To be shocked this isn't getting more coverage?

Is that something you would welcome?

The original post that mentioned sleeping on the floor said the following:
“Do you know anything about how women in traditional Jewish households are treated? All behind their religion eg no touching anyone during periods, sleeping on the floor, having to wear wigs etc.”
So it sounded very much like it was common practice in “traditional Jewish households”, not just something that was potentially happening to some women.

From what I can see the Muslim population is predicted to become the world's largest religion around 2075, but even then that wouldn't make them a majority, with around 70% of the worlds's population adhering to other/no religions.
In the Uk the % of people who identify as Muslim is currently 6%, up from 4.9% in 2011, and could potentially reach 17% by 2050, so a long way off being a majority globaly and domestically.

And just because someone identifies as Muslim doesn't mean the adhere to strictly to their religion. Certainly the Muslims I know wouldn't support sharia and the research I can find show that the majority of Muslims in Central Asia, Europe and the Americas don't support its implementation either.

But my wider point was that society, culture and demographics aren't static. This country used to be majority celtic pagan, then anglo-saxon Christian, now it's more secular. If at some point in the future the demographic shifts to a Muslim majority then that's not undemocratic.

You have never heard, does not mean it is not happening to some women. Many people around the world have not heard about FGM and yet...

Maybe but sleeping on the floor us ridiculous. Couple that follow the purity rules of marriage usually have beds that can be separated and rejoined. I have never heard of anyone sleeping on the floor.

I agree with you. I have suddenly started hearing comments like ' There is an argument that the Jews aren't from the Middle East at all, but from Europe' presumably to justify the elimination of Israel from the Corbynite Left. Some of them are going down a very slippery path to justify their support for fundamentalist Islamists.

Which does not mean that it does not happen in more strick Jewish communities. I am Catholic, not particularly orthodox/strict, but grew up around people who were and considered a lot of what they were doing very extreme. And then I met people who were really strict about religion to a whole new level that I could not believe was possible. And yet this was some people's experience. I believe Deborah Feldman wrote a memoir about her leaving her Jewish community- her experience was probably unlike yours, but it does not make it fake/rubbish/nonexistant.
There is a whole lot of horrible abuse in many religious communities that are not experienced by all of its members.

This is absolute rubbish. I'm an orthodox Jew and I've never slept on the floor (well I did once when I was 11 and had to spend the night at an aunt's house when my mum was hospitalised and my dad was with her).

>>Yet they are feted by the 'progressive ' left.
Well, they are feted by the Corbynite left, who are fortunately currently pretty irrelevant in the UK (although not in France, for example).

My concern is more for people (like me!) at the Starmer/LibDem junction, who have to realise that not all issues boil down to "unreconstructed far-right white males versus the downtrodden everyone-else".

Something similar can be seen in the trans debate, where people who supported gay rights for years need to realise that the demands of some fraction of trans people run up against other rights that progressive movements fought for.

Ultimately this is a problem for the organised centre-left (notably Labour) to sort out, just as the distinction between genuine conservatism and right-wing populism is for the organised centre-right (notably the Tories) to fix.

That's terrifying isn't it.

The older I get the more I realise the downright hatred men have towards women.

Absolutely. So the last thing women & girls need is extremists of a religion that wants to drag females back to medieval times, and will rape and murder to get their point across, getting into any kind of position of power in the UK.

So far I'm not optimistic that the Government (and I'm a Labour party member lest anyone accuse me of being right wing) has the intelligence or courage to put the welfare of its female citizens over a minority (in the UK) religious faith.

And it's not racist to recognise a particular religion as no friend of women and girls. Islam isn't a race, and we really need to ensure we retain the right to criticise any faith if we disagree with its teachings and influence.

Superb post, SerenityNowInsanityLater, and you make some very valid points about detstabilisation, which is largely what I meant about the undoubted mistakes the west has made - though they don't excuse the bestial choices of the current regime

Most of all though I agree that "The West has had no clear, intellectual idea, culturally speaking, of who they were aiding/fighting/negotiating with over the decades of regional involvement" and frankly the place might as well be Mars to those whose understanding stretches no further than finding it on a map (and sometimes not even that)

Yes @AdviceNeeded2024 female leaders can be just as useless as male leaders as we've seen.

@Cyclebabble unfortunately I think a female president wouldn’t change things one bit, unless all countries leaders were female and/or cared about women’s rights.

It's demographics of course. The Muslim population is increasing exponentially (doubling every x no of years) and the secular population is declining. I think its the same for Christianity. Its not really democratic as the population has been ignored on this subject.

I think when you live in the UK it is very easy to think that we live in reasonably enlightened times where, over the last fifty years there has been a lot of forward movement for women. In many parts of the world over the last fifty years things have got worse and Afghanistan is a prime example. Some international pressure can be applied, but Afghanistan cares little if its trade is embargoed and sanctioning aid only further hits women and children. So in the short term they have us over a barrel. Longer term we need to keep lobbying so that women's rights are high on the agenda and are properly considered. I may be too optimistic, but might we see some change if we have a women President in the US?

Jews don't fast on Fridays or Saturdays (unless a specific fast day like Yom Kippur) falls on one of those days. In fact the opposite. Friday night dinner is a tradional large meal with family and close friends and it's very common to invite friends to lunch on Saturday after the synagogue.

If you take that perspective, than neither are the Taliban. It's just a matter of scale.

It happens in this country, too - or a version of it. Most people are too naive to see it, especially liberals.

Like some British men who want to import and marry a woman who isn't too 'westernised' in her views. Or some British women who say, "Of course I choose to wear the hijab" because if they said anything else they'd end up on the wrong end of an 'honour' murder.

And now connect that - at least at some level - to the recent unrest in this country which was all conveniently dismissed as right wing extremists. Of course much it was stupid thuggery. But we'll never understand the cause of that unrest if we refuse to look for it.

I presume the same things that the West has been using for centuries when they really want something from the country in question.

Puzzledandpissedoff

I just want to throw in Operation Cyclone to back up my previous post- the US armed the Jihadis in the region. The Afghan Mujahideen received funding and arms from the CIA from ‘79-‘92. Of course we’ve experienced those aftershocks. Even now. Because the region has been permanently destabilised/at war. If you read my post on page 2, you’ll see I’ve attached two pages describing my FIL’s 1961 expedition which included Kabul. And it’s clear that geopolitical tensions existed then. Gender apartheid was grumbling in Kabul in 1961. So of course you’re absolutely right in your point that cultural habits play an influential role, systemically, in the region. The West has had no clear, intellectual idea, culturally speaking, of who they were aiding/fighting/negotiating with over the decades of regional involvement.

Undeniably there was a vacuum created after the Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan. And you’re right, the makings of these regimes are already in place- all the ingredients are there. But political vacuums give these movements/regimes momentum they wouldn’t have had in a stable political environment. The West can exploit those vacuums to their benefit.

The vacuum doesn’t necessarily create the regime but it encourages it. Most regimes can’t exist without a political vacuum. Most. Not all.
Arab Spring… I mean, we could talk for days about that!

The problem is that the 'West' only interferes when we can make money

I don't disagree, @Tulipsareredvioletsarebue, and even though the US invasion in 2001 was largely brought about by 9/11 I've no doubt plenty saw their opportunity to make a fast buck out of it, even while pretending their real concern was the Afghans themselves

Forgive me for introducing a tangent though, but it's very noticeable that there's no such concern about the Chinese regime's involvement in Africa and what it could mean for the population when they've finished exploiting it.
I've often wondered how those who (justifiably) feel that the British behaved badly think it'll go if anyone wants to challenge the regime's actions, but the engagement on this is nil

This is why people complain about two tier polocing (and are called far right for their pains). Those men who threatened that teacher should have been charged. And i didn't see any MPs mentioning it.The more weak the UK govt is the more chance of people like that have of getting more power.

It wasn’t trump, it was Biden 🙄