There is no such thing as 'islamophobia'

Scroll to see replies

Islamophobia ;dislike of or prejudice against Islam or Muslims, especially as a political force.
The Hijab makes for greater purity for the hearts of believing men and women because it screens against the desire of the heart. Without the Hijab, the heart may or may not desire. That is why the heart is more pure when the sight is blocked (by Hijab) and thus the prevention of fitna (evil actions) is very much manifested. The Hijab cuts off the ill thoughts

No, the Hijab is a sexist tool used to cover women and control them. A misogynist tool. You're not fooling anyone with that crap.

Reply 101

newusername96

Original post by welshiee

Homosexuals are not going around beheading people because they follow some disturbing 7th century ideology now, are they? They get persecuted for acting upon nothing more than their natural instinct - something that actually exists.

stop answering my question with another question.

Reply 102

welshiee

Original post by BasharAssad

stop answering my question with another question.

It's exactly what you did dumbass.

Reply 103

1010marina

Original post by SeekingAllAs

What is purity of the heart and why is it considered desirable by your deity?

If you're referring to chastity, then I think you are missing the point of life. Making relationships, having sex, and masturbation are all normal, healthy parts of life and they're not to be frightened of.

Furthermore, why is it just women who must wear the hijab, if not oppression? If it's so that men won't rape them because you can't see them and thus there is less appeal -- then you are doing the entire sex a disservice. Most grown men should be capable of controlling their penis. Also, perhaps a better solution would be to teach men to respect other people more?

But wait... I forget, if you follow the teachings of the Quran then respecting a woman's body may be difficult for you...

"Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand."

Reply 104

L i b

Original post by D00

There is no such thing as 'islamophobia'

You're right, most of the people condemned as Islamophobic don't really give two shits about Islam. They're not exactly scholars in comparative religion, nor do they particularly care about the role of women across the world or the nature of religiously inspired legal codes.

They hate brown people and Islam is a visible face of ethnic minorities asserting their own culture in this country. Criticism of Islam has become for many simply a proxy for attacking some of the largest ethnic minority groups in Britain.

They aren't Islamophobes, they're just you're good old common-or-garden racists who don't have the ****ing spine to come out and say what they think.

Reply 105

mariachi

Original post by Onde

As I said before, acts of murder and terror are wrong in any context.

The qur'an orders that the unbelievers should be murdered and terrorized against in this life (not because of any one particular incident) as Allah will terrorise the unbelievers in the afterlife for eternity (so this is clearly not focusing on an one-off incident). It also says that unbelief is worse than killing, and that Muslims should kill until there is worship only for Allah: this is clearly a command for perpetual global war and genocidal imperialistic conquests. This explains why Muhammad and his followers have engaged in perpetual war over the last 1300+ years.

what we should realise is that Islamic terrorists (at least in Europe) are usually semi-literate former small-scale thugs, radicalised by rather marginal "preachers" often over the internet

they simply follow the literal meaning of verses, and do not go into the complex, elaborate "contextualisations" that many formally-trained Islamic scholars go into, and which actually do water down to a great extent the Quran's violent content

Reply 106

mariachi

Original post by SeekingAllAs

The Hijab cuts off the ill thoughts

are you aware that there is a thriving hijabi pornography ?

Reply 107

mariachi

Original post by L i b

not true. There are quite a lot of people who "care about the role of women across the world or the nature of religiously inspired legal codes". Who oppose Islam for its political and social content, and who want to defend the secular character of our societies.

The linkage with racism may exist, but it is a very mediated one : if someone opposes Islam, then he is against more influence of Islam on society. Since more Muslims in our societies mean more influence for Islam, he may oppose immigration (at least from majority-Muslim countries). Since he may oppose Muslim immigration, he will be lumped with standard racists who know very little about Islam but hate foreign-looking people...

yes, this is actually a risk.

Reply 108

chemting

Original post by mariachi

are you aware that there is a thriving hijabi pornography ?

Lol really? I heard about this, but not managed to find any sources.

Any articles I could read?

Thanks

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 109

mariachi

Original post by chemting

Lol really? I heard about this, but not managed to find any sources.

Any articles I could read?

Thanks

Posted from TSR Mobile

just google "hijab porn".

You will find lots of practical examples, but I am not aware of any deep socio-anthropological study, which is of course our main interest

Reply 110

BaconandSauce

Islamophobia = A poor attempt to install some form of blasphemy law

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 111

chemting

Original post by mariachi

just google "hijab porn".

Good idea... :redface:

Original post by mariachi

You will find lots of practical examples,

Well, I am a kinetic learner, but visual will do :erm:

Original post by mariachi

but I am not aware of any deep socio-anthropological study, which is of course our main interest

Well, I was looking for a large scale study, for strictly business of course

Whilst I was ~~browsing~~ researching, I only managed to come across this.

http://www.vice.com/read/behind-the-rise-in-hijab-porn

Unfortunately, I couldn't find any ~~visual representation/evidence~~ analysis of socio-anthropological studies, but there seemed to be a lot of opinions flying around... albeit some from ~~experienced experts~~ scholars of sociology, anthropology and culture.

Reply 112

Plantagenet Crown

Original post by SeekingAllAs

I refuse to believe that even you think this is true. A hijab is a piece of cloth and does not have power over someone's thoughts. There are plenty of examples of hijabis who have sex, give blowjobs etc. There is even hijabi porn.

