If you raise your kids to believe in Allah you are setting up your grandchildren to live like this. Oppose religion, wherever you see it.
Well that’s pretty reductionist, and bigoted. If you’re going to judge Muslims by their extremists then you can’t leave out the Christians and Jews. Hell Jewish extremists in Israel are committing genocide as we speak.
Yes those as well.
They said religion, not just Islam.
And yet they specifically reference Allah. And elsewhere in the comment section they try and say Allah is different from the Judeo-Christian “God”.
You’re allowed to use a specific example to make a general point.
Funny how that seems to happen with minorities and Islam but not white people.
You’re the only person concerned about race here. Stop being racist.
That’s literally a line used against people protesting for minority rights. It’s not racist to call out problematic stuff.
Christianity is literally the most critiqued religion in the west lol
As they control Congress?
White people can’t be Muslim?
In a post about Muslims oppressing people, someone references Allah.
deleted by creator
But the Muslim, Christian, and Jewish god is the same deity. So “Allah” refers to the god of all 3 religions.
Not to islamophobes it doesn’t.
ALL religions
Cool. Now have the commenter up there clarify that.
I’m not saying I agree with op but their comment is very clear already
Obviously I disagree.
oppose religion
Then don’t specifically mention Allah. It’s one of the older propaganda methods. We don’t like the general group but fuck those guys specifically.
Funny how all the commenter needs to do to clear things up is edit their post. Instead you guys are all trying to make excuses.
deleted by creator
You can’t just equate religion with fascism. Not that I think religion is ethical or even separable from fascism, but they aren’t the same. Plenty of people practice religion without resorting to extremism.
I don’t think I did. Cancer and heart disease are not the same despite both having very similar results given enough time.
You implied that religion necessarily results in fascism.
If I did I am sorry. There is no way I can make a claim like that. If nothing else the world could end long before the process finished. There is a link between the two but it does not mean that a society with monotheism will have to, 100% of the time with no exceptions, eventually become a fascist one.
Allah is the God in Christianity though
What?
Not the commenter, but I assume they talk about the nature of Abrahamic religions.
Technically, Judaism, Christianity and Islam are just three updates of the same religion. First came Torah, then it got transformed into the Old Testament and completed with the New one to get the Bible, and then Bible itself got completed to get Quran.
With that came one abrahamic God - referred to as Yahweh in Judaism, Trinity in Christianity (note: Islam goes back and denies Trinity and godly nature of Jesus, calling him a prophet, not element of God, and rolling back on Holy Spirit, too, reinstating Father God as the only source of godly power), and Allah in Islam.
Thereby cancelling Allah means also cancelling Trinity and Yahweh, as they’re actually one and the same.
Before mankind was rebooting film franchises it was rebooting religions.
deleted by creator
Yes
ThorSquint.jpg
I don’t get it. Thor is not the same as Allah/God, even though he is a Norse god.
Not just exclusive to Islam. This is what Christians are actively working to make happen in the US.
Imagine looking around that classroom and thinking “All is right with this”.
Not just “all is right”. They see this and think “this is what God wants.”
That’s the thing with religious people. They don’t think. They’re told this is what God wants and that’s the end of it. That’s why it’s so important to keep churches out of government.
Allah wants.
If you didn’t know, they’re the same thing.
I know but I think it is important to emphasize. God as an abstract concept is not as bad as God as the personal total micromanaging god of Islam.
Neither is an abstract concept. They are the same exact deity from the same story and the same origin.
No they aren’t. There is a lot of difference between an Enlightenment era diest god, a local tribal god, and a triomni god.
What do you care anyhow? It isn’t like Islam is monotheistic. They have Satan and dijins.
You’re talking about God (such as the god of Islam and Catholicism, which is the same god) and gods, as in the concept of a god, which encompasses sun gods, Aztec gods, etc etc.
Usually I find how you capitalise matters here. God with a capital is a name, and talking about the “God” most people talk about.
A god, on the other hand, well you get the idea.
Anyway in this case we’re talking about the god of Islam, Christianity, Catholicism, etc. This god is the same god, and in English we would call that god “God”. Allah is that god’s name in another language. But it’s the same deity.
