Islamophiles / Regressive Left - Liberal non-Muslims who are desperate to protect the Religion of Peace

  • ⚙️ Performance issue identified and being addressed.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
FierceBrosnan said:
I never see them take a swing at Islam, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Hinduism, Shintoism, Buddhism, any other ism you can think of. And you'd think with their more progressive stance on the world at large they would be against stuff like Sharia law, which would be going backwards against all the social progress we've made.
Click to expand...
Again, it's this simple: white kids aren't forced by their parents into those religions. There's no bitterness towards those for this reason

Sad to say you're thinking too hard. Leftism is a mental illness. You almost have to drink bleach to connect their emotional reasonings.
 
Cosmos said:
Then you'd probably enjoy this post:

http://islamissexist.tumblr.com/post/163633514141/helloema5-this-is-hardcore
(Archive, original video not included)

Basically, it's a video where a privileged, Western Muslim woman defends Sharia law, claiming that it grants women equal rights. The first few reblogs are basically gushing over how Sharia law really isn't bad, and how #woke the woman in the video is. Thankfully, some people eventually started reblogging "what the fuck is wrong with you people??"

You know, as annoying as radfems (radical feminists) usually are, I've noticed that they're by far the most willing people to call out Islamist bullshit on Tumblr. If you dig into the reblogs, you'll find that many of the bloggers that call out the glorification of Islam publicly identify as radfems. I may disagree with them on a lot, but at least they're actually standing up for feminist values.

Oh, and if you're curious about how Sharia Law treats women, here's a fantastic list that explains ten of the worst laws on women. I also listed some of the worst rulings below.

  • A woman's testimony is worth half that of a man's, because women are "deficient in intelligence."
  • A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits.
  • Muslim women are prohibited from marrying non-Muslim men, although Muslim men can marry Christian and Jewish women.
  • The testimonies of 4 male witnesses are required to prove the rape of a female. If she cannot find 4 male witnesses attesting to her rape, she can be found guilty of adultery and punished.
  • A woman can only have 1 husband, while men can have up to 4 wives.
  • Men are allowed to beat their wives for insubordination.
  • A man can unilaterally divorce his wife. A wife needs her husband's consent to divorce. In countries run by Islamic law, it is notoriously difficult for women to secure a divorce (even if the husband is blatantly abusive or ran off somewhere).
  • Sex with pre-pubescent girls is permissible (note that the verse says "those who have not menstruated," referring to girls who haven't had their menarche yet).
  • Female rulers are frowned upon. Muhammad himself said “Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler.”
  • A husband has absolute authority over his wife. He is entitled to her body whenever he wants, and she is required to obey him.
  • Muslim warriors are allowed to capture the women of “infidels” and use them for their sexual gratification. Female slaves are referred to as ما ملكت ايمانكم (ma malikat aymānikum), or "those whom your right hand possess," and her owner is allowed to rape her whenever he wants.

FEMINISM!!!
Click to expand...

The site that is all "pro-woman" is also pro a movement that basically reduces women to being animals...What an irony. It'd be funny if it weren't so dangerous.

Chris did nothing wrong said:
I have. I'm just extremely unlucky.
Click to expand...

Well, at least they're committed to their ideology unlike the "bwah going to church with mummy is boring" crowd.
 
Picaninnyfreeze said:
Again, it's this simple: white kids aren't forced by their parents into those religions. There's no bitterness towards those for this reason

Sad to say you're thinking too hard. Leftism is a mental illness. You almost have to drink bleach to connect their emotional reasonings.
Click to expand...

Agreed I need to pump the brakes a little before I get too heated on this subject. Staggering mental gymnastics from these types though, makes me wish it was an Olympic sport just to see them rake in the gold.
 
FierceBrosnan said:
Agreed I need to pump the brakes a little before I get too heated on this subject. Staggering mental gymnastics from these types though, makes me wish it was an Olympic sport just to see them rake in the gold.
Click to expand...
At a certain point you hit a wall of dunning kruger and just have to accept it. There is no logic to leftism, all emotion.

But at least in understanding why there is some closure, since the logic dots will never connect.
 
FierceBrosnan said:
Was it more or less toxic than when they go after Christianity?
Click to expand...

Well Christianity will always be seen as the big one for them because they live in Christian majority countries. But most of them were part of the "euphoric atheist movement", so the critiques really don't amount to anything more but "Wow how could you believe in a sky fairy!" So most of atheists I've seen attack Islam have turned out to be shitty people for completely unrelated reasons.

Take this guy, make a stance that Islam is the worst thing in the world:


Then he goes on to kill his girlfriend:

https://kiwifarms.net/threads/russi...kolpakov-1-3rd-of-the-skeptic-feminist.30864/
 
Cosmos said:
Then you'd probably enjoy this post:

http://islamissexist.tumblr.com/post/163633514141/helloema5-this-is-hardcore
(Archive, original video not included)

Basically, it's a video where a privileged, Western Muslim woman defends Sharia law, claiming that it grants women equal rights. The first few reblogs are basically gushing over how Sharia law really isn't bad, and how #woke the woman in the video is. Thankfully, some people eventually started reblogging "what the fuck is wrong with you people??"

You know, as annoying as radfems (radical feminists) usually are, I've noticed that they're by far the most willing people to call out Islamist bullshit on Tumblr. If you dig into the reblogs, you'll find that many of the bloggers that call out the glorification of Islam publicly identify as radfems. I may disagree with them on a lot, but at least they're actually standing up for feminist values.

Oh, and if you're curious about how Sharia Law treats women, here's a fantastic list that explains ten of the worst laws on women. I also listed some of the worst rulings below.

  • A woman's testimony is worth half that of a man's, because women are "deficient in intelligence."
  • A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits.
  • Muslim women are prohibited from marrying non-Muslim men, although Muslim men can marry Christian and Jewish women.
  • The testimonies of 4 male witnesses are required to prove the rape of a female. If she cannot find 4 male witnesses attesting to her rape, she can be found guilty of adultery and punished.
  • A woman can only have 1 husband, while men can have up to 4 wives.
  • Men are allowed to beat their wives for insubordination.
  • A man can unilaterally divorce his wife. A wife needs her husband's consent to divorce. In countries run by Islamic law, it is notoriously difficult for women to secure a divorce (even if the husband is blatantly abusive or ran off somewhere).
  • Sex with pre-pubescent girls is permissible (note that the verse says "those who have not menstruated," referring to girls who haven't had their menarche yet).
  • Female rulers are frowned upon. Muhammad himself said “Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler.”
  • A husband has absolute authority over his wife. He is entitled to her body whenever he wants, and she is required to obey him.
  • Muslim warriors are allowed to capture the women of “infidels” and use them for their sexual gratification. Female slaves are referred to as ما ملكت ايمانكم (ma malikat aymānikum), or "those whom your right hand possess," and her owner is allowed to rape her whenever he wants.

FEMINISM!!!
Click to expand...

A lot of people I talk to like to respond to that sort of list with "That's only the most extreme interpretations" "That's not real Islam" "That's just the Mormons of the Islamic Religion, anyone outside Saudi Arabia isn't like that"
 
Picaninnyfreeze said:
Leftism is a mental illness. You almost have to drink bleach to connect their emotional reasonings.
Click to expand...
I've read six responses by you today and three of them had some variant on this 'leftists are mentally ill' shit. It's dumb and you come across like a worldnewsdaily commenter, obsessed with hating those evil leftists.
 
Ineedahero said:
I've read six responses by you today and three of them had some variant on this 'leftists are mentally ill' shit. It's dumb and you come across like a worldnewsdaily commenter, obsessed with hating those evil leftists.
Click to expand...

may he just is.

FataBataRang said:
When is the last time you saw a Mormon strap a bomb to his chest?
Click to expand...

Yeah but you know the counter arguments already I'm sure. "IRA has bombings, every religion has a minority of crazies, they aren't representative"
 
They won't attack non-christian religions because they are racist. Islam may treat many millions of women and lgbt people as subhuman and without rights, but all of that is "over there" instead of the suburbs where they live in their parents' mcmansions, and they believe that only christians have the power to impose hurtful laws on them - those silly brown people who eat sand all day won't ever actually make me wear a burka here in America, and deep down I know their holy book is dumb and they're dumb for following it, so I'll treat them like children instead of potential threats.

It's the soft bigotry of low expectations in full swing.
 
You know, that reminds me that recently a Muslim guy moved into the assisted living home where I used to live. And there's also this other guy, very left-leaning, wants to see socialism "done properly", dumped his girlfriend because she disagreed with him, the whole package... as you can imagine, the left-leaning guy practically worships the ground the Muslim walks on, yet always talks to him like he's a pet or child. It's so embarrassing.
 
Chris did nothing wrong said:
Well Christianity will always be seen as the big one for them because they live in Christian majority countries. But most of them were part of the "euphoric atheist movement", so the critiques really don't amount to anything more but "Wow how could you believe in a sky fairy!" So most of atheists I've seen attack Islam have turned out to be shitty people for completely unrelated reasons.

Take this guy, make a stance that Islam is the worst thing in the world:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=tN_qU_ekdas
Then he goes on to kill his girlfriend:

https://kiwifarms.net/threads/russi...kolpakov-1-3rd-of-the-skeptic-feminist.30864/
Click to expand...

Good lord! This is what happens when lolcows attack.
 
vertexwindi said:
You know, that reminds me that recently a Muslim guy moved into the assisted living home where I used to live. And there's also this other guy, very left-leaning, wants to see socialism "done properly", dumped his girlfriend because she disagreed with him, the whole package... as you can imagine, the left-leaning guy practically worships the ground the Muslim walks on, yet always talks to him like he's a pet or child. It's so embarrassing.
Click to expand...

Haha, oh wow. Can you give some specific examples of cringey interactions between them?

Anyway, I found something pretty interesting. Apparently, Islamophiles aren't restricted to the West. India has a small number of them, too.

"It is High Time We Discarded the Pernicious Myth of India’s Medieval Muslim ‘Villains’"
Archive

Tl;dr: Hindus need to stop slandering Islam's reign in India, it wasn't that bad.

This needs some background information to fully understand. Arab Muslims began conquering India soon after the death of Muhammad, although they only really established dominance from the 12th to 16th centuries. During this time period, tens of millions of Hindus were killed (some sources even estimate that 60-80 million Hindus were killed in a 500-year period), more tens of millions were sold into slavery (fun fact: most scholars agree that slavery wasn't a big thing in India until Muslims invaded), and even more tens of millions were forcibly converted to Islam. Thousands of Hindu temples were destroyed or converted into mosques.

Here are some links that go over the devastation that the Muslim conquests brought upon the native Hindus. Some sites are clearly biased, but they cite non-biased, historical sources.
I think it's wrong to hold modern-day Muslims accountable for these atrocities, just like it's wrong to hold modern-day Christians accountable for the Inquisition. But I don't think history should be swept under the rug, especially when it continues to have influence in the present.

Oh, and lol, the article tries to paint a rosy picture of Aurangzeb, widely regarded as one of the worst Mughal rulers and an absolute tyrant. The top rated comments of the article point out how deceitful it is to claim that Aurangzeb wasn't a Hindu-hating tyrant.

It is a known fact that Aurangzeb:
  1. Emphasized on Sharia law and collected Jizya taxes from non-Muslim Indians.
  2. Codified Hanafi law by the work of several hundred jurists, called Fatawa-e-Alamgiri.
  3. Demolished the schools and the temples of non-Muslims in Varanasi and other cities
  4. Ordered Subahdars to punish Muslims who dressed like non-Muslims.
  5. Executed Sufi mystic Sarmad Kashani and the ninth Sikh Guru Tegh Bahadur
  6. Levied discriminatory taxes on Hindu merchants at the rate of 5% as against 2.5% on Muslim merchants.
  7. Ordered to dismiss all Hindu quanungos and patwaris from revenue administration.
  8. Destroyed temples, for which figures vary wildly from 80 to 60,000 --- depending on which historian your talk to.
  9. Banned music performances in royal courts and stopped payment to musicians as music was against Islam.
  10. He compiled his Shariah rulings into one book “Al Fatawa Al Alamgiriyah” which became popular across the radical Muslim world under the name “Al Fatawa Al Hindiyah”
  11. Executed his brother Dara Shikoh for taking interest in Sufism and Hinduism
  12. Promised safe passage to Guru Gobind Singh if he leaves the fort of Anandpur by sending a copy of holy Quran with his royal signature. This promise was ignored and Guru was attacked from behind as he left the fort.
Sources:
  1. Richards, John F. (1996). The Mughal Empire. The New Cambridge History of India 5 (Reprinted ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 162. ISBN 9780521566032.
  2. Brown, Katherine Butler (January 2007). "Did Aurangzeb Ban Music? Questions for the Historiography of his Reign". Modern Asian Studies 41 (1): 77. doi:10.1017/S0026749X05002313.
  3. Mukhia, Harbans. The Mughals of India. pp. 25–26.
  4. Mukhia, Harbans. The Mughals of India. pp. 25–26.
  5. David Cook, Martyrdom in Islam, (Cambridge University Press, 2007), pp. 80
  6. Encyclopedia of World Trade: From Ancient Times to the Present
  7. A Comprehensive History of Medieval India: Twelfth to the Mid-Eighteenth Century By Farooqui Salma Ahmed
  8. Islam in South Asia: A Short History By Jamal Malik
  9. Mukhia, Harbans. The Mughals of India. pp. 25–26.
I recommend reading the article's comments if you want to know more; it's full of Indians who are pissed off at the whitewashing of a bloody part of their history.
 
I was looking at some videos when I came across this comment: "As a non-Muslim atheist woman I wear Hijab (not Niqab) in solidarity with female victims of Islamophobia. Islam does not objectify and sexualize female bodies and does not impose unrealistic body-images. It liberates women from male gaze. So why is a fascist WHITE woman telling minority women what we are allowed to wear for our own freedom? UGH smh."

Personally, I'd rather be cat-called than live a life where I have to make sure I show nothing more than my face or eyes (depending on the region).
 
Notice how the study is only talking about evangelicals not other sexy of Christianity how very one sided. Also I'm sure they talk to Muslims in the middle East to confuse this study :roll:
 
Last edited:
Yaoi Huntress Earth said:
I was looking at some videos when I came across this comment: "As a non-Muslim atheist woman I wear Hijab (not Niqab) in solidarity with female victims of Islamophobia. Islam does not objectify and sexualize female bodies and does not impose unrealistic body-images. It liberates women from male gaze. So why is a fascist WHITE woman telling minority women what we are allowed to wear for our own freedom? UGH smh."

Personally, I'd rather be cat-called than live a life where I have to make sure I show nothing more than my face or eyes (depending on the region).
Click to expand...

It doesn't objectify women's bodies? Maybe not, but the idea that the female body is inherently sinful and must be hidden is just as misogynistic. It implies that women are to blame for being raped or harassed and that you can't expect men to control themselves. Women not dressed modestly are "asking for it."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom