US DoD white paper: wearing hijab is "passive terrorism"

I believe that drone strikes are a sign of subjugation.


A head scarf (hijab)? No. No more than a turban is an indicator of the subjugation of men in Sikh society.
The full-face covering (niqab)? Maybe, but I live in Canada, and I’ve seen women wearing them off their own free will. Even if it is an “indicator of subjugation,” it’s still their choice whether to wear it or not.
The shape-concealing full-body covering (burqa)? I would say that’s definitely an “indicator of subjugation,” but if a woman wants to wear it of her own free will, I still support that choice.


True and complete freedom from the shackles of ideology.


It isn’t a black and white thing. Certainly it could be considered part of a form of subjugation in some cases, but not in others.


I’m reminded of this article in the New York Times Magazine

sometimes women who "take up the veil"do so not because of traditionalism, not because of cultural practices, but because they have been exposed to something new in their lives. Perhaps this novel influence is benign-- perhaps it is something dangerous.


The Saudis did what the Ottomans, and two Yugoslav governments had real trouble with… [ETA- changed to a better pdf]


It’s a bit like dresses are in the west. It is inherently sexist and oppressive to have laws and conventions dictating women must wear dresses. It is not necessarily sexist for a woman to CHOOSE to wear a dress.


Not saying I’m better or worse than them them them. Just that I don’t display my religion in public (as the saying goes, neither religion nor dicks should be displayed to children)

I would never suggest that religion is the sole cause. I was talking about sexual repression, suppression, and oppression - something of a specialty for many religions.

Nothing in life is so simple. Sorry if I suggested that it was.

Hahahahah. Noooope. That’s not an old saying. That’s just you being a dick, like a child, about religion.


You’re alternating between catastrophe and indifference. I’m sure it’s other people who are ‘just’ too unserious. Yeah?


The pseudoskeptic community sure is something, isn’t it?


It would still be culturally entrenched.

It wasn’t “just” a fashion accessory.

It was, in part, worn as a deliberate “fuck you” statement to the ignorant fools who used 9/11 and its aftermath as an excuse to be dicks to Muslims.


Oh, is that the name for them? I’ve just been calling them “Culturally Christian Dawkinites”, because they’re so busy rebelling against the Christianity that they grew up in that they don’t recognize that other cultures and other religions are different from their own cultural backgrounds.


I was saying something earlier, about how people talk about the women like they have no agency. It’s weird. I don’t know why I’m suddenly reminded I said that.

As an aside, of course Captain Creamsiclehair was asked to weigh in on this issue.

You and a lot of people. (Genuinely unsure if you came up with that independently or if you picked it up like I did, from a friend.) It’s hard to explain it to them. It’s like asking a fish, “How’s the water?”

“What water?”


Picked it up from the Jewish community over on Tumblr, actually; getting harassed by them is practically a badge of membership in that community.

I got one a year ago, actually, that was this mess of Pretentious Evangelical Atheist idiocy. I proceeded to rip it to pieces

Anonymous Asked
How can you call yourself an atheist and still call yourself Jewish? Atheism is about rejecting all of those old fables and using reason and logic to make yourself better. You can either be Jewish (which is a religion, btw, in case you missed it) or you can be an atheist. And by saying that you can be both, you’re just keeping other people from waking up and seeing the truth. You call yourself a teacher, but I think you’re more of an enabler for people that don’t want to think and grow.

Wow, that didn’t take long, now did it? Turn on Anon and look what pops up within a few hours.

Let me guess. You’re a culturally Christian atheist who read Dawkins and now seeks to wake up the sheeple to the Big Lie, and thinks that Judaism is Christianity Lite. You’ve spent your entire life immersed in Christian thought, and, though you now reject Jesus as your personal savior, you still see everything through the lens of that Christian thought, including the idea that people need to be saved from making the wrong choice that (you think) will destroy them.

How am I doing? Oh, right, you’re on anon.

Let me break this down for you:Judaism is an ethno-religion. It is an ethnicity and a religion, and the ethnicity has a cultural heritage that stretches back to the Bronze Age. I am an atheist because I do not believe in god, and because I personally do not believe that, if there was a god as described in the Torah, that I would be willing to worship and give fealty to that entity. That is my choice, as a free-willed human being (more on the importance of choice in a moment).

That being said, while I reject theism, I find value, connection, social fulfillment and personal identity in my heritage as a Jew. The fact that I reject the religious aspects of Judaism doesn’t mean that I don’t respect and wish to honor those that came before me by acknowledging my heritage and identity. And the ethnic aspects of Judaism are so prejudiced against in the wide world that even if I tried to cast it off and assimilate, goyim like you would be quick to remind me of my place. But you don’t have that problem. You’re almost certainly culturally Christian, and either American or European, meaning that, despite the fact that you’re seen as less trustworthy than adulterers by most of the public, you can still go forth and enjoy the various aspects of your cultural heritage and society without being made an outsider. You don’t have to worry about losing your connection with your culture and ancestry, because it’s omnipresent, so you can focus on just rejecting the religious aspect.

Furthermore, as a culturally Christian atheist, you have spent your whole life fighting against the authoritarianism and dogmatism inherent in Christian culture (your “don’t want to think and grow” comment was something of a giveaway there). Guess what!? Those cultural factors don’t exist in Judaism. Hell, the name “Yisrael” means “He Who Wrestles With God”! We ask questions, we argue, we debate and slice hairs until the argument falls to pieces or the evidence does. The conformity to the word of the Pope or priest? Yeah, that doesn’t exist in Judaism. We argue. We joke that to get the number of opinions in a room full of Jews, you add one and square the number. Rabbis cube the number. And while we have our own internal problems with dogma and reactionary thinking, the Jewish ideal for the masses is not a bunch of ignorant sheep (see the Texas Board of Education’s standards for a classic example of the ideal being put into practice), but a group of stubborn, willful and educated people who won’t listen without a good argument first.

And, getting on to the philosophy of choice, let’s start at the basics. Would you say that you have a choice, a real choice, if there is only one option? Most people say no, which is why the US has such a low level of voter involvement–because the two parties are seen as kabuki theater, with little difference between them, both funded by the same wealthy people buying politicians (while this might not be the actual case, that’s a debate for another time. It is most certainly the perception).

So, if we take the statement that a choice has to have multiple options in order to be a meaningful choice as a valid one, then, quite simply:

If the choice between theism and atheism is to be a valid choice, then the choice must be respected as valid–even if you don’t agree with their choice. If someone chooses to be a theist, you have to respect their choice as valid–because then, by virtue of reciprocity, if you fail to respect their choice, why should they respect yours? And while Christians are well known for their hypocrisy in this area, well, I thought becoming an atheist was about using reason to become a better person and rejecting those tendencies? By sending this ask, you’ve shown that, no, you really aren’t any better than they are. .


Sure, and I don’t think you think life is simple. My point was that oppression stems from power, more than anything else. So if religion is empowered, it can certainly be oppressive. I don’t think anyone disagrees with that. Men deciding what women should or shouldn’t wear, in whatever context, is oppressive.


Because it’s true and you’re smart enough to be aware of that, unlike some men here! :wink: Plus, you said it upthread, too!

1 Like