They must thank Allah every day for America’s Oligarchy gifting the military industrial complex trillions of dollars of tax payer money, and occupying their country for decades, to end up stuck in the same prison as their parents… Instead of the darkest timeline — universal healthcare and climate action!
At least it was a chance. We certainly fucked up in Afghanistan but it’s not like the Taliban came back from nowhere.
People act like the Afghani army that the US spent years trying to rebuild didn’t just up and run away.
“Welp, time to suck off the people who put me in this position!”
I’m pretty sure that’s against the teachings of Islam.
I especially like that guy in the back. That could be the teacher, but I guess that it’s someone who observes that the God is feared enough and nothing disallowed happens.
Makes me wonder how one makes such career choices, too
No where in Islam does it say that girls are not allowed to study, what a fucking bunch of dimwits these people are…
Edit: Narcissist would be the right word here
Removed by mod
Hey There, I appreciate you citing sources and doing some research yourself! However I would like to clarify the things that I feel are wrong in your argument, I am on mobile so please forgive if the comment is not formatted well
The first thing here is that as far as basic human dignity is considered, both men and women are equal in islam, if anything is permitted for men, it is also permitted for women and vice versa unless explicitly stated otherwise (and innovation is a huge in sin islam)[1]
Nowhere is education banned for women specifically, and it is in fact encouraged (which means for women as well)[2][3]
This is also a nice segue into the fact that islam doesn’t really ‘prohibit’ critical thinking, it deals with supernatural things, nowhere in islam you are taught calculus (cringe analogy i know, but it gets the point across), specifically islam talks about life after death, which we have no idea of, it’s completely open to interpretation, so there is really no answer to what happens after death or why life exists in the first place. Also nowhere in the quran will you find absurd statements like the sky is red like the thread suggests, most of the things that it talks about are established science or real life experiences (sun rising from the east, fruits growing from plants etc), or advice on how to handle situations like loans, marriage, divorces and so on, every institute has some sort of set of rules it is governed by, and you can read through the quran and won’t find anything that straight up contradicts common knowledge or established science, you can just think of it as a general set of rules, also it tackles a lot of things that the arabs of that time dealt with so it alienates some people, but the general rules which apply to everyone are very ‘naturalistic’/real life based, so saying that islam does not allow critical thinking is just wrong imo
Now on the most sensitive issue, the status of women in islam, i would like to point out that any hadith or verse from quran should be taken in context of the time and place it was revealed in the case of quran or said/performed in the case of hadith, things can change quite substantially depending on time and location, there are multiple examples of this of which i’ll add a source later
So in the hadith you mentioned about degeneration of women, i’ll first point out some reasons as to why it was probably said
-
With regard to a woman’s lack of reason, it is because women are easily swayed by emotions, which make them unable to deal appropriately with new issues that arise.
-
As for a woman’s lack of religious commitment, it is because women do not pray and fast during the days of their menses and when they are bleeding following childbirth.
As for them complaining, Surah Al Mujadilah (The first few verses) specifically talks about a women who complained to the prophet about the way her husband acted, and she was not the one criticized, instead all men warned about sinful divorce and the compensations they will have to complete(You can read it here https://quran.com/al-mujadila)
Also islam talk a lot about women rights in various other places[4][5][6][7], hence maintaining a sort of equilibrium, both men and women are warned about their wrongdoings
On the last topic of suckling, it has nothing to do with segregation, it was a different matter which this [8] explains quite well
I would like to end by saying that there is a reason scholars exist who spend their lives studying hadiths and quran, they both have to interpreted carefully to not arrive at the wrong conclusions, your understanding of hadith isn’t perfect, nor is mine, the best I can do is try to explain the best I can, no society is perfect, there are of course of a lot of extremist on any sort of ‘following’, you will even find atheists who don’t want any person who follows any religion to exist, but it is important to understand there are good people and scholars as well, while our opinions might differ, the best thing to do is to try to adopt the good qualities from both sides
And really the point I am trying to make from all of this is that ‘organizations’ like taliban or ‘some’ governments don’t really represent Islam, for them religion is just a tool they can use to bring a ton of people on their sides who will not bother to fact check their claims or even bother to learn about their own beliefs, the perfect example of this is the fact that in photo in the article, you can see a male teacher teaching an all-female class, the more appropriate thing here is to actually have a female teacher, but I guarantee that the taliban doesn’t hire female teachers, which is just enough for any reasonable person to understand the hypocrisy of these (talibani) people
[1] https://sunnah.com/nasai:1578
[2] https://sunnah.com/riyadussalihin:1388
[3]https://sunnah.com/riyadussalihin:1383, https://sunnah.com/riyadussalihin:1385
[4] https://quran.com/an-nisa/19
[5] https://quran.com/an-nisa/32
[6] https://sunnah.com/muslim:1468a
One major problem with the Abrahamic religions is that they are too scholarly in regard to their religious texts. It is horrifying how much collective brainpower has been wasted on this complete and utter bullshit, that could instead have been spent discovering the true nature of the universe.
