also applies regarding the criticisms some had of Abdullah Yusuf Ali's view on "accepting" versus
"paying" interest on loans. That is men criticizing a man.

You have to separate this absurd idea that every strict interpretationalist that seeks to remain closer to the undiluted word of the Eternal God wants to control you or cares what Aisha Wadud does. For all I care, she can lead the grand prayer on Eid in Mecca. However, I refuse to simply dismiss all the evidence and say: Yep, because you find it makes your life easier and is more palatable, I will modify Islamic theology.

Islam was perfected by God and the Quran was sent as a guarantee that God's eternal edicts would remain standing (after all God says "we made it easy to remember and we shall gaurd it.") Why gaurd something so vehemently with hafiz ul Qurans for generations since Ubay ibn Kaab and Abdullah ibn Masud only to allow for such flexibility in it that you accomplish what God warns about in 3:78:


There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues: (As they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, "That is from Allah," but it is not from Allah (3:78)

They change words from their context and forget a part of that whereof they were admonished (5:13)

And remember Allah took a Covenant from the People of the Book, to make it known and clear to mankind, and not to hide it; but they threw it away behind their backs, and purchased with it some miserable gain! And vile was the bargain they made! (3:187)

But the transgressors changed the word from that which had been given them (2:59)

And unto thee (Muslims) have We revealed the Scripture (the Qur'an) with the truth, confirming whatever Scripture was before it, and a watcher over it. So judge between them by that which Allah hath revealed. (5:48)

Narrated 'Ubaidullah bin 'Abdullah: 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas said, "O the group of Muslims! How can you ask the people of the Scriptures about anything while your Book which Allah has revealed to your Prophet contains the most recent news from Allah and is pure and not distorted? Allah has told you that the people of the Scriptures have changed some of Allah's Books and distorted it and wrote something with their own hands and said, 'This is from Allah, so as to have a minor gain for it. Won't the knowledge that has come to you stop you from asking them? No, by Allah, we have never seen a man from them asking you about that (the Book Al-Qur'an ) which has been revealed to you.

[Roshina]

Oh. Abeille, you tell people they're "confused" when they don't agree with you. That's unfortunate. I can't imagine what all you must be missing out on for thinking that way.

Allow me to make a suggestion (this is for everyone, foremost for myself), which I'll do my praising a great teacher of mine.

I have this teacher who just NEVER reads anyone's comments or thoughts or questions as stupid or confused. She'll ask them to repeat it first; then she'll ask them to elaborate on it; then she'll simply tell them she doesn't understand what they are saying and she apologizes. So she'll tell them what she understands it as. She even thinks that they might have something valuable to contribute to class discussions.

That requires a lot of patience and gut. Most people aren't like that. Most of us are too impatient and too arrogant to think that someone else might be wrong or might not be as confused as we'd like them to be.

Now, me, I can't respect someone who's unable to see things from a different perspective. To me, they are the lowest of the world's creatures who have no value whatsoever. I realize this may sound arrogant to some, but that's fine with me. How can someone live their life and think there's only ONE way of seeing everything? Isn't that smothering? If they choose to live this way, awesome -- but they have no right to tell others that's exactly how everyone else should be, too. That's when it gets repulsive.