Getting back to the topic of this thread, here are six categories of religious micro aggression per
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jmmh/10381607.0006.203?rgn=main;view=fulltext 1. Endorsing Religious Stereotypes: statements or behaviors that communicate false, presumptuous, or incorrect perceptions of certain religious groups (e.g., stereotyping that a Muslim person is a terrorist or that a Jewish person is cheap). 2. Exoticization: instances where people view other religions as trendy or foreign (e.g., an individual who dresses in a certain religion’s garb or garments for fashion or pleasure). 3. Pathology of Different Religious Groups: Statements and behaviors in which individuals equate certain religious practices or traditions as being abnormal, sinful, or deviant (e.g., telling someone that they are in the “wrong” religion). 4. Assumption of One's Own Religious Identity as the Norm: Comments or behaviors that convey people’s presumption that their religion is the standard and behaves accordingly (e.g., greeting someone “Merry Christmas” or saying “God bless you” after someone sneezes conveys one’s perception that everyone is Christian or believes in God). 5. Assumption of Religious Homogeneity: Statements in which individuals assume that every believer of a religion practices the same customs or has the same beliefs as the entire group (e.g., assuming that all Muslim people wear head coverings). 6. Denial of Religious Prejudice: Incidents in which individuals claim that they are not religiously biased, even if their words or behaviors may indicate otherwise. |
Is it micro-aggressive or macro-aggressive to think that this is a load of indulgent, self-serving obsessive tosh?
Why are you looking for problems where there may not be any at all? Sometimes people just don't know any better and aren't being any kind of aggressive at all. When I get dumb questions, I give kind answers. Education is always better than a PC shutdown of genuine inquiry. |
I think pretty much every human being is guilty of all of these things, in religious and many other cultural and social contexts. For example, take item #4. Certainly when you and the other Muslim poster write "women are equal in Islam," the debate has been around whether everybody should understand that this means to Muslims that women are equally valued even if they don't have equal legal rights. I don't ever think you spelled out women's legal rights, instead you left it to a handful of other posters to clarify these for the 98% of readers who didn't know. Only after that did you clarify your idea of equal value. I think this was particularly unfortunate because you live in a western country, you know that 98% of your readers aren't familiar with the Muslim interpretation of "women's equality," yet you both continued to say this anyway. |
Discrimination is a political and societal context. It has nothing to do with finer points of theology you're discussing. There isn't especially much to debate here, you are correct. What is important to clarify - although you may not accept that here - is the true meaning behind "Muslims respect Jesus and Moses as prophets." What it really means is that "we think both Jesus and Moses were Muslims. We think they brought the same message as Muhammad but it got distorted along the way. That's why Muhammad was sent to deliver the message again, and this time God made sure to protect the message. Christians and Jews, we think your holy books have been distorted, only ours stands intact, and therefore only ours is the correct one. The way you interpret Jesus and Moses is erroneous. The way we interpret them is correct." (There is actually extensive Islamic "scholarship" out there dedicated to cataloging and "proving" inaccuracies and discrepancies in both Testaments.) |
I'm 7:01 and I agree with this. On these several threads, OP has said, without any qualifications, things like - Islam treats women captives well - Islam gives women equality - Islam has the same Jesus as Christians, except for divinity Either - OP is guilty of her micro-aggression #4 (OP assumes that others share her understanding of these statements and, crucially, that others agree with this understanding), or - OP is deliberately glossing over key facts and differences for the benefit of the many DCUM readers who don't know much about Islam. This 2nd potential reason is probably the source of charges that she's trying to convert people, although OP may well be sincere in saying that conversion is not her goal here. |
Muslims are abundantly, stupefyingly guilty of #3. "Correct it with your hand, correct it with your word, and you can't do either, at the very least hate it in your heart." #4 is BS. You feel micro-aggressed upon when someone tells you God bless you after you sneezed? For real? ![]() ![]() |
Many Muslim countries, not just KSA, are guilty of #3, marginalizing and often persecuting people of other faiths or no faith. |
Thinking about this some more, I'm not sure it's fair to hold OP accountable for the behavior of all Muslims, or even for things in the Quran.
OP should be held accountable, however, for micro-aggressions of her own. For example, she makes micro-aggression #4 often, when she makes bald statements on things like women's equality or Jesus or women captives, where her initial premise is always that her DMV readers both understand and agree with her. |
It's not personal, no one is holding her responsible for anything other than her statements. |
Where does "Christian-evangelical-crusader-Islamophobe" fell into the micro aggression categories? |
To clarify why and how Muslim women feel equality (in value of rights, or equity) exists is a lengthy explanation. To simply say, for example, that inheritance laws gives women less is only half the picture. Inheritance laws gives more to males because they predominantly bear financial burdens in their lives. Then we have to explain what kind of financial responsibilities the man has in Islam and also explain how it is that women does not bear any financial responsibilities. All this detailed explanation must be provided, all the while fending off unfair insults from Islamophobes along the way who will say our system treats women like children. No, actually it considers the fact that women bear children and often have the responsibility of raising children. That itself is a great undertaking so Islam does not impose on her the additional burden of financial responsibility. Muslims are not embarrassed or ashamed to explain all this and more. We think Islam is a just system, so we do not feel it necessary to mislead. But it is time consuming and presumptuous to assume this audience is interested in great details about our faith. Muslima and I only wrote to correct inaccurate information that was posted. If there was any further inquiry, however, we would have and did clarify. |
It was an emotional reaction to the hostility on these threads toward Islam for which I have apologized already. Muslims have yet to receive any apology for the Islam bashing on DCUM, however. |
But are you saying because KSA engages in #3, this justifies Islamophobia here in America? |
Micro aggression is not necessarily intentional discrimination. The person committing it may actually be well intentioned or have no idea what they are saying. But why would anyone wish a stranger Merry Christmas or say "bless you " to a person not knowing if they welcome such comments. We live in a pluralistic community. There are atheists who don't believe in God. Why not acknowledge that? There are people who do not celebrate Christmas. Why not acknowledge this too? |
Where did you get the idea communication needed to be shut down or questions should be stifled? |