You say that there are atheists who wish religious people to not exist. That is true, but perhaps not in the way you imply. The vast majority of atheists don’t want to see religious people killed, but rather freed from the bonds of religion, not only for their own good, but for the good of humanity. Religion is in the same category as poverty in terms of degradation and the wasting of human potential. Like poverty, it needs to be eradicated, not by eradicating the impoverished, but by improving education and social conditions.
He is not wrong lol. His interpretation is just more “originalist”
You can reform islam all you want but the text says what it says.
Removed by mod
The video you linked has uh, let’s say a lot of problems The first red flag being that the individual claims that ‘he is more knowledgeable about islam than anybody else’ which is a major red flag, but let’s put that aside for now
The very first hadith he quotes is da’eef (weak) so that is pretty much irrelevant considering there are sahih(correct) contradictory hadith(s) one of them being this Riyad as-Salihin 1390 https://sunnah.com/riyadussalihin:1390 (Sahih)(Correct), this hadith specifically mentions religious knowledge, and doesn’t specify who gets this knowledge or not
But he uses the weak hadith to push his point anyway, and the reason is because the feeling i get is that this guy is trying to say we should not share any of our knowledge with people of other faiths
Second issue he mentions is that women are not allowed to come to colleges with non mehrams and not learn anything that takes them away from islam and uses it as the reason girls are not supposed to study in Islam, what he conveniently misses out though is that men are also subject to these rulings, and i don’t think men have any problem going to colleges, flip this guy from atheist to religious and this is the type of guy who would ban women from education, I think i don’t need to explain the mentality this guy has, also there is a thing called ‘concessions’ which are granted by scholars, and most of the (decent) scholars are of the opinion that studying in co-ed schools and colleges is permissible as long both the sides stay within the prescribed rulings
Third: This guy picks a random guys book who I have never heard of and starts quoting whatever he has written, safe to say i don’t care what ‘Ashraf Ali Thanvi’ has to say, he never seems to derive any of his opinions from quran and sunnah, i have already mentioned that no society is perfect, while I have never even seen the book, let alone heard this guys name, I will admit that there maybe some places where this guy is popular, and I will wholeheartedly admit that this is a problem, the source of sharia is hadith and quran, and ijma (see the last part) (and to some extent the four imam’s of fiqh) anyone who starts saying whatever they think is best/appropriate is dishonest
Then at 15:50, he says the most ridiculous thing possible, he shows a fatwa where IT CLEARLY STATES THAT IT IS PERMISSIBLE FOR HER TO STUDY IF THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVES and then he proceeds to ask what if these laws are not met, what laws are not met? I don’t know about any college that forces male and female people to sit together, or make them talk forcefully, because if something like that exists, it is an issue on a state level, people are given freedom of expression, no women (or men) should be forced to do anything.
He then proceeds to say the prophet only took help from women in those things which the women were able to do, what? How can someone do something they can’t do, the statement doesn’t even make sense, this was really the point where I was about to close the video but then he said some other things that i think could be clarified, you can learn more about women treating men in battle here: https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/156919/the-life-of-rufaydah-al-aslamiyyah
His argument about The university of qarawiyyin is also so ignorant it’s hilarious, he didn’t even bother to read the Wikipedia page which clearly states that there is lack of documentation about who used to study there and what type of studies were there, regardless if it’s fake or not, he used this to try to prove his point anyway, if you dig deeper into wiki you will find this:
Students were male, but traditionally it has been said that “facilities were at times provided for interested women to listen to the discourse while accommodated in a special gallery (riwaq) overlooking the scholars’ circle”. Like I said, that there is a lack of documentation, so really anything is to be taken with a grain of salt, it also shows that there was period of decline until the early 1900’s meaning there were probably fewer students, it was finally reformed in the early-mid 1900s until it was finally integrated into the state educational system in 1947, and women have been studying there since 1940’s.
