8 ms·

> Muslim (fundamentalist) society looking down on appliances that do 'womens work'. That's extremely condescending, not to mention plain wrong.

berkes 5y ago
I'm not trying to start an Off-topic religious debate here. Sorry for coming over condescending. If you read "all Muslims" you read far too much in it: the fundamentialist part is important. Nor did I say, nor imply that this goes for anyone who identifies as Muslim. If you read that: I'm truly sorry. I know from experience that the statement holds true for several Christian fundamentalists and Jewish fundamentalist (not all!)communities. I have only read (but not from experience) about how women (especially those of other sects) were treated in the Chalifate from ISIS and how their "work" was deemed slave-worthy.
- gher-shyu3i 5y ago
  > the fundamentialist part is important It's still outright wrong. Your experience with Christian and Jewish fundamentalists does not apply to Muslims. Please stop with spreading incorrect information about Muslims. ISIS is a fringe group whom we don't give any semblance of credence to, and even they would not look down at washing machines "because it's a woman's job". This is plain ridiculous. The secular West continues to group all religions together and marks any religious person as some sort of sheep. Also, let's stop with this "identifies as" business. A person is either a Muslim or a non-Muslim. A person who does not believe in God cannot "identify as" a Muslim for example. That being said, the religion is open to anyone who wants to accept it.
  - Ntrails 5y ago
    > A person is either a Muslim or a non-Muslim. As long as you accept it is their right to define that, and not you! One might use "identifies as" to avoid the classic response of "ah but x was not really a y because z". Someone who believes themselves to be a Muslim simply is. You can call them a bad Muslim, ignorant, misinformed, misguided etc. But they are what they believe themselves to be. (I am entirely sympathetic to your original frustration. GP was applying very odd assumptions)
    - gher-shyu3i 5y ago
      > As long as you accept it is their right to define that, and not you! That's not how Islam works. That's how it was able to survive against the torrent of corruption that affected Christianity and Judaism. The Quran and Hadiths are preserved so that we're easily able to consult them to determine who is and isn't a Muslim. Note that this isn't gate keeping, Islam is wide open for anyone to accept. However, the tenants are strict enough to survive the passage of time. > You can call them a bad Muslim, ignorant, misinformed, misguided etc. But they are what they believe themselves to be. This already happens. I'm talking about the extremes that the secular West has adopted, whereby people can inherit their parents religion, even if they don't believe in it.
      - Ntrails 5y ago
        > The Quran and Hadiths are preserved so that we're easily able to consult them to determine who is and isn't a Muslim. And yet those poor benighted souls believe they follow those very same texts that you say would reject them. How is that possible? Because their religious leaders interpret the texts differently, emphasise different aspects. For a Christian equivalent. The Catholic church can excommunicate someone. They will no longer be Catholic but there is no power that can stop a person who believes themselves to be Christian from being termed that. "Normal" Christians might prefer not to be associated with various people, can call sects Extremist or Fundamentalist etc. We simply cannot claim they are Not Christians.
        gher-shyu3i 5y ago
        Not everything is up for interpretation in Islam. For example, homosexuality is prohibited, and no amount of "interpretation" is going to change that. Same goes with drinking wine or intoxicants. There is no valid interpretation of Islam that allows such behaviors. You'd be surprised to find that said "religious leaders" you're referring to don't know the basics of exegesis. This applies to ISIS for example. I invite you to read the many Hadiths about Khawarij, those immediately reject your premise that all interpretations are equally valid. They're not.

berkes 5y ago

I'm not trying to start an Off-topic religious debate here. Sorry for coming over condescending. If you read "all Muslims" you read far too much in it: the fundamentialist part is important. Nor did I say, nor imply that this goes for anyone who identifies as Muslim. If you read that: I'm truly sorry. I know from experience that the statement holds true for several Christian fundamentalists and Jewish fundamentalist (not all!)communities. I have only read (but not from experience) about how women (especially those of other sects) were treated in the Chalifate from ISIS and how their "work" was deemed slave-worthy.

gher-shyu3i 5y ago
> the fundamentialist part is important It's still outright wrong. Your experience with Christian and Jewish fundamentalists does not apply to Muslims. Please stop with spreading incorrect information about Muslims. ISIS is a fringe group whom we don't give any semblance of credence to, and even they would not look down at washing machines "because it's a woman's job". This is plain ridiculous. The secular West continues to group all religions together and marks any religious person as some sort of sheep. Also, let's stop with this "identifies as" business. A person is either a Muslim or a non-Muslim. A person who does not believe in God cannot "identify as" a Muslim for example. That being said, the religion is open to anyone who wants to accept it.
- Ntrails 5y ago
  > A person is either a Muslim or a non-Muslim. As long as you accept it is their right to define that, and not you! One might use "identifies as" to avoid the classic response of "ah but x was not really a y because z". Someone who believes themselves to be a Muslim simply is. You can call them a bad Muslim, ignorant, misinformed, misguided etc. But they are what they believe themselves to be. (I am entirely sympathetic to your original frustration. GP was applying very odd assumptions)
  - gher-shyu3i 5y ago
    > As long as you accept it is their right to define that, and not you! That's not how Islam works. That's how it was able to survive against the torrent of corruption that affected Christianity and Judaism. The Quran and Hadiths are preserved so that we're easily able to consult them to determine who is and isn't a Muslim. Note that this isn't gate keeping, Islam is wide open for anyone to accept. However, the tenants are strict enough to survive the passage of time. > You can call them a bad Muslim, ignorant, misinformed, misguided etc. But they are what they believe themselves to be. This already happens. I'm talking about the extremes that the secular West has adopted, whereby people can inherit their parents religion, even if they don't believe in it.
    - Ntrails 5y ago
      > The Quran and Hadiths are preserved so that we're easily able to consult them to determine who is and isn't a Muslim. And yet those poor benighted souls believe they follow those very same texts that you say would reject them. How is that possible? Because their religious leaders interpret the texts differently, emphasise different aspects. For a Christian equivalent. The Catholic church can excommunicate someone. They will no longer be Catholic but there is no power that can stop a person who believes themselves to be Christian from being termed that. "Normal" Christians might prefer not to be associated with various people, can call sects Extremist or Fundamentalist etc. We simply cannot claim they are Not Christians.
      - gher-shyu3i 5y ago
        Not everything is up for interpretation in Islam. For example, homosexuality is prohibited, and no amount of "interpretation" is going to change that. Same goes with drinking wine or intoxicants. There is no valid interpretation of Islam that allows such behaviors. You'd be surprised to find that said "religious leaders" you're referring to don't know the basics of exegesis. This applies to ISIS for example. I invite you to read the many Hadiths about Khawarij, those immediately reject your premise that all interpretations are equally valid. They're not.