Reply 113

mariachi

Original post by chemting

Good idea... :redface:

Well, I am a kinetic learner, but visual will do :erm:

thanks

the subject is in fact quite relevant (beyond its visual aspects). The study you mentioned seems a quite interesting one :

"The supposed licentiousness of the West is forever being contrasted, to my mind, in wholly spurious ways, with a sexually barren Middle East," John R. Bradley, author of Behind the Veil of Vice: The Business and Culture of Sex in the Middle East,

"According to recent Google data, six of the top eight porn-searching countries are Muslim states (Pakistan, Egypt, Iran, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey). The most popular porn searches of 2014 by country reflect a trend for the "hijab"—the search term ranked number four in Morocco and number five in Algeria.

Clearly, demand for hijab porn is high. If you type the word into the search bar of Pornhub or xvideos, you'll see thumbnail after thumbnail of porn featuring the headscarf—some cam stuff, lots of homemade POV and the odd budget studio job. But if porn is illegal in most Middle Eastern countries and Muslim states, where does it all come from? "

"Men and women all over the Arab world not only watch porn, they film themselves engaging in sexual relations or masturbating, and post the clips on the internet," Eyal Sagui Bizawe recently wrote in an article for Israeli website Haaretz. "These are watched by Arabs from various countries who want to hear sex talk in their own language, and by surfers everywhere who are tired of the rigid and monotonous Western model of beauty."

My conclusions :
hijab has clearly many uses
nothing new under the sun
what unites us is more important than what draws us apart : one human race only

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 114

L i b

Original post by mariachi

The linkage with racism may exist, but it is a very mediated one : if someone opposes Islam, then he is against more influence of Islam on society. Since more Muslims in our societies mean more influence for Islam, he may oppose immigration (at least from majority-Muslim countries). Since he may oppose Muslim immigration, he will be lumped with standard racists who know very little about Islam but hate foreign-looking people...

In theory, that could be the case - I just don't think that it is the case, barring a very small number of people.

Reply 115

mariachi

Original post by L i b

Really? Show me one that anyone would describe remotely as Islamphobic.

no problem :
personally, I do"care about the role of women across the world or the nature of religiously inspired legal codes". I do oppose Islam for its political and social content, and I want to defend the secular character of our societies. And I have been described as being "Islamophobic" many, many times

Original post by L i b

In theory, that could be the case - I just don't think that it is the case, barring a very small number of people.

there is a red line between opposing Islam as a religion and Muslims as persons - but, confusingly, many shades of gray in between

e.g. would this balanced, well-reasoned criticism of Islam be considered as Islamophobic ?

[video="youtube;v5foN-2ucZc"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5foN-2ucZc[/video]

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 116

msaddams

Too many people confusing 'Islam' with 'Muslims'. There are obviously people who have an irrational fear of all Muslims because some of them commit terrorist acts in the name of their religion, and this is what people call 'Islamophobia' (for some reason). However there is nothing irrational about opposing Islam itself, which is, may I remind you all, an idea, and so I don't understand why people are calling it a phobia. Personally I think the correct term should be 'Muslimphobia' or something along those lines for those people who genuinely hate or fear all Muslims.

Reply 117

mariachi

Original post by msaddams

we have been repeating this here on TSR for years

unfortunately, "Islamophobia" was there already, and now the chances of making those distinctions you mention are pretty slim

however, recent episodes inspired by Islam have shown many people that opposing it is perfectly legitimate and even advisable

on the other hand, discriminating Muslims as such is not only morally wrong, but will in fact make matters even worse

best

Reply 118

lambriniy

I don't see crimes against Muslims as Islamophobic. Any kind of violence against Muslims is based on the dislike or intollerance towards them as people, as a community. This is personal, it is a crime and it would be wrong in any given situation with any person under attack because of their etnicity/beliefs/etc. However, this is not Islamophobia. Rather, it's what some people have started calling Ant-Musim bigotry. Islamophobia (while not meaning this in its literal sence) has become known as any kind of negative association with or depiction of Islam. It might be in the form of literature, arts, media discussions, etc. It more often than not DOES NOT involve Muslims, it is not directly targetting them, it is targetting the ideology that they have adopted.

Having said this, clearly because of the nature of Islam and its role in people's lives, most of them are taking critical/negative depictions of Islam as negative depictions of their own personalities (which are obviously 2 different things and it is entirely up to them whether they'd see it this way or not). If analogy can be used, me saying that SMOKING is dangerous, unpleasant, annoying and I can't tolerate it does not mean I am saying that SMOKERS are dangerous, unpleasant, annoying or I can't tolerate them.

So the bottomline is whether we agree that an idea as sacred as it could be seen by some, is immune from criticism or not. If we believe it isn't, then Islamophobia should not be relevant at all. Unfortunately and ironically, censorship in the west and on campuses especially is increasing to the point when most people believe that this particular idea (Islam) should not be a subject of questioning/ discussion at all, because some people might perceive it as a personal attack and feel uncomfortable. Forgetting that the very purpose of reason, debate and university is handling uncomfortable intelectual ideas. To be honest, I think it should be more offenssive to Muslims to be treated as people who can't meet this standard.

Reply 119

Marco1

Original post by DorianGrayism

I don't particularly understand your response here.

I am not talking about the reasoning for wearing a hjab. I am saying the action of tearing off the hjab is driven by Islamophobia.

People have a fear of things that do not exist all the time ( IE Ghosts).

People also have a fear of Islamisation and therefore, that results in them attacking Muslims physically.

I am not here to say YOU are Islamophobic. I completely agree with your line of questioning with regards to religion and etc. However, some people's fear of Islam leads to them to take irrational positions ( IE violence)

You've gone off point. The OP's argument is sound and is plainly true. It is a politically motivated nonsense word. A phobia is an irrational fear. It's not irrational to fear Islam. Yet you use a nonsense word to apply to someone who rips the veil of someone or bomb a mosque. Why not just say what it is instead of labelling such behaviour with a nonsense word. That is foolish.