Overall this is just a pathetic source when you are trying to prove something.
I would also like to add that a hypothesis is not given by a conducting one experiment, a lot of factors are taken into account and the experiment is repeated multiple times with different conditions, similarly picking one ayah from the quran and using it to prove a point doesn’t make a lot of sense, you need look at the context, and the other verses and hadiths as well, which i have already provided a few and you can look for more yourself, or if you want I can list them, which will take a lot of time on my side
The next slave girl concept has been long obliterated in today’s modern world, you have to remember like i said in my previous comment, quran also has a lot of laws for the arabs of that time which have been called illiterate a variety of times, people really used to marry practically infinite amount of women and even their mothers, there are many hadiths that talk about releasing slaves and how rewarding it is [1][2][3] in fact it is a compensation in many cases where you miss important religious duties, to the point where the system has died (i am not saying Islam did it, it happened due to a variety of reasons)
Also even in that time you just couldn’t make any girl a slave, this was only for the prisoners of war, you were supposed to share your food and wealth with them and help them in tough works, I am not saying that having a slave is even remotely justified today, but what i am saying is that there is a lot more nuance to it
Also in response to some other replies, I am not really trying to influence or change your opinion, you are absolutely entitled to your opinions, I am just writing this to speak about how many muslims I see who are discriminated by people because of terrorist organizations or an incomplete understanding of Islam, even if you don’t agree with the teachings, it doesn’t even remotely justify people using terrible words and accusing them of actions they didn’t do in the first place, not just about islam, i could make a similar case about judaism, christianity or any other religion for that matter.
Some people need to start seeing other people as people first not muslim/christian/jew/atheist
[1] Sahih al-Bukhari 2517 https://sunnah.com/bukhari:2517
[2] Sahih al-Bukhari 2518 https://sunnah.com/bukhari:2518
[3] Sahih al-Bukhari 2519 https://sunnah.com/bukhari:2519, Sahih al-Bukhari 2520 https://sunnah.com/bukhari:2520
Side-note: Ijma is “ Ijmāʿ (Arabic: إجماع ʾiǧmāʿ [ʔɪd͡ʒˈmæːʕ], “consensus”) is an Arabic term referring to the consensus or agreement of the Islamic community on a point of Islamic law.”, not something a random guy said on youtube
Removed by mod
-
Insightful!
Infact, in thr quran, Allah encourages everyone to gather knowledge.
These fuckers are making a mockery of Islam
The religulous are always the worst at all things, ironically including being religious.
rampant misogynists would be appropriate too.
It isn’t about religion with any of these types. Rather, it’s about religion being a tool they can use so that those who do think it’s all about religion allow them to have authority.
Religion is the second worst plague visited on humanity. As you say, the worst is the lust for power over others. Religion, especially the Abrahamic religions, is second because it is uniquely positioned to facilitate the ambitions of those who lust for power. Pure violence can subjugate a population for a while, but real, long-lasting, self-regulating, trans-generational oppression has usually required religion.
Brother, that’s literally the point of all religion. Religion is by definition a social institution intended as a tool for public influence.
I don’t disagree with you but I think it’s important to draw a distinction between the motives for that influence, which I believe falls primarily between three possibilities: someone seeking to save souls (or true believers with no personal motive other than maybe getting points for their own soul), someone seeking to manipulate others into being good to each other, and someone just seeking personal power and who will adjust the “good” their religion supports based on their situation.
They can all blur into each other, so reality is a bit more complicated than that, but what I wanted to express was that most (if not all) religious leaders present as the first, but some not insignificant portion of them (if not all) actually fall more into the 2nd or 3rd categories. They don’t believe in the same god that their followers believe in.
I think most assume that they are true believers.
religion sucks, conservatism sucks. that shit is so old.
Absolutely reprehensible and repulsive. Sick fuckers are so scared of women that they will not let them be educated. Fuck those backwards ass sexist monsters. Indefensible
Fucking incel losers, this Taliban.
learning is never over. No matter how hard authoritarians try.
