Weird Afghan law

Lonewulf said:
If you notice, Randfan was positing that they (The Muslim Extremists) would not change, and furthermore would grow and grow.
Click to expand...
No. Not even close.
  • I'm in favor of imigration for everyone.
  • I believe people can and will likely change to some degree.
  • I believe that criticism of Islam will speed the change and improve lives of Muslim women and homosexuals.
 
gtc said:
Islam isn't a monolothic religion, in fact it is less so than Christianity which has defined heirachies for at least some churches (i.e. Catholics and Anglicans). This is how you get mostly secular Turkey next door to the jihad exporting Iran.

One of the contributing factors towards the radicalisation of muslim youth seems to me to be the way that any man can declare himself a religious authority and so few of the disaffected youth seem to know enough about Islam to call him out on his BS.
Click to expand...
.
Yes!
With no central authority or governing counsel of wise men, or not so wise men, Islam is pretty much an individual's interpretation of the book. Those that make noise with their interpretations get noticed and become 'holy men', regardless of the garf they're shouting.
It prevents a true secular separation of the religion from real life, which is the only relief civilization can hope for.
 
Guybrush Threepwood said:
I don't mean this to be a snarky Larsenesque 'evidence' post. but I am surprised by that, do you have a link showing which countries do and don't recognise it.
Click to expand...

Here is one about revoking a similar law in the muslim stat of the Bahama's.

link

So this is not really some where that you can say islam is far behind christian nations at all. Only about 30 years behind the US for example.
 
Sabrina said:
Oh how I wish we could return to the days when women were revered as the bringers of life and were therefore never to be mistreated if at all possible.
Click to expand...

So you wish to return to a fairy tale?


Artifacts dug up from nearly prehistoric eras seem to indicate that humans worshipped a "Goddess", not a "God", and recognized that women were to be honored as the ones capable of bringing life to the world, while men were honored as the caregivers and providers.
Click to expand...

Or it was porn, who knows?

This is a massive inferance from one artifact you know.
 
Well, humans worshipping goddesses persisted well into the age of recorded history. Athens, Ishtar, Inanna, Astarte, Amaterasu, etc.

The problem is that, at least by the time we do enter recorded history,

1. Those hardly acted like women, or like primarily life givers.

Ishtar was a goddess of war and prostitution, and also was a bit into zoophilia. Her temples doubled as brothels, basically.

Inanna was quite the bloodthirsty bitch, and picked a fight on a whim. Her psalms by Enheduanna credit her with poisoning rivers, obliterating crops, and a bit of genocide on the side. She was also a serial rapist, pretty much.

Astarte was primarily a goddess of war.

Etc.

That's not women, that's guys with tits, if all y'all will pardon the crude expression. It's not worshipping actual women, it's worshipping some BS image of a woman who acts like the guys and would approve what the guys are doing.

2. That idealized goddess image never actually meant treating the actual women better.

E.g., Athens had Athena as a patron goddess, and she was a goddess of wisdom. But they treated their actual women like, well, just a tiny notch above slaves. And speaking of wisdom, they didn't think the actual women were smart or wise enough to speak for themselves in court: as a free woman, your husband or father would speak for you, or if you had neither, then may the Gods have mercy on you because then only the other party would get to speak against you and you'd have no right to say anything.

E.g., for all the symbolisms around Ishtar or Inanna, I'm not aware of the actual women having any actual privilege because of it.

E.g., for Amaterasu's being the top kami in the Japanese mythology, and the claim to power of the imperial family... that sure didn't prevent a male-centered culture in Japan.

3. Actually, in a lot of cases those goddesses were there to justify the guys' supremacy or demands.

E.g., Inanna as a rapist is basically just a gender-reversed representation of what the male soldiers did in wars. And served to help justify and rationalize it.

E.g., Ishtar as a goddess of prostitution, just served to justify demanding that every woman, regardless of social status or class, prostitutes herself in the temple/brothel. Helped get a supply of pussy for the guys, I guess. (This is mentioned by Herodotus, btw.)

E.g., ditto for Astarte.
 
HansMustermann said:
Well, humans worshipping goddesses persisted well into the age of recorded history. Athens, Ishtar, Inanna, Astarte, Amaterasu, etc.

The problem is that, at least by the time we do enter recorded history,
Click to expand...

Is there any evidence of any neolithic modern cultures that where anything like the supposted religion being suggested either?

I know of none.
 
Well, no, there is no evidence that women were put onto any pedestal. On the contrary, if I'm to extrapolate from the religions I've mentioned there, I'd say: even _if_ those caveman figurines were of actual goddesses (and that's a big if), there's nothing to say they weren't like those religions I've mentioned. Basically that they worshipped a goddess but kidnapped and raped actual women anyway. (Getting women in war was a stapple of tribal and ancient warfare.)

Of course, it's still an extrapolation that may or may not be false, but it's slightly less baseless than the matriarchy utopia.

Basically I'm not as much disagreeing with you, as it's in addition to it :)

ETA: and to actually answer your question: no, I don't know of any modern tribes that are like that matriarchal utopia either. In fact, the only tribes that were labelled as "matriarchal" in the past, were only so from the perspective of a very patriarchal culture. So we got to hear of "matriarchal" amerindian tribes... which kidnapped and raped women routinely, but then they could do stuff like sometimes act a bit rebellious towards their husband. And _that_ looked like being led by women to the idiot missionary who saw it, or at least dangerously close to it.
 
Last edited:
HansMustermann said:
Well, no, there is no evidence that women were put onto any pedestal. On the contrary, if I'm to extrapolate from the religions I've mentioned there, I'd say: even _if_ those caveman figurines were of actual goddesses (and that's a big if), there's nothing to say they weren't like those religions I've mentioned. Basically that they worshipped a goddess but kidnapped and raped actual women anyway. (Getting women in war was a stapple of tribal and ancient warfare.)

Of course, it's still an extrapolation that may or may not be false, but it's slightly less baseless than the matriarchy utopia.

Basically I'm not as much disagreeing with you, as it's in addition to it :)

ETA: and to actually answer your question: no, I don't know of any modern tribes that are like that matriarchal utopia either. In fact, the only tribes that were labelled as "matriarchal" in the past, were only so from the perspective of a very patriarchal culture. So we got to hear of "matriarchal" amerindian tribes... which kidnapped and raped women routinely, but then they could do stuff like sometimes act a bit rebellious towards their husband. And _that_ looked like being led by women to the idiot missionary who saw it, or at least dangerously close to it.
Click to expand...

Well there are some matrilineal cultures, for example where property was passed through female lines. Of course this tended to mean that the most important man in someones life was their mothers brother, not their father.

And I know that we are not in any real disagreement. I also often do addendums to posts I agree with, not just argue with posts I disagree with.
 
Matrilineal is one thing. A lot of the societies described as "matriarchal" in the previous centuries were really just matrilineal. But that's still quite far from matriarchy or from the fairy tale utopia upper in the thread, as I gather you'd agree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom