The Outsider Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 The Burqa thing is a religious issue, female foeticide isnt. Malaria kills many more people than AIDS, but do we stop talking about AIDS? If you are giving an example on female discrimination, which would you give - Burqa or the systematic elimination of females from the society? Its due to the patriarchal structure of the society in south asia. pakistan's sex ration is similar to Indias, so its not a religious issue. So, patriarchal society > Islam? Because your numbers for Pakistan imply that a lot of people seem to override Islam in Pakistan when it comes to killing females. Everything is in percentages. How does factoring in 50 million change the percentage. And you can look up the Sachar committee report, it has such statistics, or the census 2001. Errr..because that 50 million would largely belong to Hindus. If the discussion is about Indian Muslims then what I said is irrelevant, but if the discussion is on Islam then it is relevant. The discussion is about Indian Muslims.
seedhi Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 Again, completely irrelevant. Looks like you have nothing to say and are just throwing random red herrings around. Let me restate - it doesn't matter which ideology is responsible for the skewed sex ratio : 1. As a social problem it's downright stupid to bring oppression of women through Burqas into the frame when such a huge discrimination problem exists through other means.I dont understand this. There are any number of issues facing Indian muslim women: burqa, divorce law, inheritance, alimony, illiteracy, work participation. Each one of these might be seem "trivial" according to you in front of female foeticide. So, one should not tackle these problems at all? Note that at least in the case of personal laws and burqa religion is deeply involved in maintaining the current situation. Also, in the late 80s and 90s the Indian govt ran ads on Doordarshan which raised awareness about the practise of ghungat in Hindu society. But of course burqa wasnt mentioned. 2. Your example of Pakistan should imply according to your reasoning, that Pakistanis are not religious at all because the Quran prohibits female infanticide.This one takes the cake. A lot of religious books forbid murder - but murder takes place, therefore no one is religious? Not everyone commits female foeticide and not everyone commits a murder. 3. This only shows that any ideology followed to the extreme results in a lot of problems.Obviously, and one way that an ideology is followed to extreme is if the ideology is extremely dogmatic and obtuse to any other except a very literal interpretation. Then discuss discrimination - why are you bringing irrelevant things like abortion rates in the West into the discussion?You were suggesting that sex selective abortion implies condoning the killing of women. It does not, it implies discrimination. Not sure how many times I have to state it to get through - if you don't want to take it as a religious matter, don't. It does not change the fact that it is much much bigger issue than Burqa clad women.Fine, that is your viewpoint, but that does not preclude others from discussing the religious angle in the practise and imposition of burqa.
The Outsider Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 I dont understand this. There are any number of issues facing Indian muslim women: burqa, divorce law, inheritance, alimony, illiteracy, work participation. Each one of these might be seem "trivial" according to you in front of female foeticide. So, one should not tackle these problems at all? Note that at least in the case of personal laws and burqa religion is deeply involved in maintaining the current situation. Also, in the late 80s and 90s the Indian govt ran ads on Doordarshan which raised awareness about the practise of ghungat in Hindu society. But of course burqa wasnt mentioned. What about the issues facing Hindu women - dowry, systematic elimination from the society, illiteracy? I have never said not to tackle these problems. But if you are going to give the Burqa as the foremost example of women oppression in a country where far bigger oppressive practices are present against women, it is plain dumb. This one takes the cake. A lot of religious books forbid murder - but murder takes place, therefore no one is religious? Not everyone commits female foeticide and not everyone commits a murder. I am talking about the ones who do - are they religious or not? Obviously, and one way that an ideology is followed to extreme is if the ideology is extremely dogmatic and obtuse to any other except a very literal interpretation. So, which literal interpretation and of what dogma has resulted in 50 million missing women in India? You were suggesting that sex selective abortion implies condoning the killing of women. It does not, it implies discrimination. No, I wasn't - I've mentioned numerous times that female infanticide is not the only reason for the 50 million missing women. Fine, that is your viewpoint, but that does not preclude others from discussing the religious angle in the practise and imposition of burqa. No, it doesn't. But marking the practise of the Burqa as an example of women oppression in India, when many more grave issues result in the oppression is nothing but propaganda.