This is exactly what the alt-right Christian fucks want. I’m surprised that they don’t realize how much in common they have with the Taliban.
religion sucks dude
religious fanaticism in all regards
I’ll never forget, a few years into the war I asked what my Afghani colleague thought of the war. He told me “I hate the Taliban. When I was a boy they came to my village and slit all the men’s throats. NOT a few of the men. ALL of the men.” Leaving those people to suffer that regime was a greater crime than any we committed in the 20 years of occupation.
Leaving those people to suffer that regime was a greater crime than any we committed in the 20 years of occupation
This doesnt make any sense lmao.
We tried. We failed. So we stopped.
Should be raining switchblade drones on their leadership until they learn to behave. Let them play 13th century games on a modern battlefield without the courtesy of putting ourselves in AK-47 or exploding vest range.
Removed by mod
Drones are effective at killing people, but they’re dogshit at killing ideology.
Ideas have to have heads to live in.
So kill em all then?
Y E s
More than that, drones are bad at constructing infrastructure, but they’re really good at destroying it. If you’re tearing through a housing complex to kill a terrorist, you’re going to make a lot more disillusioned people out of those who are now homeless. It’s really epic how people don’t understand this, and don’t understand how people might not look kindly to a military occupation generally, especially one that isn’t helping much to build out their infrastructure, or, maybe more importantly, position them in a way where they’re actually well off in the global market, since that’s something they have to worry about now in a neoliberal, globalized society. And then instead everyone’s just like, yeah, well, they don’t want our help, but they’re still a threat, let’s kill everyone, and then we can save the little girls that are never going into the classroom again after they’re fucking dead.
I hate this place, bro.
You’re right, what I’ve described above is the same as what you’re talking about. Good job not noticing the differences which were clearly meant to mislead.
It’s too late. Americans have adopted the ‘brown people need to solve their own problems’ mantra for this generation.
Come back in 20 years when things are so shit we can no longer look away.
If you kill enough of the right ones, it’ll work. When their leader’s first act in office is to hose what’s left of the last guy (and it will have been a guy) off of the floor and walls, I think they’ll gain some perspective and make better choices. Can’t be as polite and delicate as we were over the past couple decades.
Yes, because achieving lasting positive change by killing people has worked SO well in Afghanistan of all places 🤦
Why should you give a shit what they do? I’ll hunt down anyone who commits acts of terror against the US, but I don’t give a fuck if these people want to repress their own people. It’s their choice how to live, not mine. One man’s repression is another’s freedom since religion makes people do dumbass things. They’re not worth the cost of a switchblade nor any of the other expensive shit we lobbed at that country for 2 decades. Once we had the guy that coordinated 9/11 we should have pulled out. They don’t want western style “civilization” they’re perfect happy (definitely not all of them) with their value and political system.
Guess I’m one of those weirdos who wants humans to have rights even if we don’t share a flag or similar genitals.
You’re literally calling for raining bombs on a country of people who don’t want that… you’re not asking for human rights. You’re pushing your ideas of right on them. Have you learned nothing from what the middle eastern people have been telling western civilization over the last several years? They don’t want our ideas. They have religious texts that they believe sets up how to live and act for them. Just leave them the fuck alone and focus on our own countries.
Is there really no middle ground between “I don’t give a fuck about them” and “Bomb the country” ?
In logical thinking there is, but not in US foreign policy.
No. Clearly only two options
I’m calling for raining bombs on a select group of people who can’t seem to navigate their way out of the dark ages. Advocating for the “sit back and watch” position puts a higher value on the lives of tyrants than the rights of the people they oppress. If we kill the ones in charge who turn out to be assholes, they’ll either run out of assholes or get the message. Both outcomes are fine.
So if Russia wants to bomb your leaders because your country allows slaves in prison like a middle age shithole, you wouldn’t mind do you? You should actually welcome it.
And then when your leaders keep ruling as tyrants by refusing to give universal healthcare to your people, the EU should execute your leaders immediately, you agree?
And when your police keep murdering black people, your leaders should once again get blasted, you’ll get the message eventually, right?
You wouldn’t disagree with these rightful bombings, would you? It’s all for putting you out of your oppression and the dark ages.
You have made an accurate and fitting comparison, Vladimirovich. Definitely the same things going on in both cases.
