The subtle micro aggressions of islamophobia

[Anonymous]

Hey, I think it's wrong, ethically and morally, that she routinely calls people bigots just for disagreeing with her.

Much worse that what some random guy once said about Mohammed many weeks ago.

[Anonymous]

OP may be educated but she lacks critical thinking skills.

She routinely asks us to accept whatever her favorite scholars say, even when her snippets of their works contain no supporting evidence.

She routinely insists that you can't understand the Quran unless one knows Arabic, but she herself appears to not actually be able to read the Arabic herself as she been caught misconstruing Quranic passages multiple times--no compulsion in Islam instead of religion; saying the Quran censures a father for burying a female baby when it doesn't.

She routinely exhorts everyone to talk to Islamic scholars as those seem to be the sole source of all her knowledge and belief; there is no sign that she has ever attempted to deconstruct the Quran and understand it herself. Then, laughably, she will write many lines about the background of scholars she regurgitates and their elevated association with one institution or another to back up why we should accept whatever they say.

When we don't accept, she flings around names like Islamaphobe or personal insults and threatens to out the shadowy anti-Islamic organiztion we must belong to.

Thanks PPs for keeping up the heat on her sophistry and providing hours of amusement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thanks PPs for keeping up the heat on her sophistry and providing hours of amusement.

It's been interesting, and I really mean that. I was a medieval history major and history is still a hobby for me. A big part of European medieval history obviously involves the Islamic world, and so I took some courses on Islam's origins and up through the Ottomans. But it's been a while, and I'm sure I never got into some of the detail that came out here. So thanks to you for hanging in there.

Sophistry doesn't begin to describe it. Some of her rhetorical and logical gambits made my jaw drop, and not for good reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks PPs for keeping up the heat on her sophistry and providing hours of amusement.

It's been interesting, and I really mean that. I was a medieval history major and history is still a hobby for me. A big part of European medieval history obviously involves the Islamic world, and so I took some courses on Islam's origins and up through the Ottomans. But it's been a while, and I'm sure I never got into some of the detail that came out here. So thanks to you for hanging in there.

Sophistry doesn't begin to describe it. Some of her rhetorical and logical gambits made my jaw drop, and not for good reasons.

Here is my favorite: "So you never watched the links I posted? Ha! You're an Islamophobe!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Honestly, the best advice I can give you is to read the ENTIRE books of the scholars I mentioned in this thread. They address all these topics through historical research and beautifully explain why the Quran mentioned these. It was not to support or encourage at all. However, for the person who refuses to read, but only wishes to google, cut, and paste, you will not understand. Historians and religious scholars have already done a fine job of explaining why the Quran mentioned these. Learn from them rather than spewing false information and pretending you are a historian or islam expert.

What makes you think I haven't?

You are just like any other dawah-wallah I met, and I met many, many of them better than you. If you tell them you disagree, they say it's because you haven't read enough - because clearly, someone who reads enough ABSOLUTELY will see think the way they do. (This is the point at which I begin to giggle pointedly). I've read more history and religious studies on the subject than you can possibly imagine. So you have a good explanation of why these things are in the Quran. That doesn't mean they are good, make sense, or should be preserved, or mean anything at all.

Beauty is the eye of the beholder.

Dawahwallah. That is a term which means one who propogates Islam. It is used by southeast Asians. Are you a person of a minority faith from a southeast Asian Muslim country? Were you mistreated in those countries? Could this be why you are so hateful of Islam?

I'm not that PP, but I know what a wallah is. All it takes is a good vocabulary or a British background. (I have the latter (and I think my relatives at both Cambridge and Oxford would find your suggestion that their current and in some cases former profs are discussing DCUM to be knee-slapping hilarious, to borrow an American colloquialism.)

You lost me. When did anyone say the scholars at Oxford would be discussing DCUM?

[Anonymous]

In the name of Allah the Beneficent the Merciful
Praise be to God, and peace upon the Seal of Prophets.

Mohammad Ali Isfenani, the chairman for the legal affairs committee, said matter-of-factly: "As some people may not comply with our current Islamic legal system, we must regard 9 as being the appropriate age for a girl to have reached puberty and qualified to get married. To do otherwise would be to contradict and challenge Islamic Sharia law."

http://www.ibtimes.com/child-bride-practice-rising-iran-parliament-seeks-lower-girls-legal-marriage-age-9-760263

The job of the student of the Islamic tradition is to investigate to the best of his or her ability, and Allah knows best the reality of the situation.

[Anonymous]

Have you noticed that the first two things Islamic fundamentalists do when they gain political power are to make women cover up and to lower the age of marriage for females?

It is as though they see these as the two things most necessary for an Islamic state and the ones most needed to right the wrongs of the previous secular state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Honestly, the best advice I can give you is to read the ENTIRE books of the scholars I mentioned in this thread. They address all these topics through historical research and beautifully explain why the Quran mentioned these. It was not to support or encourage at all. However, for the person who refuses to read, but only wishes to google, cut, and paste, you will not understand. Historians and religious scholars have already done a fine job of explaining why the Quran mentioned these. Learn from them rather than spewing false information and pretending you are a historian or islam expert.

What makes you think I haven't?

You are just like any other dawah-wallah I met, and I met many, many of them better than you. If you tell them you disagree, they say it's because you haven't read enough - because clearly, someone who reads enough ABSOLUTELY will see think the way they do. (This is the point at which I begin to giggle pointedly). I've read more history and religious studies on the subject than you can possibly imagine. So you have a good explanation of why these things are in the Quran. That doesn't mean they are good, make sense, or should be preserved, or mean anything at all.

Beauty is the eye of the beholder.

Dawahwallah. That is a term which means one who propogates Islam. It is used by southeast Asians. Are you a person of a minority faith from a southeast Asian Muslim country? Were you mistreated in those countries? Could this be why you are so hateful of Islam?

I'm not that PP, but I know what a wallah is. All it takes is a good vocabulary or a British background. (I have the latter (and I think my relatives at both Cambridge and Oxford would find your suggestion that their current and in some cases former profs are discussing DCUM to be knee-slapping hilarious, to borrow an American colloquialism.)

You lost me. When did anyone say the scholars at Oxford would be discussing DCUM?

OP said that scholars at Oxford, Cambridge and Harvard would all be discussing DCUM at her post at 11/07/2014 01:34 on page 16 of this thread, here: http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/225/420097.page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks PPs for keeping up the heat on her sophistry and providing hours of amusement.

It's been interesting, and I really mean that. I was a medieval history major and history is still a hobby for me. A big part of European medieval history obviously involves the Islamic world, and so I took some courses on Islam's origins and up through the Ottomans. But it's been a while, and I'm sure I never got into some of the detail that came out here. So thanks to you for hanging in there.

Sophistry doesn't begin to describe it. Some of her rhetorical and logical gambits made my jaw drop, and not for good reasons.

Here is my favorite: "So you never watched the links I posted? Ha! You're an Islamophobe!"

Here's one of my favorites. Someone, perhaps you, posted a quote from well-regarded Muslim scholar Bin Bayyah about the role of sharia. Bin Bayyah, the boss of one of OP's favorite Muslim scholars, took a position on sharia that was directly contradictory to OP. OP's answer? "Done with you. You and your posse are RACIST islamophobes!"

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/315/405354.page#5676077

[Anonymous]

For historical record, because OP keeps bringing up that pedophilia comment.

Here's the guy calling Mohammed a pedophile, three months ago, @ 08/28/2014 23:25 at http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/15/405354.page

And here's OP calling Mary a porn star: "Jesus might not have had a choice over how he was born but today's equivalent of his status would be making a porn star's son a prophet." There are numerous other instances where OP called Jesus' birth a "disgrace" and "shameful" and so on, but you can see the instance above at 09/02/2014 23:27 http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/120/405354.page.

I agree with OP that the pedophile comment was wrong and that poster should apologize. However, OP has never apologized for calling Mary a slut.

Also, in the past three months since the pedophilia comment, charges of Islamophobia have stemmed from disagreement on things like the definition of "women's equality" and whether it should involve legal equality in divorce and inheritance, or whether that's just "western linear thinking." And so on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For historical record, because OP keeps bringing up that pedophilia comment.

Here's the guy calling Mohammed a pedophile, three months ago, @ 08/28/2014 23:25 at http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/15/405354.page

And here's OP calling Mary a porn star: "Jesus might not have had a choice over how he was born but today's equivalent of his status would be making a porn star's son a prophet." There are numerous other instances where OP called Jesus' birth a "disgrace" and "shameful" and so on, but you can see the instance above at 09/02/2014 23:27 http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/120/405354.page.

I agree with OP that the pedophile comment was wrong and that poster should apologize. However, OP has never apologized for calling Mary a slut.

Also, in the past three months since the pedophilia comment, charges of Islamophobia have stemmed from disagreement on things like the definition of "women's equality" and whether it should involve legal equality in divorce and inheritance, or whether that's just "western linear thinking." And so on.

So how old was Aisha when Muhammed married her?

In line with Allah’s commandment to imitate the example of their Prophet, Muslims maintain this harmful practice until today. Following are excerpts from an interview with Dr. Ahmad Al-Mu’bi, a Saudi marriage officiant: “It is allowed to marry a girl at the age of one, if sex is postponed. The Prophet Muhammad, whose model we follow, married ‘Aisha when she was six and had sex with her when she was nine.’” (Source: Aired on LBC TV (Lebanon) – June 19, 2008)

You just can't make this stuff up!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ak0_UvzjgnU

courtesy of http://www.memritv.org/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It is a term used by Indians and Pakistani people. So we have identified our Islamophobe's background. Sheds light on where her hatred may come from. She is possibly of a minority faith and was oppressed in her country.

If she is Pakistani, she is not a minority and indeed Pakistani Sunni oppression of Christians and minority Muslim sects is common:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/pakistani-christians-burned-alive-were-attacked-1-200-people-kin-n243386

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-29933125

Ugh. Of a minority FAITH, of course. Christians are discriminated in Pakistan, as are other minorities. That has to do with Pakistan's culture, not Islam.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And I am not going to address your insult as I do sympathize that your posts will be public fodder after the articles are written. You are angry and I understand.

It's not an insult to call you a dawwah-wallah. You are that.

What do I care how people use my posts? They are anonymous. They will remain so. They can frame them and hang it up in their houses for all I care. You confuse amusement with anger.

You seriously have a challenge with reading comprehension. I never said dawah wallah was an insult. The insult was in saying others were far better dawahwallahs. Lol I think posting the opinions of the religious scholars exposed your islamophobia.

How is it an insult to say others do what you try to do better? You think you're the best? For real?

First of all, get this through your head, I am not doing dawah. Second, the insult isn't in the dawah part, its in her assertion that I did not defend Islam well. I know she is wrong, however. I referenced religious scholars to defend Islam, so I employed their arguments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It is a term used by Indians and Pakistani people. So we have identified our Islamophobe's background. Sheds light on where her hatred may come from. She is possibly of a minority faith and was oppressed in her country.

If she is Pakistani, she is not a minority and indeed Pakistani Sunni oppression of Christians and minority Muslim sects is common:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/pakistani-christians-burned-alive-were-attacked-1-200-people-kin-n243386

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-29933125

Ugh. Of a minority FAITH, of course. Christians are discriminated in Pakistan, as are other minorities. That has to do with Pakistan's culture, not Islam.

discriminated is not the right word. Murdered is more accurate.

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — A mob accused of burning alive a Christian couple in an industrial kiln in Pakistan allegedly wrapped a pregnant mother in cotton so she would catch fire more easily, according to family members who witnessed the attack. Sajjad Maseeh, 27, and his wife Shama Bibi, 24, were set upon by at least 1,200 people after rumors circulated that they had burned verses from the Quran, family spokesman Javed Maseeh told NBC News via telephone late Thursday. Their legs were also broken so they couldn't run away.

"They picked them up by their arms and legs and held them over the brick furnace until their clothes caught fire," he said. "And then they threw them inside the furnace."

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/pakistani-christians-burned-alive-were-attacked-1-200-people-kin-n243386

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And I am not going to address your insult as I do sympathize that your posts will be public fodder after the articles are written. You are angry and I understand.

It's not an insult to call you a dawwah-wallah. You are that.

What do I care how people use my posts? They are anonymous. They will remain so. They can frame them and hang it up in their houses for all I care. You confuse amusement with anger.

You seriously have a challenge with reading comprehension. I never said dawah wallah was an insult. The insult was in saying others were far better dawahwallahs. Lol I think posting the opinions of the religious scholars exposed your islamophobia.

How is it an insult to say others do what you try to do better? You think you're the best? For real?

First of all, get this through your head, I am not doing dawah. Second, the insult isn't in the dawah part, its in her assertion that I did not defend Islam well. I know she is wrong, however. I referenced religious scholars to defend Islam, so I employed their arguments.

She didn't say you didn't defend Islam well - Islam will do quite well without you, you know. She said there are better dawwah-wallahs out there than you. That much is true. Whether or not you did anything well is not up to you to judge.