seedhi Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 If you are giving an example on female discrimination' date=' which would you give - Burqa or the systematic elimination of females from the society?[/quote']If I were to give an example of female discrimination based on religion, I would give the example of burqa, talaq and other components of sharia law. So, patriarchal society > Islam? Because your numbers for Pakistan imply that a lot of people seem to override Islam in Pakistan when it comes to killing females.A lot in absolute numbers, but the percentage of female foeticide is still probably around 5-6% at most in India or pakistan. Errr..because that 50 million would largely belong to Hindus.I cannot see how such an adjustment can be made, but go ahead if you want to - census and Sachar report have some figures in them.
seedhi Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 What about the issues facing Hindu women - dowry' date=' systematic elimination from the society, illiteracy? [/quote']Absolutely, these issues should be tackled - and I have seen many initiatives by the government - campaigns have been taken out against sati, dowry, female foeticide, illiteracy. Laws have been formulated against sati, dowry and female foeticide. The dowry law is one of the few laws in India where the accused is presumed guilty until proven innocent. I ask you - how many campaigns have been started by the government against misuse of talaq, burqa. A Supreme Court decision on alimony to muslim women was overturned by a Constitutional Amendment under pressure from the mullahs. Now the main reason for the discrepancy in the attitude of the government is the religious angle. Therefore it is absolutely justified to discuss the religious framework that shields the status quo. I have never said not to tackle these problems. But if you are going to give the Burqa as the foremost example of women oppression in a country where far bigger oppressive practices are present against women, it is plain dumb.I have not given the burqa as a foremost example of female discrimination in any comparative sense. But there is a qualitative aspect to it as it is sanctioned by a religion and therefore that aspect is open to being discussed without bringing other issues into it. I am talking about the ones who do - are they religious or not?They might be, there are any number of other prescriptions in the Koran and sunnah that they might follow. So, which literal interpretation and of what dogma has resulted in 50 million missing women in India?I said that one way for extremism was adherence to a dogmatic ideology. Not the only way. The cause for female foeticide is in the social factors and the patriarchal system. No, it doesn't. But marking the practise of the Burqa as an example of women oppression in India, when many more grave issues result in the oppression is nothing but propaganda.Gandhi, Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Swami Dayanand and a host of social reformers who spoke against the purdah system were all propagandists? The Indian government campaign against the veil amongst Hindus was propaganda?
Mariyam Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 I'm going to do a BossBhai here and give you a taste of your own medicine. That is subject the reader to an unusually long, repetitive and boring rant. Would you mind explaining the numerous acts of mass violence' date=' cessations, ethnic cleansing all on religious grounds enacted by members of these guys ? . My simple mind tells me that these things cant happen without significant support. And support cannot happen if a community is largely comprised of "zindagi ke bhoj ka maara" types. If you do believe otherwise I respectfully disagree with you and perhaps there is no point continuing this discussion as our sense of reality is quite different. [/quote'] I am not sure what you are insinuating here? Your constant claim in each post is that you say things bluntly. Over here you couldn't be more vague. Are you suggesting that the entire Muslim community or majority of it is involved in supporting elements that attack other communities? If thats what you are saying, then you need a reality check ASAP. On the question of massacres in the past using Islam as an excuse or a reason are wrong. I will not even attempt to deny or justify those. They are a shameful part of our history. However, that has nothing to do with me. I didn't commit those massacres. I don't condone such action. Why the hell are you asking me? If you think punishing someone today for what Allauddin Khilji did 800 years ago is the way forward, then you have a warped