You’re a clown. The US has literally banned abortion and you want to take the high moral ground. Lmfao.
I am fine with that. If all the politicians in the US were put on show trials and hung tomorrow I would go to work same as normal. You can do that for the Wall Street fuckers as well, plus the health insurance people, the lobbyists, anyone who sits on a think tank.
Pretty much anyone who claims they get to rule over me and not provide people with a service. Go do whatever you want.
Pretty much anyone who claims they get to rule over me and not provide people with a service.
The problem is that these two things aren’t, you know, unrelated. You say, the health insurance people, right, and I would generally agree they can go fuck themselves, but I think if we kill a bunch of them, the power vacuum will probably just fill itself with the exact same shit, while people slowly get radicalized and possibly become nationalistic because everyone’s getting killed by a foreign government, you know, especially as the government that’s getting bombed to shit starts cutting propaganda about it. You need to actively be providing an alternative that people will flock to, when you go and kill these people, otherwise, you’ll just be eliminating infrastructure in the form of people, and you’ll be turning everything into a dark age political radicalization hellzone.
their own people
This might come as a shock to you, but those are people just like you.
They’re still worth saving even if they aren’t from your country.
You’ll understand when you’re older, maybe.
I love when you lemmings end your shit with “maybe when you’re older” like as if you’re some all knowing creature because you’re old as shit (boomer).
Maybe when you’re older you’ll learn to leave people the fuck alone that want to be left alone. We’ve tried world building enough. The Soviets, the British and the US. How many dead Middle Eastern people will it take before your colonial ass realizes it’s not what they want.
They’re only worth saving if they want to be saved. Keep worrying about your $1 food, I’ve got bigger things to be worried about that don’t involve making kids terrified of clear blue skies.
Gods, I’m probably going to regret this, but…
I agree with your overall point, but the unempathetic way you’re expressing it is really off-putting to me. For example…
I’ve got bigger things to be worried about
People say things like this all the time about problems that don’t affect them and that they can’t control (some other examples are homelessness, addiction, etc.). It always strikes me as being super uncaring and cold. No one’s asking you to help them directly or to let it spoil your day or whatever – but it takes absolutely zero effort to just briefly recognize systemic problems like these. In fact, I think it’s important that we do so. Why? Because that shit could happen here as well. That 6th-grade girl could be me, or my nibling, or my neighbor, and there but for the grace of god go I. (It’s an expression, I’m not being religious here.)
Yeah, yeah I know “thoughts and prayers” and all that noise, but I think it’s more than that. There are oppressive religious entities here where I live in the US. Seeing what this leads to … nothing we can do to stop it, right. And FFS the US sending our military to try to fix anything is absolutely … “colonial” is a good term for it, as you said. Even non-military intervention, like when we send politicians to Latin American countries to lecture them on instability that we created. So wack.
But I can at least recognize the humanity here, and what it must feel like to get one of those girls. It doesn’t really constitute “worry” to just care about another person and to express that.
They don’t want to be “saved”
Really? You speak for all of them?
Obviously not for all, but demonstrably for the majority
What about the ones who you don’t speak for?
What about them?
The linked article suggests otherwise.
The linked article, like the vast majority of articles about Afghanistan, exclusively covers Kabul.
So the people in Kabul are not Afghan?
Go troll somewhere else
Should have spent 20 years establishing islamic-free zones. You can only enter if you curse the prophet. Build up fortresses of civilization.
Or just the dark mosque where young men pray and literally learn to box with blindfolds in the dark to take out their rage.
Now imagine the next big movie, the transporter but next level badass, with beards, tattoos, swords, guns and straight up ICI the killer levels blood and Michael bay camera works. All in some middle eastern version of Bruce Lee but where the main character winds up fighting terrorists, Rambo, some random corrupt guy, his friends asshole neighbor and a whole gang of dudes who are all rapists or something strange like that, then there’s some GTA bad guys, some Russian mobster guy, the Wagner guys, then the final boss is like Bin Ladens paedophile friend/cousin whose secretly an o.g traitor, and also an MMA fighter, a kamikaze pilot and a bomb maker guy who has an entire harem of children and even a secret chapel hidden in the mountains where he prays to an evil alternate Allah for more children or something.
