Has anyone left their spouse over GC views / pro-Islam stance

[PinkTreeFrog]

Husband and I could never find common ground on gender critical views and his blindness to the harms of Islam to women. He has an inability to take in information that contradicts his world view. Has anyone left a spouse over this?

They only mentioned 'anti trans' activist. They didn't mention anti women activist, so it seems rather telling to me. And I wondered why.

Just be careful of your daughter spending too much time with him and being indoctrinated by him if he wants 50-50.

So it's not true then, that per your own Quran, a woman's testimony is worth only half a man's?

The quran says there is no compulsion and no forcing in islam.

That's not what Islamic scholars say...

You talk of OPs prejudice but say none of the boys in the neighbourhood, the Muslim boys would 'want' her daughter, why?

The hijab is optional? Tell that to 6 year old girls covered in head to toe at primary school on a hot summer's day. The 6 year old isn't the one who choses to be completely covered when the rest of her female classmates aren't, is she? I think you have a naive and romanticised idea in your head. I've seen 5 and 6 year old girls in hijab. Do you genuinely think they made that choice?

I've seem Muslim women completely covered in thick clothing on the beach on a scorching hot day, and the husband is in the water with their children. She is sitting completely covered in black thick clothes on the sand. Are you really asking us to believe she chooses that, and not to be in the water, too?

He sounds more liberal and so less likely to indoctrinate one way or the other.

Wearing the burqa is about preserving a woman's 'honor', as if being fully covered does that. But men don't need to be fully covered. That there, is the sexism, the misogyny, and how it's out of touch with western values.

And the difference is the New Testament over-rides the Old Testament. We don't live by the Old Testament. Christianity has changed. Islam, has not.

No, he sounds more conservative and misogynist and chauvinist, and hence will indoctrinate that poor girl to think she has no rights to a female only space to change or go to the toilet. He's a dangerous misogynist bigot.

When it comes to the vital issue of WOMENS RIGHTS, it IS by necessity, and design, black and white. You either believe women deserve rights (OP) or you don't (OP's husband). Being with someone who doesn't believe the female sex class deserve safety, privacy and dignity would be a deal-breaker to most people with a modicum of critical thinking.

Always with the nuns...

Nuns stopped wearing the habit in the 1960s after Vatican 2. Christianity has evolved and modernised. Islam doesn't, and it stays the same.

As I said misogyny is absolutely a leaving worthy offence.

I work with children, I have worked with a lot of children from Muslim families and yes they absolutely do ask to wear it at 5,6,7 years old.

Mum, sisters, aunties, friends older sisters, neighbours etc. wear them and celebrate them and the children pick up on that and want to be included. I have also worked with girls who didn’t want to wear it, and didn’t.

This. OP your views on Islam are questionable. If I was him, I’d be divorcing you too.

Right. So you don't like Muslims and transgender people. Unfortunately for you, this doesn't mean that you get to decide that anyone who doesn't subscribe to your views are 'anti-woman'. It's simply not logical to decide anyone who won't automatically discriminate against a person for your reasons doesn't like or respect women.

Have you ever known a woman who wore a hijab, or a trans person? Have you ever considered that their lives may be more complex and nuanced than your opinions?

It's possible to be wary of the harms of radical religion without deciding all members of that religion are harmful. It's possible to respect transgender people without assuming that they are all harmful or are somehow trying to erase women with their existence.

The things that you are saying are not reasonable fears, they are bigotry and unfounded hatred.

Supporting WOMENS RIGHTS does not mean we "don't like" 'transgender' people. Believing fully intact males should not be in womens changing rooms does not mean we "don't like" 'transgender' people.

We all know males. We don't need to get to know males to know they shouldn't be in female only safe spaces, in our rape crisis centres, in our sports etc.

You know, you don't get to relabel males as 'transgender' and think that gives them the right to violate female only boundaries and spaces.

I've met a fair few nuns who would be better very surprised to hear that they no longer wear the habit. It's not compulsory, but they still choose it.

Is their choice valid to you? Or would you tell them they are they subjugated and forced to cover their hair? Would you accept their reasoning, or would you tell them they don't know their own minds?

You realise that while many women are Catholic, very, very, very few are nuns, right? And women who are not nun don't wear the habit?

So the comparison doesn't even work.

At no stage would I ever accuse someone of being transphobic for supporting women's rights (I support women's rights myself!), so I'm unsure why you chose to say that.

I didn't mention people who support women's rights, I mentioned people who are transphobic, which is a different thing.

Assuming all transgender people are somehow dangerous or perverted is transphobic (much in the same way that people used to have 'genuine concerns' about gay people when it was actually just simple homophobia).

It's just not accurate to say that calling someone transgender is 'relabeling' males.

No one is assuming that about all transgender people.

We are saying MALES are all potentially dangerous. This does not change if that male is wearing a dress (in fact, evidence over 4 countries shows transwomen commit sexual offences 5 times higher than other males). You appear to think it does. So yes, you do appear to think that calling a male a transgender is relabeling them.

I hope you're equally critical of other faiths and don't have a religion.

Your initial point, in the post I relied to, was that nuns don't wear the habit. This is inaccurate, although I wonder why you even made the (non-factual) point in the first place, since it's apparently irrelevant.

How about you answer the questions I asked, instead of trying to avoid them? Is their choice valid to you?

Forgot to add that this is not 'Gay 2.0'. Gay people took nothing from women and girls. That there, is the difference. Here, from a gay man himself:

I'm always eager to learn, and to keep myself safe, but I have never seen any actual evidence that trans women are more dangerous than cis men. So please, go ahead and post a link to the apparent multiple peer reviewed studies or official statistics which prove your point.