Now Reading
Why Are Muslim Guys Responding to That ‘Short Shorts’ Article?

Why Are Muslim Guys Responding to That ‘Short Shorts’ Article?

The recent hype in the online Muslim community was this article called “Practicing Islam in Short Shorts.” By a Muslim girl. A number of people shared the post, and a few — from my circle of friends — pitied the author, prayed for her guidance, dismissed her experiences as “cultural, not Islamic!” I let it be known to some such commenters that such reactions are grounded in arrogance and ignorance because they disregard a Muslim’s experience with Islam; they have idealized Islam and the Muslim experience in such a way that any Muslim who doesn’t have the romanticized experience with Islam growing up was simply never exposed to “Islam” but to “culture.”

This myth of “culture vs. Islam,” as though the two can be separated from each other, as though Islam — or any other religion — can be practiced in a vacuum, needs to be challenged because it is unrealistic. There’s no such thing as an Islam without culture or cultural influences because Islam, like all religions, has to be interpreted before it can be practiced, and in order for it to be interpreted and practiced, the interpreter and/or practitioner is inevitably going to approach it according to their background. Our perceptual systems are limited, and it is impossible to interpret Islam and understand it without considering what we experience, what we know, what our surroundings are like. Culture thus plays an ineluctable role in the process of interpretation and practice.

The original article aside, I was struck most by a response from a fellow Muslim brotha. See, what made him think he should respond to that article, anyway? What makes us think we can respond to something that someone else says based on their experience? Is it not arrogant to say, “No, no — sister, because your argument was based on your experience, and your experience is not mine, let me go ahead and tell you what your reality and experience should have been because mine is the more right one?” More importantly, why does a guy think he can have an opinion on whether a girl can or can’t practice Islam in shorts? Don’t we have more than a smothering number of Muslim men from the ‘ulama holding the obvious opinion that “it’s not possible”? What new thing could a male have to say on women’s clothing, practice of Islam, and whether or not her experience and voice count as a result of how she dresses and practices the religion?

But that’s not even the point here. The point is that Hussain Makke, the author of the response, completely missed Thanaa El-Naggar’s point and made some false or at least oversimplified claims in his article. I am tempted to address each of his points, but I have neither the time nor the interest to do so right now. The obvious sexism in Makke’s article aside (“this is a very sensitive topic and should be discussed maturely and without emotion, rather, with intellect,” he writes. Seriously? His article, perhaps because it is from a man’s perspective, is obviously grounded in intellect, not emotion, as though we can talk about religion and the practice of religion and of “sensitive” topics without bringing emotions into them. Besides, what’s with the privileging of intellect over emotion? And what’s with this false dichotomy, as though we must have either one or the other in all conversations?), I’ll highlight two major issues: one is that Makke missed the actual point El-Naggar wanted to convey in her article, and the other is that Makke’s idea on “religion” and “spirituality” is false, shallow, and incomplete.

But before I get there, I need to comment on judgment. You see, when we sense the need to say, “I have no right to judge her for wearing short shorts because for all I know, she’s probably a much better person and Muslim than I am,” the implication is that she may be subject to judgment because of what she’s wearing. Would the same person say, “I have no right to judge this girl who’s wearing the hijab and practicing Islam the way I believe she should, because for all I know, she’s a much better Muslim/person than I am?” We also don’t get to not-judge people just because they might be better than us in some way or another. We don’t get to judge people, period.

What is the point of the El-Naggar’s article that Makke misses entirely? This: “In your worship, be free” — interestingly enough, precisely the last words of Makke’s article, but which actually contradict his entire premise. El-Naggar’s point is that you can be a good Muslim without adhering to the standards that most Muslims expect you to adhere to. Islam is much grander and more profound than your and my limited, narrow idea and expectation of it. Yet, Makke claims that some of El-Naggar’s views “contradict the religion” (when what he should have said is that they contradict his understanding of the religion), and that “you cannot be truly spiritual in Islam without following its law. It’s one and the same.” It would have been honest of Makke to point out that this is merely his take on how religion and spirituality operate. Religion/religious law and spirituality are not the same thing, not in Islam and not in any other religion. Islamic law took centuries to develop, and it was interpreted and codified almost entirely by men, so actually, yes, we can be truly spiritual and have a close relationship with God while not following parts of a law that do not always speak to us or are not always sympathetic towards our needs and realities.

