Why is that when State and Religion clash, women are always the pawns?

[elehhhhna]

Abortion.

Birth Control.

Attire? Yep: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7309736&mesg_id=7309736





What is this #$^%$ ? We're the majority in every country but IIRC China. When do we get treated like the dammned majority? We need a global XY REVOLUTION 1!!1!11

[WildEyedLiberal]

1. You really think Islamic veils are about women's choice?

You really think most women wear them because of their own free and independent choice? I support the spirit of your OP but find it extremely ironic that you're using a prime symbol of women's oppression as a banner for feminism. There's absolutely nothing feminist about a patriarchal culture forcing women to cover their entire body head to toe lest their decadent flesh tempt some man into fornicating with her on the spot.

FWIW, I feel the same way about those ridiculous ankle-length pentecostal skirts, although they are marginally better in that, at least, they don't rob a woman of her identity by shielding 90% of her face from view.

[elehhhhna]

3. When one is born to a tradition -- the old aunties and grandmothers

should not be subjected by the state to take off their dammned veils. Encourage? Great! Force? No.



The Mormons believe a LOT of crazy stuff but let them have their magic underwear, anyway.

[WildEyedLiberal]

8. I think the fine line is between crazy and oppressive

Mormon underwear falls pretty exclusively in the crazy department - it's not exclusive to one gender and isn't visible to anyone else. The veil, however, sends a crystal clear message to the woman who wears it and anyone who happens to look at her - that, by virtue of being a woman, her body does not belong to her and is not hers to reveal as she chooses. It's just as crazy as the Mormon underwear, but infinitely more dangerous.

I don't know how I feel about France's proposed law, other than I don't think it can be judged according to the American legal standard. It would be stricken as unconstitutional in a nanosecond here, but France has no such guarantees of religious freedom. I do think that the ban attacks a symptom more than the disease (the disease being religious oppression, not Islam itself, just to clarify) and as such I'm not sure what they intend to accomplish. And yeah, it'd be nice if there were at least a corresponding ban on men - but that's the rub, isn't it? Most of these "traditions" don't require the men to wear anything too special in the way of attire - just the women. That's why I really can't be bothered to defend most of these "traditions," because they almost uniformly have misogynistic roots and intentions.

[Better Today]

2. We aren't always, it's often gays, ethnicities, and other. Just that being a

part of a certain minority, one tends to focus on those sleights.

[enlightenment]

4. Because with few exceptions, religion is 'written' by men.

They got to decide the rules of the game . . .

And I agree with your thoughts on the matter.

[elehhhhna]

6. is the pont of it to keep us down? WTH? Sure seems that way.

So why do we let the State cave to this imaginary crap?

[enlightenment]

17. Not sure.

I could surmise that part of the problem is that these 'mainstream' religions (all of which are based on patriarchy) have successfully inculcated women - convinced them that believing in the God they define means accepting the rules of the religion. If they buck against the harness, they are chastised in some form, up to and including physical abuse and death. That tends to put a damper on the desire of other women to question the status quo.

To gain control of something, you have to appropriate it and that's a slow, slow slog when it comes to religion.

[Gwendolyn]

5. What makes you think that ultra-conservative religious women want to join your revolution.

They love being slaves to men. And more than likely they're completely anti-abortion and birth control as well. And think gay people should be executed or re-programmed.

If women were all on the same page, it'd be one thing. But we're not.

[elehhhhna]

9. like the book says, they can be "Left Behind"

lol. fine, their choice to be a vessel or whatever delusion they choose.

I'll go out on a limb here and say that msot of us want equal treatment. No more, no less.

[Gwendolyn]

12. I guess I'm mentioning it because you listed ultra-religious women in your OP.

Those ladies in their burqas are not interested in attaining equal rights for women. You see, we're all over the map. :)

[elehhhhna]

14. That doesn't mean they'd fight it. We have equal responsibilities.

Equal rights would be appropriate.

[elehhhhna]

15. That doesn't mean they'd fight it. We have equal responsibilities.

Equal rights would be appropriate.

[valerief]

7. Men are bigger and more violent than women. nt

[elehhhhna]

11. that's succinct.

[Thirtieschild]

10. They still blame it on Eve

[elehhhhna]

13. You know they made that Eve shit up just to down us.

She was apparently a lousy mother, too. Look how her one son turned out.

The mother of all people was sleazy and conniving? Great job, God!

Woman: God's first fuckup. FABULOUS basis for a religion!

[pitohui]

16. because numbers aren't power, money and power are power

women are pawns because there are too many of us and we are in competition with each other, we have value in this society exactly as long as we are young and beautiful, and then it's gone unless we have money which most of us will never be able to earn, since the highest paying of jobs are overwhelmingly given to males

you know this, so i'm not sure why you're asking the question

powerless people rarely rise up, they are too busy trying to survive

there will never be a global revolution because the youngest and strongest figure they'll be the lucky ones who can parlay looks, beauty, and youth into riches and once they find out the old truth, that they are a disposable toy, and that nothing fades so fast as looks, beauty, and youth, it's too late, the attention has passed to the next generation

i'm tired of fighting for young women who don't care about abortion rights because, to them, having a baby is a way to get DNA to sue a man for $$$ and they are too ignorant of basic math to notice that the money they get from the man is NEVER enough to cover the real costs of having a baby/losing their looks/losing their career

there was a brief moment in the 70s when women stood together, but individuals decided there was too much money to be made selling their sexuality -- nothing has so brief a lifespan as sex appeal but if you try saying so you're put down as bitter and jealous so every generation has to learn its own lesson the hard way

those who are incapable of learning from the bad experiences of the past then get to enjoy those bad experiences for themselves

there is no benefit to being a "majority," if women were truly rare and precious, perhaps we'd be treated better, but we're a dime a dozen, if you don't want to clean some creep's toilet, there's always another woman who will, ever notice that?

how many bright, intelligent, won't-take-shit women do you know in great relationships? how many bright, intelligent, won't-take-shit women do you know who are single? the women who are losers often times actually get more men (of course the quality of the men they get they'd prob. be better off w/out)

if you want to change things for yrself, get $$$ any legal way possible, if you want to change things for women, help yrself and other women get $$$ any legal way possible -- but it's surprisingly difficult if you're not plugged into the old boy's network

we live in a capitalist society, if we want to be taken seriously as adults, we need to get our hands on some damn $$$

and if you want to defend the rights of religious hysterics to force women into wearing hijabs/head scarves/burqas by all means...get some counseling...because that is not empowering to women...france is right on this and you are wrong