5 ms·

> your commentary is limited to "well shucks maybe imprisoning women for driving is just their twist on not allowing people to go to church in bikinis!" Again,

> your commentary is limited to "well shucks maybe imprisoning women for driving is just their twist on not allowing people to go to church in bikinis!" Again, I didn't say that, you did. Perhaps quote something I did say. Regarding your statement, I'll repeat what I said above: It's a pretty inflammatory statement, so could you be specific about who does that and how often?

ethanbond 10y ago
Do you live under a rock? How about Iran (the country in question) arresting women for showing hair (the problem in question) on Instagram. The problem with trying to quote you directly is that you actually aren't saying anything of substance. You're simply being an apologist who apparently can't muster up the courage to even take a stance on way or the other. You're just offering some good old PR hedging for an oppressive regime and trying to neuter the discussion with vague allusions to moral relativism. I'll ask again, what exactly are you trying to say? As it stands now, you're bogging down an important conversation that needs to happen with half-baked apologism. https://www.google.com/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iranian-women-arrested-for-posting-vulgar-photos-on-instagram-without-wearing-headscarves-a7033236.html%3famp?client=safari https://www.google.com/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...
- DanBC 10y ago
  The claim was not "women are arrested for not wearing the hijab" (and everyone agrees that it's wrong to arrest people for clothing). The claim was "women are arrested, beaten, raped, murdered for not wearing the hijab". Is that true?
  - ethanbond 10y ago
    Uh, yes. http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/isis-stones-five-women-death-not-wearing-veil-says-mamouzini/ http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/isis-stones-five-women-dea... This isn't in Iran, but doesn't hackuser's lame moral relativism argument also apply to ISIS? Isn't stoning women to death for not wearing the hijab simply part of their moral code? After all, the US doesn't allow women to show their breasts in public. Edit: If your issue is specifically that someone implied that specifically rape/murder happens to women specifically in Iran specifically for wearing a hijab, here's a glimpse at what it means to be arrested in Iran: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world-jan-june11-iranianwomen_06-10/ http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world-jan-june11-iranianwomen... You can see that women get arrested for not wearing the hijab here: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iranian-women-arrested-for-posting-vulgar-photos-on-instagram-without-wearing-headscarves-a7033236.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iranian-... So no, for some reason I can't seem to find an official press release from Khomeini that a specific woman was raped/murdered for not wearing a hijab. I can only point to mountains of evidence of systematic oppression and abuse, which undoubtedly includes arrest/rape/murder, and which undoubtedly includes the violation of simply not wearing a hijab.
  - vacri 10y ago
    When correcting someone for misquoting, you should take care to avoid misquoting yourself. Nursie didn't mention murder, and didn't mention the hijab or anything islamic in particular - though it was clearly about islam in context, the comment itself was culture-free, and was about moral relativism.
- hackuser 10y ago
  > Do you live under a rock? This and prior insults make me think that talking to you really isn't valuable or worth more time. Enjoy your day.
  - ethanbond 10y ago
    Sure, I hope you enjoy your day as well. I would like to say that if your point is simply that the hijab is an article of clothing, then yes, you're right, and no one here disagrees with you. The question here is about the legal code which requires that women wear said article of clothing. The western war against the hijab is not against cloth, it is against this legal and cultural structure. This should actually be self evident in your own posts: the west has been waging an internal war against abuse of women for decades, yet at no point was this war centered around the hijab. Obviously the war is not, never has been, and never will be about the hijab. It has always centered around the structural problem of abuse of women. However, speaking in vague references like your own about the structural problem has proven to be unproductive. The way you eliminate structural abuse is by eliminating specific instances of abuse. One after the other after the other. For this reason, the war against abuse is endless, both in the west and abroad, as mentioned in my own comment. There are few people who would declare that this war is won anywhere. Yet everyone can agree that tackling the specific problem of suffrage was a massive blow against the structural problem of abuse. The specific problem of abortion was a massive blow against the structural problem of abuse. The specific problem of the hijab will be a massive blow against the structural problem of abuse. Reverting the discussion back to a philosophical one is not actually helpful, and many people find it insulting when it's done in response to a person showing enormous courage in tackling a real, practical problem. I hope that explains the knee jerk reactions you've received here.

ethanbond 10y ago

Do you live under a rock? How about Iran (the country in question) arresting women for showing hair (the problem in question) on Instagram. The problem with trying to quote you directly is that you actually aren't saying anything of substance. You're simply being an apologist who apparently can't muster up the courage to even take a stance on way or the other. You're just offering some good old PR hedging for an oppressive regime and trying to neuter the discussion with vague allusions to moral relativism. I'll ask again, what exactly are you trying to say? As it stands now, you're bogging down an important conversation that needs to happen with half-baked apologism. https://www.google.com/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iranian-women-arrested-for-posting-vulgar-photos-on-instagram-without-wearing-headscarves-a7033236.html%3famp?client=safari https://www.google.com/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...

DanBC 10y ago
The claim was not "women are arrested for not wearing the hijab" (and everyone agrees that it's wrong to arrest people for clothing). The claim was "women are arrested, beaten, raped, murdered for not wearing the hijab". Is that true?
- ethanbond 10y ago
  Uh, yes. http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/isis-stones-five-women-death-not-wearing-veil-says-mamouzini/ http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/isis-stones-five-women-dea... This isn't in Iran, but doesn't hackuser's lame moral relativism argument also apply to ISIS? Isn't stoning women to death for not wearing the hijab simply part of their moral code? After all, the US doesn't allow women to show their breasts in public. Edit: If your issue is specifically that someone implied that specifically rape/murder happens to women specifically in Iran specifically for wearing a hijab, here's a glimpse at what it means to be arrested in Iran: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world-jan-june11-iranianwomen_06-10/ http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world-jan-june11-iranianwomen... You can see that women get arrested for not wearing the hijab here: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iranian-women-arrested-for-posting-vulgar-photos-on-instagram-without-wearing-headscarves-a7033236.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iranian-... So no, for some reason I can't seem to find an official press release from Khomeini that a specific woman was raped/murdered for not wearing a hijab. I can only point to mountains of evidence of systematic oppression and abuse, which undoubtedly includes arrest/rape/murder, and which undoubtedly includes the violation of simply not wearing a hijab.
- vacri 10y ago
  When correcting someone for misquoting, you should take care to avoid misquoting yourself. Nursie didn't mention murder, and didn't mention the hijab or anything islamic in particular - though it was clearly about islam in context, the comment itself was culture-free, and was about moral relativism.
hackuser 10y ago
> Do you live under a rock? This and prior insults make me think that talking to you really isn't valuable or worth more time. Enjoy your day.
- ethanbond 10y ago
  Sure, I hope you enjoy your day as well. I would like to say that if your point is simply that the hijab is an article of clothing, then yes, you're right, and no one here disagrees with you. The question here is about the legal code which requires that women wear said article of clothing. The western war against the hijab is not against cloth, it is against this legal and cultural structure. This should actually be self evident in your own posts: the west has been waging an internal war against abuse of women for decades, yet at no point was this war centered around the hijab. Obviously the war is not, never has been, and never will be about the hijab. It has always centered around the structural problem of abuse of women. However, speaking in vague references like your own about the structural problem has proven to be unproductive. The way you eliminate structural abuse is by eliminating specific instances of abuse. One after the other after the other. For this reason, the war against abuse is endless, both in the west and abroad, as mentioned in my own comment. There are few people who would declare that this war is won anywhere. Yet everyone can agree that tackling the specific problem of suffrage was a massive blow against the structural problem of abuse. The specific problem of abortion was a massive blow against the structural problem of abuse. The specific problem of the hijab will be a massive blow against the structural problem of abuse. Reverting the discussion back to a philosophical one is not actually helpful, and many people find it insulting when it's done in response to a person showing enormous courage in tackling a real, practical problem. I hope that explains the knee jerk reactions you've received here.