The Student Room Group

Basketball rules changed to allow players to wear hijabs

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Mathemagicien
Allah and Big Mo are always watching.


Pervs
Reply 81
Original post by Mathemagicien
Don't be ignorant, Islam is the most feminist religion. Did Islam burn witches?
No.
But it still beheads them.
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/12/13/world/meast/saudi-arabia-beheading/
Reply 82
Original post by AishaGirl
This is relative. In Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries no women should not be free to do and wear whatever they please.
Loving the irony of a Muslimah who claims that Muslimahs should be free to wear what they want claiming that other Muslimahs should not be free to wear what they want.

The Muslims in those countries have chosen Islamic law.
You do realise that Sadi Arabia is a totalitarian dictatorship? Political parties and elections are forbidden. So no, the Muslims in Saudi Arabia have not "chosen" their system. It is imposed on them.

It's like China saying "British citizens should be free to eat whatever animals they want, like cats and dogs" when this clearly is a relative statement.
But no double standards though.
If you claim that Muslimahs should be free to choose whether to wear the hijab or not, this applies everywhere.

To use your analogy, it's actually like China insisting that Britain allow the eating of dogs but banning it in China.
Reply 83
Original post by AishaGirl
Assume there are people in the UK that would like to eat cats and dogs but they are not allowed to because the UK law says they can't.
There is no law against eating dog in the UK. We are free to eat dog if we choose.
Eating dog in Islam is unlawful.

It's really very simple when you snap out of your own biased viewpoint.
Indeed. You would then realise that it is actually Islam that imposes unreasonable restrictions on personal freedom, not the UK legal system.
Reply 84
Original post by AishaGirl
It prevents sex before marriage, affairs, one night stands and many other things.
Why?
Filthy muslims
Original post by AishaGirl
I'm not getting this list am I? :rolleyes:


How does it feel to have to deal with somebody who gives you useless replies? Must be like looking in the mirror.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 87
Original post by feministy
Feminism is about giving women a choice- that includes the choice to or to not wear a hijab.

Women don't have the choice to wear the hijab precisely. Female teams from Gulf countries were not allowed by their government to compete because they couldn't wear a hijab.

Allowing the hijab in sport competitions is just pandering to these barbarians -- again.
If the hijab is such a good thing then why don't white western women wear it?Honestly we got rid of this nonsense years ago. It's not an outrage for a women to show some ankle anymore.We shouldn't pander to this backwards nonsense.Clearly wearing the hijab is just a result of indoctrination and culture.Just because sexism is engrained into someones culture and beliefs does not mean we should pander to it.
Original post by Josb
Women don't have the choice to wear the hijab precisely. Female teams from Gulf countries were not allowed by their government to compete because they couldn't wear a hijab.

Allowing the hijab in sport competitions is just pandering to these barbarians -- again.


The other solution would have been to continue to disallow female athletes on a competitive level, just to make a point to the non-athlete authorities. No one wins.
Reply 90
Original post by Another
The other solution would have been to continue to disallow female athletes on a competitive level, just to make a point to the non-athlete authorities. No one wins.
But they weren't being disallowed. They were choosing to not compete. It is a subtle but important distinction.

I am being disallowed from competing in the 400m for Team GB because the athletic authorities have imposed a qualifying time that I cannot achieve without changing my lifestyle. Therefore I demand that they lower this qualifying time in order not to unfairly disadvantage me.
Original post by QE2
But they weren't being disallowed. They were choosing to not compete. It is a subtle but important distinction.

I am being disallowed from competing in the 400m for Team GB because the athletic authorities have imposed a qualifying time that I cannot achieve without changing my lifestyle. Therefore I demand that they lower this qualifying time in order not to unfairly disadvantage me.