sense of history and justice. Why should I explain those historical tragedies? Do Spanish kids today have to explain why their ancestors killed the Aztecs? Do American kids have to be answer why their ancestors killed the Red Indians? What you are doing in effect is that you are compartmentalizing people into singular identities. This person is a Muslim, that one is a Hindu, there is pseudo secular, there is a communist etc. That is never the case. In the world today, almost everyone has multiple identities. A person can be a Muslim and an Indian, a Hindu and a secularist, a lover of democracy and a revolutionary, a believer in equality and a believer in religion, a chocolate lover and an ice cream lover, A Rafi fan and a Kishore fan, A Tendulkar fan and a bigot etc all at the same time. The mistake you make is when you categorize a whole lot of people under just one header thinking that it trumps everything else. That is not the case. The sooner you understand that, the better it is. I'm an Indian who is Muslim, loves chocolates and ice creams and Rafi and Kishore. All of these definitions describe me. Together. There is no way you can box me up into just one of the above identities. BTW this menace is not restricted to India. It happens in pretty much every country that has significant Muslim population. Rich or poor. So I've become a menace now, from a green bozo? Lol. I want you to look me in the eye and say that. In my short tenure on this planet, I have never ever argued over religion. With anyone. Congrats. You bring out the worst in me. Anyways, what is your solution to this 'menace' that India and the world faces? Let us all hear. I've asked you before and I'll ask you again, how do you think should a Muslim respond to your posts? As I said it doesn't give me any joy to tell all this but Iam one of those that will bluntly state the facts as they are without fear , favour or prejudice. Trust me I would want Janism to be the universal religion and Iam hardly a Jain. The next choice would be Buddhism and Iam not that either. What makes you think that you alone have the right to question people and loudly proclaim that you are stating 'facts'? What you state is nothing but prejudiced opinion. And HOW THE HELL DOES WRITING PROVOCATIVE STATEMENTS ALL DAY LONG ON A CRICKET FORUM HELP THE CAUSE OF THE PEOPLE YOU CLAIM TO REPRESENT? Start a party of your own, for the welfare of the people on whose behalf you claim to 'fight'. Do something. Oh BTW, your views on Burqa usage in India are plain wrong, ignorant and factually incorrect. What percentage of Indian Muslim women cover themselves with a Burqa? According to you, why is a woman in Burqa considered to be oppressed while say a woman wearing a ghoonghat is not? You could have talked about the Shah Bano episode, which only harmed the Muslim community. That is a symbol of radicalization and oppression of women, and not the Burqa. Damn I didn't know. Is she like hawt(er) in those movies ? :woot: Appreciate the fact, that inspite of you constantly labelling all muslims as this and that, I respond with humour. That Zeenat Aman thing was funny. Lets see you do any better. :P. I don't think any one in their right mind would have ever laughed/smiled reading your posts. My guess is that they would run for an aspirin.Don't know about you, but most of us come here to share a few laughs, talk cricket and make friends if possible. Not to enter into a mudslinging competition with others.
seedhi Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 You could have talked about the Shah Bano ruling' date=' which IMO was a blatantly stupid ruling harming the Muslim community. That is a symbol of radicalization and oppression of women, and not the Burqa.[/quote']So a ruling that grants alimony to a divorced muslim women is a symbol of oppression of women. I guess in your bizarro world the subsequent amendment to the law made by Rajiv Gandhi to placate the mullahs was a step heralding the liberation of divorced muslim women from any alimony from her ex-husband.
Mariyam Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 So a ruling that grants alimony to a divorced muslim women is a symbol of oppression of women. I guess in your bizarro world the subsequent amendment to the law made by Rajiv Gandhi to placate the mullahs was a step heralding the liberation of divorced muslim women from any alimony from her ex-husband. I meant the amendment ( which de jure trumped the initial ruling) made by the Rajiv Gandhi government as a symbol of oppression. I thought that was understood. Apparently wasn't. Maybe I overestimate the folks here. :P Will edit my previous post.
EnterTheVoid Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 Mandirs also start blaring their aartis at 5 in the morning all across India. :hysterical: LOL. What bullshit. My grandparents live a stones throw from two different temples. When I stayed with them for 2 months, no temple started "blasting aartis at 5:00 AM in the morning", definitely NOT over a loud speaker.
seedhi Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 I meant the amendment ( which de jure trumped the initial ruling) made by the Rajiv Gandhi government as a symbol of oppression. I thought that was understood. Apparently wasn't. Maybe I overestimate the folks here. :P Will edit my previous post. This is what your post (#200) reads after editing. You could have talked about the Shah Bano episode,which IMO was a blatantly stupid ruling harming the Muslim community. That is a symbol of radicalization and oppression of women, and not the Burqa.You sure have overestimated something here, and its not the folks on this board ..
punjabi_khota Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 :hysterical: LOL. What bullshit. My grandparents live a stones throw from two different temples. When I stayed with them for 2 months, no temple started "blasting aartis at 5:00 AM in the morning" Well the volume of aartis are no match for the death metal crap that you have on all day all night :finger: ...maybe thats the reason you didn't hear any of the aartis..
EnterTheVoid Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 Aartis being blasted at 5:00 AM ... what a ****ing joke :hysterical: Even you know that is complete bullshit.
Mariyam Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 This is what your post (#200) reads after editing. You sure have overestimated something here, and its not the folks on this board .. Yes. Mistake accepted and corrected. I tend to lose concentration when called a green bozo, lizard, desert bandit, menace to the society and what not. It becomes that much more difficult to stay composed and focused. Either-ways, you knew all along what I meant.
seedhi Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 Yes. Mistake accepted and corrected. I tend to lose concentration when called a green bozo' date= lizard, desert bandit, menace to the society and what not. It becomes that much more difficult to stay composed and focused. Either-ways, you knew all along what I meant.Well, nobody is forcing you to read this thread or browse through this section of the forum, or indeed the form itself. Feel free to utilize your energies in other activities, such as feeding Rs18 Kit-Kats to children, about which you are evidently passionate enough to share with us the details so vividly.
Mariyam Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 Well' date=' nobody is forcing you to read this thread or browse through this section of the forum, or indeed the [b']form itself. My turn to nit pick. :P You should revisit the 'form' guidelines. Here you go. http://www.indiancricketfans.com/announcement.php?f=26&a=18 Here is the relevant paragraph: Discussion on sensitive topics (such as religion) should be carried out in a mature and respectable way. Please be advised that a continual trend of any member to unnecessarily abuse, attack or make derogatory/inflammatory remarks and/or generalizations towards any religion, community or race will not be permitted. Do treat other members of this forum with courtesy and respect, and engage in discussions in a constructive manner. Are you implying that phrases like green bozo, menace to the society, desert bandits etc are necessary to carry out a mature discussion on a sensitive topic? If yes, then take up the issue with the people who run the 'form'. These rules aren't mine. If thats not what you imply, accept that I have a right to be offended when I read what I've stated above. Feel free to utilize your energies in other activities, such as feeding Rs18 Kit-Kats to children, about which you are evidently passionate enough to share with us the details so vividly. Actually, thats good advice. They cost more now. Not Rs 18 anymore.
Desi Cartman Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 Aartis being blasted at 5:00 AM ... what a ****ing joke :hysterical: Even you know that is complete bullshit. Its not a joke , its a reality. It can be daily or during festive season and it doesnt happen in all temples . Jagrans are also pretty common in Narth India if u dont believe me then u should watch Hyderabad blues :P
Sachin=GOD Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 Its not a joke ' date= its a reality. It can be daily or during festive season and it doesnt happen in all temples . Jagrans are also pretty common in Narth India if u dont believe me then u should watch Hyderabad blues :P ++++
punjabi_khota Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 Aartis being blasted at 5:00 AM ... what a ****ing joke :hysterical: Even you know that is complete bullshit. You have barely lived in India, wtf do you think you know ? :hahaha:
vaibhav_delhi Posted February 2, 2011 Posted February 2, 2011 You have barely lived in India' date=' wtf do you think you know ? :hahaha:[/quote'] In my experience, tht doesnt happen in southern india. so he has no clue...
Recommended Posts