The lore combined with the action would be enough to make a whole trilogy of badass
That’s funny because they think the same thing about the United States, as clearly indicated by bin Laden’s letter to the US.
I’m just saying that he speaks in the exact same tone as this commentor and we should take note of the danger of this rhetoric.
No words to describe this stupidity.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
In September 2021, a month after U.S. and NATO troops withdrew from Afghanistan following two decades of war, the Taliban announced that girls were barred from studying beyond sixth grade.
The Taliban have defied global condemnation and warnings that the restrictions will make it almost impossible for them to gain recognition as the country’s legitimate rulers.
Last week, U.N. special envoy Roza Otunbayeva expressed concern that a generation of Afghan girls is falling behind with each day that passes.
Last week, an official in the Education Ministry said Afghan girls of all ages are allowed to study in religious schools known as madrassas, which have traditionally been boys-only.
In another part of Kabul, 13-year old Setayesh Sahibzada wonders what the future holds for her.
Analyst Muhammad Saleem Paigir warned that excluding women and girls from education will be disastrous for Afghanistan.
The original article contains 327 words, the summary contains 141 words. Saved 57%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
My initial thought experiment on this was “could these girls migrate to the west on a visa to complete their studies and return?”, and then I went down the rabbit hole of the demographics of Afghanistan. Of a population of around 40m, 46% are under 15, which is mad! That’s potentially a lot of girls that will lose an education.
I wonder if a remote education could be the way forward? Let these girls study remotely online, assuming they have some form of internet access available, and create a worldwide visa that would allow any Afghan girl that can pass a standard entry exam to attend university. While we have no need to provide children from another country an education, this would probably be a low-cost solution, and one that I imagine many rich philanthropists would happily provide as a grant.
This solution sort of implies that the Taliban would allow it. Like the whole system over there isn’t designed to crush these women as a form of control. It’s not a lack of ability to educate them this is by design of their government.
For a visa like this to work you’d need the government and the Men of the country to be in agreement with it happening. That currently isn’t the case. Providing a visa that almost no one will be able to use even if they wanted too would not only not help but could easily be something that’s pointed to as “we’re already providing a way for them to get educated and we don’t have to do anything else.”
True, under current laws women obviously can’t travel without a man present, so it would basically mean sending a full family over, or at the very least, a parent or partner with them.
My main point of highlighting it was that it’s not a small number of people, and that the young population of Afghanistan isn’t anywhere near as small as I thought. A remote education might help, as it’s something that women can access without having a man present.
The young population is really high in Gaza too. You often see that with poor nations.
Not to bang on about this but, how are you building the infrastructure to get reliable internet (that the men won’t let women access anyway) to remote afghan villages that don’t even have running water?
I think you’re wildly under estimating the control men have over women there. You also may be under the impression it’s just the government trying to control and crush these women, it’s not. The average man in Afghanistan is not only complicit but active in subjugating Afghani women. This isn’t about lack of access to education, it’s about lack of personhood and autonomy for women. Afghanistan has education, women just aren’t allowed to be educated.
Edit: so I just realized you’re probably really young given the solutions you’ve proposed. (I reread and suggesting to send a full family/guardian can only be someone young or a troll.) I apologize if I’m coming off really harsh. The reality is just that men are actively trying to subjugate/control/own/deny basic human rights to women in some of these countries and your comments completely missing that got under my skin. My apologies.
Coming close to my forties, but I’ll take the youth comment! It’s not a serious suggestion, but more of a discussion starter to how help could be given in instances where women want an education AND their families support them.
It kind of makes sense because I bet the life expectancy in Afghanistan is not very high at all, so a higher percentage of the population would tend to be younger because of that.
there’s also the whole issue of, you know, not letting them in cuz they have no education or marketable skills
we don’t just let people in
That’s just the multipolar world kicking in.
Just religion
No. The world may be multipolar, but this is clearly a low point on the moral landscape.
Yes, that’s the joke. When people say they want a “multipolar world” what they mean is that we should not use global institutions to influence global values and we should tolerate all sorts of human rights abuses in the interest of some odd idealistic parity.
Removed by mod
I feel like when people say multi polar world, it still benefits China and America with their space programs etc but quite literally leaves Australia, NZ, EU and Russia in a pickle.
Only on religion.
