Islamaphobia?

[Onnedheil]

So, as feminists, women, fighting against patriarchy, against rape culture against male violence to women. My question is this.

Are we suddenly now supposed to be supporting a religion that is an actual rape culture, Openly accepted paedophilia, actual supremacy of toxic masculinity an actual patriarchy Which is responsible for female genital mutilation , based on a the word of a paedophile warmonger who propagates a monotheist singular God who is male .

And when Anyone, speaks out about these things We're labelled as a racist and as islamaphobe and told to silence our voice for the religion of peace?

Have I ended up in the twilight zone or something?

and no Ayesha wasnt his favourite wife or most beloved, that was held by lady khadija who was his first wife and he stayed monogamous with her their first 20 odd years together until she died. the latter is held up for a different reason in islam, she was a widow and a prominent businesswoman who was much older than Muhammad when she proposed to him and she was also the only one he had any surviving children with from the 9 wives he was married to in his lifetime. all the rest of his marriages were for political alliances and ties and except Ayesha were with widows or divorcees. whilst widows and divorcees generally find it hardest to marry now in muslim communities because of a singular preference for virgins they were not considered on the shelf back then.

That's not just down to the Religions of the Book though. It's human history.

Exactly Bertrand.

I always thought that was mean of Jesus to be so dismissive of the work she was doing but still quite happy to eat her food.

My guess is that Mohammed and Jesus were a bit ahead of their time, revolutionary in their forward thinking attitudes but still people of their time. Quite natural and understandable if you see them as just good men, rather than men with supernatural abilities to hear God's word.

And I suspect all the be-nice-to-each-other stuff wasn't anything a woman hadn't already said. Except it takes a man to say it for it go become a religion

you can have two conflicting trends in the same place or religion. i used race relations in America as an example. it is the only western country to democratically elect a black president to LEAD the country. and yet, black young men and women are constantly shown being gunned down on the streets by federal police for the slightest incursions and infractions which you wouldnt see in the UK or other countries though they also have problems with the police and ethnic minorities. we see america as in a league of its own in that aspect, is this by Obama's edict? no. as a backlash to a black man named Barak Obama being able to make edicts then yes i think so. this is in 2015 and hes still in his 2nd term. never underestimate the general down and dirtiness of the powerful to uphold the status quo under and above any efforts to change the system, you speak of 2000 years but that was ample time to change the message of Jesus away from the message he came with eg female worship leaders etc i dont really know that much. but thats how i see misogyny and patriarchy in islam, as a backlash.

speaking of Mary and Martha, there is an old gospel song i once came by on youtube and even as a muslim i was very struck by the words...

'Mary don't you weep, and tell your sister Martha not to moan'.

to me it spoke of not becoming depressed or constantly complaining but to hold one's head up and have hope and faith that things will change. as a feminist agitating for reform in my own faith community those words are very inspiring, though i do not know the biblical story of Mary and Martha. i think its a nice anthem though for feminist women of colour dealing with intersectional problems that sometimes seems so heavy and awful to bear. not just racism and classism and sexism but also tradition and custom too.

Aretha Franklin does it amazing but this version by Fantasia at 'Black Girls Rock' 2015 just kills it for me, the emotion and expression right till the end of the performance is very powerful.

night ladies.

Moonstruck I really appreciate you telling us about Ayesha and Lady Khadija. It is interesting.

I think it just goes to show how religion can be interpreted so completely differently, because it is both conservative and reactionary at the same time.

Conservative because it is rooted in the norms of society at that time but reactionary in that the main leaders were reacting against injustices in that society.

So people can look to it to reflect their own beliefs. One person can look to the conservatism of Christianity to justify their own homophobia whilst another will see Jesus' acceptance of outsiders as a reason to embrace everyone regardless of sexual orientation.

You Moonstruck are obviously someone who sees Islam in progressive terms whilst others will look to it as proof that women should be secluded and hidden. It's all in the interpretation because religion is ultimately human made.

Religion is human made, but religiousity, sprituality and the rest is a Real Thing. Lots of people subscribe to the notion of a higher power,and things non material. Maybe psychological, perhaps a recognition of something that exists independently? But it helps a lot of people on a personal level, through the ordinary tribulations of life. You can argue all you want about the influence of religion on different societies, and there's loads to criticize there, but that has eff all to do with the ordinary person, living an ordinary life with ordinary tragedies & joys.

The different codes and laws mean less that the notion that there is something out there. THe prescriptions are cultural, but the idea tha
t there is an arbitrator or whatever is universal.

7days, yes, I think these things are deeply rooted in the human psyche.

They are almond. And to people who feel it deeply, scientific positivism doesn't explain life/emotion/consciousness as they percieve it.

"THe prescriptions are cultural, but the idea that there is an arbitrator or whatever is universal."

1. It is nowhere near "universal". Most people seem to want to believe in a creator who will protect them, but to many of us this hypothesis makes no sense. You may have heard of the terms atheist and agnostic.

1. Appeal to Numbers is a logical fallacy. Belief in flat Earth used to be far more universal than belief in God is now, and we all know how that turned out.

The fact that most people are raised from an early age to believe in a God might have something to do with large numbers of believers. It's funny how children don't seem to get a "God-shaped hole" to fill if you never carve it out teach them about the God hypothesis when they are small.

I'm not saying that there isn't a human urge to connect to a higher meaning. Of course there is, but the kind of oppressive rules forced on us from an early age by the main religions that we currently have are just awful.

That's probably why atheists can get so evangelical and as passionate as believers in their atheism; finally they've been liberated from the crazy rules of religion and they're free!

I remember as a kid spending days worried I was going to hell because I'd blasphemed and that is the unforgivable sin. It's crazy and some of my friends had such high expectations to live up to. It's so liberating to realise that you're not going to hell.

Pretty much the only thing you need to remember to do is be nice to people and you're golden.

"I'm not saying that there isn't a human urge to connect to a higher meaning. Of course there is"

No there isn't. I am human and have no such urge. Never have. You may have noticed that I'm not the only one.

There is a human urge to explain the unknown, which is why people have come up with Greek Mythology to explain natural phenomena like rain, thunder, and earthquakes. It is also why people have come up with notions of heaven and hell. It's comforting to think that you won't just disappear when you die but will have eternal bliss as long as you're good.

"That's probably why atheists can get so evangelical and as passionate as believers in their atheism; finally they've been liberated from the crazy rules of religion and they're free!"

I've never been enslaved by religion and again, I'm not the only skeptic who has always been a skeptic, even as a child.

Atheist can be very vocal because (1) religious people are and it does get a a bit too much at times and you want to argue back eventually, and (2) the whole hypothesis of creator God who checks on you to see if you're good and will put you in heaven after death if you just believe is so ludicrous that you want to make those under the spell see the nonsense for what it is.

I used to do that in my teens because I thought that I could get people to see that there isn't a shred of evidence for any of their fundamental assumptions, it then I saw that it is impossible for them to think objectively and rationally on a subject they have effectively been brainwashed about from an early age.

"But again, I think it depends what you mean by a higher meaning. Not many people are comfortable with the idea that they're just a blob of cells on a rock that exists by cosmic accident, so nothing they do matters "

Of course what we do matters. Do we not think about future generations? About the people sharing the world with us now? About the lives we are living now?

"I've always been a sceptic too, but rather than wanting to 'make people see' I'm always fascinated to understand their faith*. I'm just really interested in how people see the world, I suppose. And my scepticism also extends to myself: I might be wrong"

Can I ask, with the greatest of respect, why you don't seem to be interested when atheists explain their atheism to you, and why you keep telling them that they are wrong, that atheism is a belief system?

Well yes quite Côte I didn't mean everyone has an urge to believe in a higher meaning but just that the motivation that drives some to belief in a supernatural being is natural and also is the same as that which drives others to be all Brian Coxy and starry eyed about the beauty and complexity of science.

Personally I'm too old to be starry eyed about anything although I do get a bit excited about Mathsy things in general because it seems so ordered.

Yes I do feel that atheists don't get as much respect as religious people for their views which is a tad unfair as they are the ones ultimately in the right

Athiests don't get as much respect?!? You must be joking......

"I've always been a sceptic too, but rather than wanting to 'make people see' I'm always fascinated to understand their faith"

You don't sound like a sceptic tbh and neither have you spent much time thinking & researching these subjects from what I see on this thread. Which is fine, you just need to read & think more about it and understand better the basic concepts involved, such as what is an atheist, what is evidence, what is proof, what is the scientific method, etc.

"I'm just really interested in how people see the world, I suppose"

Yes, it's fascinating until you realize religious belief involves suspension of disbelief

" I might be wrong. "

Yes, when you make a claim, that claim might be wrong.

However, when assess someone else's claim and say "You have no evidence so I'm not buying it", that's not an unreasonable decision.

"Not many people are comfortable with the idea that they're just a blob of cells on a rock that exists by cosmic accident"

Because people want to think they are as unique and special as they feel. Unfortunately for them, wishful thinking is not a great way to understand the universe.

Why should atheists or theists "get respect"?

"Mary don't you weep, and tell your sister Martha not to moan'.

to me it spoke of not becoming depressed or constantly complaining but to hold one's head up and have hope and faith that things will change. as a feminist agitating for reform in my own faith community those words are very inspiring, though i do not know the biblical story of Mary and Martha"

It's not, I'm afraid. It's just Jesus' saying what would be expressed a lfew books further on as as "Woman, know thy place"

"the motivation that drives some to belief in a supernatural being is natural"

The motivation to understand the unknown is natural. Belief in a complex and convoluted story that involves a creator God with feelings and motivations of Earthling mammals (like good, evil, compassion, love for others, love of a son, etc) is not "natural" but taught through passive and active measures from very early ages.

".. also is the same as that which drives others to be all Brian Coxy and starry eyed about the beauty and complexity of science."

I have no idea what you might mean here. Are you trying to say that people believe in science and have love for science the way people say they believe in and love Jesus? That sounds mad.