I emphasize that Islamic law was established by a group of elite Muslim men (most of whom held views on women that would be offensive to many contemporary Muslims, men and women alike). Gender is important here because think back to my above point on culture and religion: patriarchy reigns and frequently blinds our perception of religion and hence of the parts of Islamic law that pertain to gender and sexuality, especially to women. We may want to believe that Islamic law is solely from God, solely from the Qur’an, but that is not the reality because God hardly played a role in it. For God, the Shari’a is whatever is just, whatever is good; men have decided, and largely continue to decide, what exactly justice and good mean. There have been and continue to be multiple sources of Islamic law, and the Qur’an has been hardly a part of it, mainly because of how open it is to interpretation (I know – it’s heartbreaking that the Qur’an isn’t as clear, decisive, and simple as we’re taught when we’re kids; I was crushed when I found out, too). And believe it or not, circumstances and necessity are considered a source of Islamic law. It gets complicated here because every other Muslim then feels compelled to opine, “Yes, BUT! But only an authentic scholar can speak on that, not you,” and it gets even more complicated because none of us can agree on what an “authentic scholar” means.

No, this doesn’t mean dismissing the centuries of scholarship and hard work on Islamic law (unless you want to do so), but it does mean thinking critically about it when its effects are harmful to us, whether as individuals or as community members. We cannot be spiritually blackmailed into accepting every guideline about us (Muslim women) just because scholars worked hard for centuries to reach a consensus on so many (patriarchal) guidelines and rules about us. We get that the scholars may have meant well, but that’s irrelevant and does not negate the reality of the damaging consequences of some of the guidelines they established.

Makke also conflates ideas of “religion” and “spirituality”: contrary to what he assumes, people are not entering religion because they want to find spirituality—many people are leaving organized religion because it is so bereft of spirituality due to its incessant, overwhelming need for rituals. Too many of us are so fixated on the idea that Islam must be practiced one specific way that we miss the overall point that many Muslims would agree Islam aimed to promote: love God, and demonstrate that love through worship. But what does it mean to love God, and how do we worship God? That’s where some of our differences lie — and that should be okay. Some believe everything is in how we dress (if you’re a woman), others believe it’s more about prayer and being a good person, others believe it is a combination or parts of these two, and so on. Where we go wrong is when we make claims like Makke’s – that there’s a specific way to be spiritual, a specific way to worship God.

That said, too many of us are quick to point fingers at other Muslims when they “pick and choose” or when they say, “I accept some hadiths, but not all,” but how many of us actually believe in hadiths that are so condescending towards women? There is a long history of hadith science, including hadith criticism. The process of sifting through hadiths to ensure the authenticity of the ones being collected was arduous and most probably sincere, but not everything in Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, or the other four hadith books are entirely authentic, and today, we have some scholars even claiming that hadiths that would have no reason to be declared inauthentic are fabricated (see “Seek knowledge even if you have to go as far as China” is a false hadeeth). Why would such a harmless, and in fact a beautiful and useful, hadith suddenly be declared fabricated? Let’s please not get started no whether is a legitimate source of knowledge on Islam. I do not consider it to be so, but the point here is that even harmless hadiths are suddenly being dismissed as inauthentic.

See Also

What about the hadiths that are actually very destructive and offensive to women, such as those saying that women have to have sex with their husbands whenever the husband wants it even if the wife is on the back of a camel or at the stove? Or the ones threatening that the Prophet (peace be upon him) cursed women who pluck their eyebrows? It is easy for men to say, “No, no, you can’t just not accept this hadith just because you want to pluck your eyebrows!” or “Just because you are being brainwashed by the west that if your consent was not sought before sexual intercourse, then it’s rape,” but for women, these are realities because we are the ones who have to live with the consequences of hadiths like these.

So, yes, a Muslim, and especially a woman, has every right, every reason to distance herself from Islamic law, grounded in patriarchy and some misogyny with respect to question of gender, and decide that she would rather turn to God than to law to practice Islam. At the end of the day, she is the one who has to face her Creator and defend her choices where necessary. I, too, would much rather make my own choices and defend them when confronted by God than to say, “Well, Imam (male) X said I could/could not do this, and I obeyed.” What if the response is, “Why did you not think about it more critically?

Sure, we’re told that our scholars, our imams are accountable to God for any mis-knowledge, mis-information they impart (intentionally or unintentionally). You and I are not responsible for having to face God for the choices we made because of what the imams told us, but why are we so obsessed with this idea? Why are we so willing to let our scholars be wrong (when they’re wrong — and that’s possible, as any humble scholar should admit), and why are we so hesitant to be wrong ourselves? Why are we so unwilling to think critically about what is passed down to us? Are we really so unthinking, or so incapable of thinking and reflecting (despite the Qur’an’s command that we think, reflect, reason) that we’d rather leave everything to our scholars, to other humans, to make decisions for us, to think for us? Another problem with consigning accountability to scholars is that we claim there is no clergy in Islam in theory, but in practice, I doubt any other religious community appeals to it more strongly than we do.

I’ll end with the one point that Makke makes that I find of value: “In your worship, be free.” I’m sure he had a different idea in mind—I mean, what exactly did this mean other than what El-Naggar shares of her own experience, no?—but, indeed, let us all be free in our worship, however we understand its meaning. Let us also be free in our practice of Islam. Anything that takes us away from God, remove it from your life; anything that brings you to God, take it, cherish it, live it.

View Comments (361)
    • can you explain your comment please? i have made an assumption about what you mean but would rather you spoke for yourself about this rather than me relying on my assumptions

  • What is troubling with these kind of pieces is that they try to normalize sins. Its one thing to struggle to be a Muslim and admit it. Its another to try to justify sins and have a smug attitude that “only I know how to practice Islam based on MY experiences and no one can tell me otherwise”. You will note that most erudite scholars, even female scholars like Amina Wadud and Ingrid Matson, show so much humility. On the other hand, young passionate Muslims show so much zeal in trying to debunk thousands of years of Islamic scholarship. May Allah guide us all.

    • Right. “even female scholars” show humility… because of course (!) women are known to be the *most* arrogant.

      You should take your own advice when it comes to modesty. What is troubling about these kinds of comments is that not only do they deliberately misread the tones of women, they (not so subtlety) attempt to *arrogantly* pit women against each other. I would challenge to ask either of these scholars whether they would play along with your conceited game.

      • Pathetic. I guess even women, even feminist women who are not praying in shorts are part of the ‘male dominated patriarchy’. Devastate yourself with shallow and inebriated comments.

        • Your guessings are indeed just guessings, and not true.

          The truth is that almost all societies in the world, save a few small indigenous communities, are patriarchal.

          All great religions (Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism) are largely interpreted & practiced in a patriarchal way.

          And this is a huge problem for women world wide, since patriarchy is an ideology which is based on the subjugation, opression & discrimination of women.

          Sexism is also a part & parcel of it: The idea that women are lesser than men.

          (That horrible hadith about women being lacking in intellegence & faith is a good example of sexism. The patriarchs that came up with that hadith really have/had no shame, to put such horrible & hatefull words in the mouth of our beloved prophet, peace be upon him)

          Oh yes, and our message as Islamic Feminists to men is: You don’t own our religion. Period.

          • patriarchy is an ideology… typical feminist spewing typical regurgitated nonsense to defend an ill ideology. God Bless Patriarchy! And yes the message to Islamic Feminists is: You don’t own our religion. Period.

    • Aameen to your prayer. Indeed, may Allah guide us all!
      Since it looks like you missed this part of the article, I feel it incumbent upon me to remind you:

      “No, this doesn’t mean dismissing the centuries of scholarship and hard
      work on Islamic law (unless you want to do so), but it does mean
      thinking critically about it when its effects are harmful to us, whether
      as individuals or as community members. We cannot be spiritually
      blackmailed into accepting every guideline about us (Muslim women) just
      because scholars worked hard for centuries to reach a consensus on so
      many (patriarchal) guidelines and rules about us. We get that the
      scholars may have meant well, but that’s irrelevant and does not negate
      the reality of the damaging consequences of some of the guidelines they

      Thank you for reading!

      • Thanks for your kind reply. Yes, I can agree with that. In addition, it is also important that we identify present female scholars who may be free from the shackles of patriarchy to lead this discussion, instead of just using our own experiences and knowledge (that may or may not be enough) to come up with fatwas. And God knows best.

        • can’t our discussion include perspectives from both female scholars and the “girl on the street”? aren’t both experiences and understandings valid? it makes more sense to me to come to a consensus about what it right (which automatically takes into consideration all points of view), rather than a majority rule or elite ruling. sure, it makes sense to have female scholars “lead” the discussion but they are not the only ones in the discussion. the niqabi, hijabi, non-veiler, conservative, flamboyant, the poor, the rich, the married, unmarried, widowed and divorced…all these voices should be heard

          • True. Muslim women come in all shapes, sizes, ethnicities, walks of life, classes, ages and all voices are valid & should be heard.

