Mighty Intellect
Posts: 1,535 
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Location: Calgary, Alberta
January 5th, 2008, 11:20 AM
Folks, this one really caught my breath. How does one begin to answer such - well I'm at a loss to even name this insanity.
I'm not out to get any particular religion - they all seem a little nutty to me. This, however, is a bit shocking.
http://yementimes.com/article.shtml?...=community&a=6
Pangloss
Folks, this one really caught my breath. How does one begin to answer such - well I'm at a loss to even name this insanity.
I'm not out to get any particular religion - they all seem a little nutty to me. This, however, is a bit shocking.
http://yementimes.com/article.shtml?...=community&a=6
Pangloss
January 5th, 2008, 11:34 AM
Well, it seems to me it's an individual thing moreso than a religion thing. There are plenty of good men in twisted religions all over the world who know better. There are also plenty of men who come from religions which DON'T condone it, who hit their wives anyway. Violence is (it pains me to say it) a natural human reaction and will likely never be erased from marital situations entirely. Hopefully we can limit it greatly, but, I really don't see it ever disappearing.
Here's one of our fave wife beaters. What a doll.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FgMLROTqJ0
Well, it seems to me it's an individual thing moreso than a religion thing. There are plenty of good men in twisted religions all over the world who know better. There are also plenty of men who come from religions which DON'T condone it, who hit their wives anyway. Violence is (it pains me to say it) a natural human reaction and will likely never be erased from marital situations entirely. Hopefully we can limit it greatly, but, I really don't see it ever disappearing.
Here's one of our fave wife beaters. What a doll.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FgMLROTqJ0
Member
Posts: 192
January 5th, 2008, 11:42 AM
There really is very little point in responding. I know that that is so wrong but on the other side they know that that is so right. I will not change my view and neither will they. It said right at the bottom that they must protect their society from cultural invasion.
There really is very little point in responding. I know that that is so wrong but on the other side they know that that is so right. I will not change my view and neither will they. It said right at the bottom that they must protect their society from cultural invasion.
Mighty Intellect
Posts: 1,535
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Location: Calgary, Alberta
January 5th, 2008, 11:55 AM
Don't forget that there was an editor who approved of the story, a managing editor who supervises the paper, a publisher who hired the managing editor, editor and columnist, and of course, the readers.
If his stuff was so crazy and offensive, the letters to the paper would drive him off the page.
I used to be a columnist.
Pangloss
Don't forget that there was an editor who approved of the story, a managing editor who supervises the paper, a publisher who hired the managing editor, editor and columnist, and of course, the readers.
If his stuff was so crazy and offensive, the letters to the paper would drive him off the page.
I used to be a columnist.
Pangloss
Member
Posts: 192
January 5th, 2008, 12:01 PM
It does not really surprise me that this is allowed to be printed or that it is accepted by the readers. They are proud of this, they are proud of their religion and society and not just the men, a lot of the women are very proud of it as well, it is how generations of their family have lived. I don't agree with it but it is not my religion or society.
Quoting Pangloss
Don't forget that there was an editor who approved of the story, a managing editor who supervises the paper, a publisher who hired the managing editor, editor and columnist, and of course, the readers.
If his stuff was so crazy and offensive, the letters to the paper would drive him off the page.
I used to be a columnist.
Pangloss
If his stuff was so crazy and offensive, the letters to the paper would drive him off the page.
I used to be a columnist.
Pangloss
It does not really surprise me that this is allowed to be printed or that it is accepted by the readers. They are proud of this, they are proud of their religion and society and not just the men, a lot of the women are very proud of it as well, it is how generations of their family have lived. I don't agree with it but it is not my religion or society.
January 5th, 2008, 12:05 PM
When our society started REALLY pushing to stop violence against women, it wasn't a whole lot different guys. There were people speaking against women's rights, and yes, some of them were women. I don't really get why it's so shocking or appalling. It's our past too. Even in this day and age I know western women in their 40's and 50's who think a good smack is a justified way to end a fight. Change isn't instantaneous. But the fact that they are even having to write articles trying to justify and keep violence 'okay' is evidence that change has begun.
When our society started REALLY pushing to stop violence against women, it wasn't a whole lot different guys. There were people speaking against women's rights, and yes, some of them were women. I don't really get why it's so shocking or appalling. It's our past too. Even in this day and age I know western women in their 40's and 50's who think a good smack is a justified way to end a fight. Change isn't instantaneous. But the fact that they are even having to write articles trying to justify and keep violence 'okay' is evidence that change has begun.
Member
Posts: 192
January 5th, 2008, 12:08 PM
Sorry Pangloss, my bad!
Quoting Pangloss
My response, Hazmart, was to Karrie more than anything else. Karrie suggests this is more of a solo act, and I am responding that a column is more of a team effort.
Less so if you're syndicated, of course.
Pangloss
Less so if you're syndicated, of course.
Pangloss
Sorry Pangloss, my bad!
January 5th, 2008, 12:08 PM
Quoting Pangloss
not a solo act.... an individual choice. Yes, a culture or an institution might excuse it. The rhetoric and talk might be encouraging it. But individuals make the choice whether or not to listen to the bull. And in societies which speak against it, some also clearly make the choice to say one thing, yet do another. Or in Sean's case... just be flat out advocates of beating one's wife.
My response, Hazmart, was to Karrie more than anything else. Karrie suggests this is more of a solo act, and I am responding that a column is more of a team effort.
Less so if you're syndicated, of course.
Pangloss
Less so if you're syndicated, of course.