I know, "disallow" is the wrong word

It is technically the athlete's choice to wear the hijab. But if she is from a country where hijab is compulsory/not wearing hijab is heavily frowned upon, then the distinction is moot.
Reply 92
Original post by Another
I know, "disallow" is the wrong word

It is technically the athlete's choice to wear the hijab. But if she is from a country where hijab is compulsory/not wearing hijab is heavily frowned upon, then the distinction is moot.
So sporting authorities should be beholden to the impositions of authoritarian regimes?

The IOC, FIFA and other organisations expressly forbid the display of political symbols or statements. Should this rule be relaxed for any country demanding that its athletes display such things?

Would you support their inclusion if the Israeli government insisted that their athletes had "Occupy Gaza" on their shirts?
Original post by QE2
So sporting authorities should be beholden to the impositions of authoritarian regimes?

The IOC, FIFA and other organisations expressly forbid the display of political symbols or statements. Should this rule be relaxed for any country demanding that its athletes display such things?

Would you support their inclusion if the Israeli government insisted that their athletes had "Occupy Gaza" on their shirts?


My take is sporting authorities should support the inclusion of athletes who are unfortunate enough to be born under authoritarian regimes

FIFA's rules state that they don't allow religious displays aren't allowed on the field, but Brazil completely ignores it. Jesus slogans under football shirts are common, and players are allowed to pray on the field.

Wearing a hijab isn't the same thing as an actionable violent slogan saying "Invade country X", I don't think the comparison holds up.
Original post by QE2
Loving the irony of a Muslimah who claims that Muslimahs should be free to wear what they want claiming that other Muslimahs should not be free to wear what they want.

But no double standards though.
If you claim that Muslimahs should be free to choose whether to wear the hijab or not, this applies everywhere.


You're misunderstanding me as per usual. In Saudi Arabia men and women should not be free to dress as they please because the law forbids it.

In the UK men and women are free and should be free to dress as they please because the law allows it. So no it is not ironic at all that I am saying that. This discussion turned into a Saudi Arabia rights for women argument so my answer was with respect to that country.

In the UK of course women are free to dress as they please and they should be free to do so because that is what brits have subscribed to.

Original post by Moonstruck16
How does it feel to have to deal with somebody who gives you useless replies?


He wasn't giving me a useless reply, he was refusing to answer the only question I asked him. I have to answer every single question thrown at me but when I ask a question, that's not allowed :lol: pfft
Reply 95
Original post by AishaGirl
You're misunderstanding me as per usual. In Saudi Arabia men and women should not be free to dress as they please because the law forbids it.

In the UK men and women are free and should be free to dress as they please because the law allows it. So no it is not ironic at all that I am saying that. This discussion turned into a Saudi Arabia rights for women argument so my answer was with respect to that country.

In the UK of course women are free to dress as they please and they should be free to do so because that is what brits have subscribed to.
In which case you needed to have said "are not free", not "should not be free".
Using your wording it is a statement of intent rather than a statement of fact.

Women in Saudia Arabia are not free to wear what they want, but they should be.
Original post by QE2
Women in Saudia Arabia are not free to wear what they want, but they should be.


Why should they? Please explain.
Original post by AishaGirl
Why should they? Please explain.


Do you support basic human rights?
Reply 98
Original post by AishaGirl
Why should they? Please explain.


This is because they are human beings, and although your prophet and allah see women as second class humans, the united nations, and more importantly the rest of the world see them as equal with men, and they have something called "Human and civil rights" meaning they don't have to be forced to do what they don't want to do.
Original post by Iridocyclitis
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/04/sport/basketball-hijab-fiba/

https://www.channel4.com/news/basketball-allows-religious-headgear-to-be-worn-in-games

Not personally a fan of the burka, but fine with the hijab in terms of religious headwear. I think this is good news for inclusion and diversity. I don't see how people can complain about hijabs restricting a women's freedom but then not be in support of something like this which promotes Muslim woman going out, being independent and developing an interest in sport. Surprised it took until now for the rule change tbh.


Listen here white devil, i won't be having you defending the musrats, commie scum begone!!!!!!!

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending