Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ioric Kittencuddler]

But I also agree with Servant Corps, that the U.N. is toothless, busy, and has no authority to go into other nations and tell them how to run their business, unless it breaks out into actual war.  Sometimes their "everybody gets a trophy" attitude creates worrying, hilarious situations like this, which is just part-and-parcel to having an international appeals body.

Just wanna respond to this; forcing Iran to conform to our moral ideals is one thing, and I wouldn't actually endorse that, even if I happen to be of the opinion that their ideals aren't acceptable (such as you do). I'd much rather debate the whole thing with them and attempt to convince them that our viewpoint is correct, but ultimately the decision as to which policy to follow rests with them. Appointing Iran to a council responsible for progressing TOWARD those ideals is another thing entirely. Because Iran's decisions in the UN aren't just going to affect Iran. Honestly, that's the problem I see here.

EDIT: Wanna clarify, I pretty much agree with everything else you posted, which is why I didn't quote the rest of it.

I don't really see a theocracy responding well to reason.

[Coidzure Dreams]

I'm just frustrated over the burqa issue.

Sure, fine, it's an expression of male dominance, yadda yadda yadda, but for some Muslim women it's an integral part of their religion. For them, immodesty is baring skin. It frustrates me that people compare burqa-wearing to the really old standby of Imperial China, foot-binding. Foot-binding is definitely harmful, Burqas aren't.

That's like saying kidnapping is ok as long as one makes sure that the victims get stockholm syndrome.

[Neruz]

I see the old culture incompatibility issues are still going strong.

[Wimdit]

I'm just frustrated over the burqa issue.

Sure, fine, it's an expression of male dominance, yadda yadda yadda, but for some Muslim women it's an integral part of their religion. For them, immodesty is baring skin. It frustrates me that people compare burqa-wearing to the really old standby of Imperial China, foot-binding. Foot-binding is definitely harmful, Burqas aren't.

That's like saying kidnapping is ok as long as one makes sure that the victims get stockholm syndrome.

Heh. Well, to be fair, if you have a reliable method of inducing Stockholm Syndrome, then is it wrong to kidnap someone? Assuming people other than the victim are mostly unaffected, of course. If it's not, then you can say that converting women to Islam so that they'll wear burqas is acceptable.

Wait, if you apply the analogy literally, then that line of reasoning essentially says that forcibly converting someone to Islam - brainwashing them, to put it another way - is acceptable. Hm. Is it?

Probably not. Whatever, the analogy isn't perfect, and if you tell them Allah is really cool with the intention of getting them to wear burqas and without using excessive force, that's probably okay. Probably.

[Grakelin]

I'm just frustrated over the burqa issue.

Sure, fine, it's an expression of male dominance, yadda yadda yadda, but for some Muslim women it's an integral part of their religion. For them, immodesty is baring skin. It frustrates me that people compare burqa-wearing to the really old standby of Imperial China, foot-binding. Foot-binding is definitely harmful, Burqas aren't.

That's like saying kidnapping is ok as long as one makes sure that the victims get stockholm syndrome.

That's like saying shooting somebody is okay as long as you thought they had kidnapped their wife, and she just had Stockholm Syndrome.

[Vester]

I'm just frustrated over the burqa issue.

Sure, fine, it's an expression of male dominance, yadda yadda yadda, but for some Muslim women it's an integral part of their religion. For them, immodesty is baring skin. It frustrates me that people compare burqa-wearing to the really old standby of Imperial China, foot-binding. Foot-binding is definitely harmful, Burqas aren't.

That's like saying kidnapping is ok as long as one makes sure that the victims get stockholm syndrome.

Heh. Well, to be fair, if you have a reliable method of inducing Stockholm Syndrome, then is it wrong to kidnap someone? Assuming people other than the victim are mostly unaffected, of course. If it's not, then you can say that converting women to Islam so that they'll wear burqas is acceptable.

Wait, if you apply the analogy literally, then that line of reasoning essentially says that forcibly converting someone to Islam - brainwashing them, to put it another way - is acceptable. Hm. Is it?

Probably not. Whatever, the analogy isn't perfect, and if you tell them Allah is really cool with the intention of getting them to wear burqas and without using excessive force, that's probably okay. Probably.

Look, it's more like, why do you wear shirts or a bra? Well, because it's socially required, and because there are reasons these things were invented.

The burqa is the same. The Taliban does much worse things, like the whole "no-education-for-you" thing or the "stoning women to death" thing. These things are so much worse than burqas, which serve other functions, that fixating on how Muslim women dress is ridiculous and harmful.

[zchris13]

Amen.  I have issues with the deprivation of basic human rights, like education, not with them asking their women to wear clothes so that their skin stays nice and protected from the sun.

[bjlong]

The only problem I have with burqas is that they completely foil my "That's (insert person here)!" devices. Every woman who wears them becomes "Burqa Lady." Even people I've known for ~4 years become completely indistinguishable to me at a distance.

But, as for moral outrage? I guess I should be outraged that I don't get to see someones neck and elbows? Their ankles? Come on, that's weak.

[Firehound]

...The headscarves aren't really the issue.  It's more the things like stoning to death for adultery that get me.  And sexism is just written all over their laws...

Article 74 – Adultery, when punishable by either flogging or stoning, can be proven by the testimony of either four just men, or three just men and two just women.

I mean... you can say that morality is relative all you like, but I don't think that'll convince a woman who's about to be stoned.

Or a man...
Remind me never to cheat on someone inside a muslim country.

My personal stance is that iran was bothering the big boys about how they never let Iran do anything important. so Iran got thrown on the next committee to shut it up.

[Grakelin]

Or a man...
Remind me never to cheat on someone inside a muslim country.

I'll do so if you're ever in this situation.

[RedKing]

One thing that's important to remember here is that by design, the United Nations is set up so that national sovereignty almost always trumps every other concern. You can thank the Cold War for that. Getting the US and the USSR to agree to the same rules meant making the rules so weak that neither could significantly use the UN as part of their foreign policy agenda. It's also the same reason that non-Security Council resolutions are non-binding. The Big Five basically have veto power to reject the combined will of the rest of the planet if they so choose.

As to the burqa situation, one of the companies I used to work hired a large group of Nigerian immigrants who were orthodox Sunnis. I walked past as their were doing their initial training session one day, and did an involuntary double-take. My first thought was, "Whoa...when did we hire ninjas?"
The two women that I got to know, Mumiyah and Khadija, were both quite intelligent and well-educated (for one, they spoke damn near perfect English), so this notion of "They're too brainwashed/ignorant to know they're being oppressed" is utter bullshit. That might be true in some cases in certain parts of the world, but to make a blanket generalization and ban based off that is just idiotic.