Coss Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 Do they still hang witches in Salem? Hopefully... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallenda Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 I guess you never read about Anthony Comstock and his role with Victoria Woodhull and other women of that time period? . Even the writings of Ida Craddock can be noteworthy especially her final letters in which she explained why she had to commit suicide. Never Anthony Comstock, no. I'll look into it. I'm sure it's pretty extreme or you wouldn't post it here. (you're citing one guy, I'm talking about whole countries, lots of them) Still, I think we all know that things improved for women in our countries a lot in the past 100 years, and especially since WW2, to the point where it's no problem for them to work as CEO's, live with their boyfriends, have lesbian girlfriends if they like, go out and have one night stands, wear makeup in public, swim in bikinis, go nude sunbathing on public beaches even, the list goes on. I think we all know that even 100 years ago, things were a lot better for women in our countries than they are for women in many (if not most) Muslim countries now. And what's more, they were almost surely as bad or worse in those same Muslim countries 100 years ago than they are now. So the gist of your statement is that, I guess, because women in the US had it bad 100 years ago, now Musim men should get their own shot at abusing their women -- like, it's only fair that they get their turn. But it's continuously been their turn for around 1000 years now. When is their turn finally gonna be over, is more like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 Things have improved for women in most countries but it doesn't deny the fact that women were treated as chattel in most countries. When women for the most part were treated in a harsh way in the distant past was the response about the same as the response is from those who treat women harshly today? When we had deaf ears that was okay but when some have deaf ears today we don't realize their deafness was very similar to ours. Where I live today in Arizona if a woman should sun bath nude behind a 6' high cement block wall and her neighbor gets up on his roof and sees her she can be arrested and might have to register as a sex offender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baa99 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 ... if the wall was made of brick then no crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallenda Posted July 24, 2013 Report Share Posted July 24, 2013 Things have improved for women in most countries but it doesn't deny the fact that women were treated as chattel in most countries. When women for the most part were treated in a harsh way in the distant past was the response about the same as the response is from those who treat women harshly today? When we had deaf ears that was okay but when some have deaf ears today we don't realize their deafness was very similar to ours. Where I live today in Arizona if a woman should sun bath nude behind a 6' high cement block wall and her neighbor gets up on his roof and sees her she can be arrested and might have to register as a sex offender. If it was a Muslim country, likely she would be stoned to death. In California the neighbor and the woman might even have a nice chat abut the Dodgers. You just said, would the reaction have been the same then, 100 years ago, well, 100 years ago women gained the right to vote in the US (1912). So even then, there was enough force for change that change was happening. This kind of thing has been dominant in Muslim culture for at least 1000 years and probably much longer than that. So it's clear that the resistance to change is much stronger there than it was here. Patriarchy in general isn't as strong in western countries as it is in Muslim ones. There's plenty of other good reasons to criticize the US. I was just reading a piece recently on its role in the 60s in helping Suharto come to power and suppress Communism there. Genocide really. Nasty stuff. Evil. But it's just a fact that women in Saudi Arabia, just to name one country, are vastly worse off in terms of human rights than women in the US. The difference is about as great as difference can be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plainsdrifter Posted July 24, 2013 Report Share Posted July 24, 2013 The sorry state of women in most muslim nations can be attributed to tribal influences. Tribal, more than religious intolerances is the cause of suffering for women, children and infidels. The combination of the two magnifies the effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted July 24, 2013 Report Share Posted July 24, 2013 The extremist Hindus can be just as nasty. Fanatics of any kind are the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallenda Posted July 24, 2013 Report Share Posted July 24, 2013 The sorry state of women in most muslim nations can be attributed to tribal influences. Tribal, more than religious intolerances is the cause of suffering for women, children and infidels. The combination of the two magnifies the effect. After I typed my last one, tried to go back and change "cultures" to countries but it was too late to edit. Of course before Islam there was no Muslim culture. I think you're right that the origin is the culture that existed in those places before Islam arose. Of course it is a strong influence on Islam itself though, these ideas are enshrined in the holy texts of the religion. The Big Guy himself married his wife when she was probably 11, and so it's easy for men in contemporary Yemen or elsewhere to want to take underage wives and follow the example of the Big Guy. I honestly don't know enough about its history to know whether a marriage to a girl that young was considered perfectly acceptable in Arabia in those days. But it's patriarchy first, which doesn't exist only in Muslim countries of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted July 24, 2013 Report Share Posted July 24, 2013 One of the legedary 'heroes' of my area married a 12 year old about 150 years ago (1860's). . The first child took the traditional less then 9 months to be born... but the baby was unhealthy and died. . Over the years the women 'pumped out' about a dozen more babies. . In some cultures in the USA..... this still goes on. . This 'pattern' was one of the main issues of the women's movement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallenda Posted July 25, 2013 Report Share Posted July 25, 2013 I dont' think you're going to persuade anyone by keeping the identity of your example a secret (what a strange choice that was), and not actually citing any verifiable specifics. The women keep pumping them out.. which women? What still goes on? Women giving birth? Yes, it does. That's why the population keeps rising. Seems to be a worldwide phenomenon. Specifics http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/06/child-brides/sinclair-photography Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.