Pangloss
Mighty Intellect
Posts: 1,535
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Location: Calgary, Alberta
January 5th, 2008, 12:09 PM
Karrie:
Of course you're right.
Sadly, those articles have a huge influence and will end up stuck to some Yemeni fridge with a magnet. Even if he (some hypothetical Yemeni reader) never hits her, the headline alone will be enough to cow many women into submission and silence.
Pangloss
Karrie:
Of course you're right.
Sadly, those articles have a huge influence and will end up stuck to some Yemeni fridge with a magnet. Even if he (some hypothetical Yemeni reader) never hits her, the headline alone will be enough to cow many women into submission and silence.
Pangloss
Gobsmacked
Posts: 4,440
January 5th, 2008, 01:03 PM
I hope we never stop being outraged or shocked when we hear of violence being condoned as an effective means to resolve anything.
I recognize that I have little power to change what I perceive to be an unacceptable situation that is still practiced with acceptance within another culture. Change must be seen as more desireable than the status quo.
What, besides our words and our hand wringing over these things, have we done as a society to provide such incentive? Have we really demonstrated a better way?
If we want to see change happen elsewhere, we really do need to begin at home - be the change we wish to see. Of course we should continue to state our refusal to accept such views - but we need to start within our own homes, society, country. Like it or not, we still live in glass houses when it comes to this problem. We've taken steps, but we've a long way to go yet. Yes we've begun by addressing such issues at a legal level - but in too many instances, it's still only a token gesture. We still hear far too many stories of domestic violence left ineffectively attended to by the legal system after repeated attempts by battered wives to have their safety protected.
To other societies that place such a high value on the preservation of a patriarchal family structure, what does our example (with it's soaring rate of divorce and family breakdown) do to encourage men in these places to seek other ways of resolving marital disputes or for women in such societies to push harder for legal reform within their own countries?
I believe that the loudest statement in support of change is made through living the example. We've made it to the point of having the language and legal instruments of change well established, BUT until those within our own culture who are entrusted with enforcing the laws - and the husbands in our country who still perpetrate domestic violence - fully integrate the message within our own society, we've little to offer if we're hoping to open closed minds.
I hope we never stop being outraged or shocked when we hear of violence being condoned as an effective means to resolve anything.
I recognize that I have little power to change what I perceive to be an unacceptable situation that is still practiced with acceptance within another culture. Change must be seen as more desireable than the status quo.
What, besides our words and our hand wringing over these things, have we done as a society to provide such incentive? Have we really demonstrated a better way?
If we want to see change happen elsewhere, we really do need to begin at home - be the change we wish to see. Of course we should continue to state our refusal to accept such views - but we need to start within our own homes, society, country. Like it or not, we still live in glass houses when it comes to this problem. We've taken steps, but we've a long way to go yet. Yes we've begun by addressing such issues at a legal level - but in too many instances, it's still only a token gesture. We still hear far too many stories of domestic violence left ineffectively attended to by the legal system after repeated attempts by battered wives to have their safety protected.
To other societies that place such a high value on the preservation of a patriarchal family structure, what does our example (with it's soaring rate of divorce and family breakdown) do to encourage men in these places to seek other ways of resolving marital disputes or for women in such societies to push harder for legal reform within their own countries?
I believe that the loudest statement in support of change is made through living the example. We've made it to the point of having the language and legal instruments of change well established, BUT until those within our own culture who are entrusted with enforcing the laws - and the husbands in our country who still perpetrate domestic violence - fully integrate the message within our own society, we've little to offer if we're hoping to open closed minds.
Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,987
Location: Florida, Hurricane Central
Location: Florida, Hurricane Central
January 5th, 2008, 09:09 PM
Are we misinterpreting this article?
This is what it says
Does he really mean "beating" as we understand it?
Are we misinterpreting this article?
This is what it says
Quote:
If a man and woman are husband and wife, the Qur’an provides solutions, firstly reaffirming any logical and acceptable reasons for such punishment. These solutions are in gradual phases and not just for women, but for men also.
For men, it begins with abandoning the marital bed, by opting to sleep elsewhere in the house. After this, they may discuss the matter with any respected person for the husband’s or the wife’s family, who could be in a position to advise the wife. If this also does not work, then the husband yields to beating the wife slightly. They do this because of a misunderstanding in the Quran, as the word says Darban, which is commonly understood today as beating. However, in Classic Arabic it means to set examples or to announce and proclaim. The more accurate meaning of this last one is that the husband finally has to set forth, to make a clear statement or proclamation, and if these measures fail, then divorce is preferable.
For men, it begins with abandoning the marital bed, by opting to sleep elsewhere in the house. After this, they may discuss the matter with any respected person for the husband’s or the wife’s family, who could be in a position to advise the wife. If this also does not work, then the husband yields to beating the wife slightly. They do this because of a misunderstanding in the Quran, as the word says Darban, which is commonly understood today as beating. However, in Classic Arabic it means to set examples or to announce and proclaim. The more accurate meaning of this last one is that the husband finally has to set forth, to make a clear statement or proclamation, and if these measures fail, then divorce is preferable.
Does he really mean "beating" as we understand it?
Hawkings former plumber
Posts: 7,945
Location: RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia Drive Apt 911
Location: RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia Drive Apt 911
January 5th, 2008, 09:59 PM
Apparently not, but we indulge in racism and hate on command it seems, to quickly looking for some convienient definintion that separates us from them, and if there isn't one at hand we will invent it ad hoc.
Apparently not, but we indulge in racism and hate on command it seems, to quickly looking for some convienient definintion that separates us from them, and if there isn't one at hand we will invent it ad hoc.