  • Irrelevant question for Orbala: Why do you write under a pseudonym when everybody knows that your real name is Shenaz Yusufzai?

    • That is not her name. If it is irrelevant, you should not inquire here. If she is using a pseudonym, you should respect her choice.

      • be brave enough to use your real name and picture and not that of a models.

        hiding behind fake identity to malign islam with your zionist agenda is pathetic

        • I suppose your real name is coco? Any last name with that?

          Orbala, love, you hear that? You look like a model.

          • lolz #patriarchyexpectsmetobeflattered that a boy thinks my pics aren’t my own but of models’. #yaRabb

  • I think you need to accept the fact that wearing shorts is haraam, Islam CAN”T change for you, you must change for Islam.

    It’s sad Muslims are now twisting the religion to justify the haraam

    • Nah, wearing shorts is not haram in my Islam. And I didn’t change my Islam, at all. If it’s haram in your Islam, then so be it. That’s not my concern.

      • Really ? So if my teenage daughter wants to join a nudist colony, I can’t say anything? IS there no critiquing even in the least about shame and hayaa, or is that women can dress however they like and expect absolutely no consequence whatsoever in the least?

        • A father should have only as much say as a mother does; his role in advising and guiding a child *not just a daughter but a son too* should be no more than the mother’s role in doing the same. When the father feels no reason to control his son’s behavior and clothing and all but insists in maintaining misogyny in the name of love and the superficial sense of security of women (through their clothing – all false stuff, as we’ve seen over and over), then that’s where it becomes a problem. So long as there’s a gap in how we train our girls and our boys, in whom we control and legitimate that control by appealing to patriarchal ideas of modesty and love for daughters, we’ll have a problem.

          What’s annoying is when random boys come on the internet commenting on women’s experiences. Like, dude, either just go away and never come back or learn to listen calmly (instead of getting all emotional because your understand of religion is being challenged). Eksechra.

          • Blimey I actually agree with the second part of your first paragraph, but the role of the father and mother is not the same, never has been. Unless you have two mommies or two daddies, which you of course very openly support.

            Random boys and Random girls alike, should stay far far away.

            (Yes in your mid twenties you have become a girly Imam Ghazali)

            The word Misogyny has lost most value, since feminists have used ad nauseam in every nook and cranny.

          • Way to completely avoid Jekyll’s question by turning it into something that has nothing to do with what he said. Disgusting feminist attitude you have.

      • hey there Orbala,
        Regarding: “Also, men need to stop commenting on women’s clothing.”

        So you’re all about this feminist Islam thing. Cool. But I do find it hypocritical that you view it as gender privilege to the point that men can’t say anything about women’s clothing. This is a restriction of freedom of speech. The same one you hail and love so you can put out your view of Islam (if we can even call it that).

        I think it’s pretty clear why you wrote this. It’s any of the following options:
        1. You dont like to wear the hijaab, so instead of changing yourself (part of submitting our will to Allah — ya know, the whole “Islam” thing), you’d rather try to change the religion to fit you. Kind of like how you go shopping…you take what you like and leave what you don’t.

        2. Allah could be lying, according to your logic. You see, Allah swt swears by the Quran (not something taken lightly when an oath is taken by Allah). He swt qualifies it as a clear (mobeen) book. So, Allah says the ayaat are clear, you say they’re not. Unless you believe that Allah lied (wa ‘iyaathu billah) or that you have some ‘ilm that no one else knews of(after all, you wont be the first “prophetess”). You can take your pick.

        3. You reject hadith and are more inclined to “those hadith are messed up and wrong…I don’t believe in it, so therefore the Quran now is up to ME to decide what it means”. In which case you would again be wrong because there is 1400 years of scholarship, by men AND WOMEN (that’ll shut you up) that verifies the authenticity of ahaadith. You don’t believe me? Read a book called “Al-Muhaddithat: The Women Scholars in Islam” by Muhammad Akram Nadwi (OMG A MAN WROTE IT!!!!!!). The book mentions that there were over 9000 women HADITH scholars in Muslim history. None of them had such deviant views that you have.

        So, you can take your pick. You’re not limited to one btw. You have a CHOICE. Ya know, like the choice to be an obedient slave of Allah or a disobedient slave like all the kuffar, munafiqoon and iblees.

        The choice is yours.

    • Oh sorry, never knew Allah stated in Their holy book that wearing shorts is haram. And I remember Allah saying explicitly that only They can decide what is haraam and what is not, and anyone else saying so is arrogant and/or committing shirk.
      It is so sad how Muslims are doing what makes Allah really furious about – thinking you are in Their position and say what you think and claim it is Islam. AKA Shirk, your real one stop ticket to hell.

    • coco, i do not agree. it is not the wearing of shorts that’s haram, it’s the context in which shorts are worn that is (according to “mainstream interpretation”). it may sound like i am getting caught up in semantics when i say this but it’s an important distinction because whilst islam itself is – in my opinion – part of the absolute realm of existence…our understanding and practice of it is part of the relative world/experience. so our acts on this plane will not change what is real and true as Allah has decreed. you can relax about that.

      there is no denying that the legal codification of islam (shariah) is infused with a patriarchal bias; and this is another important point i wish to stress to you. i may not be particularly thrilled with the idea of a short shorts wearing muslim and i am likely to judge that, but that doesn’t mean that i should, or that my judgement is better than the lady wearing the short shorts. my judgement of the sister will be in relation to what i think is right, not what Allah accepts and it seems to be the same for you. in our arrogance, we must remember that they are not the same thing.

      the short shorts wearing sister in her seeming act of defiance (as i interpret your take on it, it’s not mine) isn’t changing islam, isn’t changing your practice or your understanding of islam and certainly isn’t a threat to our beloved Creator of the worlds.

      wearing short shorts doesn’t justify a haram action and explaining why one wears short shorts or one’s feelings about doing this isn’t also justifying the haram. it’s simply explaining one’s own position on it. to me, it doesn’t make sense to get all wound up over displaying part of what we consider the awrah when Allah makes allowance for this (by allowing it to happen).

      we can’t know what His will is, so how can we know for sure that this is wrong for the sister to do? we are imposing our own interpretations and ego on this situation and we must recognise this for what it is. we need to worry a lot more about our own ways of worshipping Him before we worry about others.

      • So can zina be put in a context as well ? People can wear shorts or walk around nude or have sex left and right, it’s fine. Nobody has a problem with that, I certainly don’t. But when you purposely try to askew the lines and start saying it’s okay then there is an issue. No a matter of decency, again I don’t care about that, but this travesty that allows people in 2015 to think everything is a redo because of patriarchy and misogyny etc etc

      • Wow. Let’s go ahead and attack women when they say something we don’t like because, as men, we definitely have the right and power to do so. Shame on you, boy. How ironic that we’re so quick to attack Muslim females when they say something we don’t understand or don’t agree with, claiming their perspective is “un-Islamic,” but we complete ignore when Islam demands that we be respectful to each other. I bet you go around claiming women shouldn’t do thing X or Y so that they be respected, but then you come around and disrespect women in public forums because they are too smart for you to understand.

        • “patriarchal”…feminist love this word more than real understanding of the world, which was not invented in 1965

        • I haven’t seen an ounce of respect from your forked tongue anywhere in your writing or comments. You are extremely judgmental, arrogant, aggressive and insulting towards men in general.

      • Your dirty mind & swearing are disgusting.

        I pray to God that you’re not an actual father/dad (which is the meaning of “baba”) and don’t have the chance to poison young minds with your sexist & over-sexed worldview.

  • Is the writer of this article serious??!!! Struggling with followong orders is one thing and denying the authenticity of these orders is another thing. You can’t change Islam to enjoy your desires! You don’t worship Allah the way you decide suitable for you. Yoy worship Allah the way He decides. Hijab IS A FARD whether you like it or not. Plucking your eyebrows IS HARAM whether you like it or not. “Seek knowledge..” is not a hadith whether you like it or not. Just because you think it’s a wise beautiful advice doesn’t give you the right to claim it’s a hadith. I suggest you google the consequences of claiming that the Prophet PBUH said sth while he actually didn’t. I also suggesy that you stop denying hadiths that are known to be authentic just because they don’t fit your fantasies! May Allah save your soul and guide us all.
    And on a side note, I thought the goal of this website is to help Muslim girls worldwide strengthen their faith and become religious, but for some reason you keep publishing poison that will wreck the faith of so many young girls! You are responsible in front of Allah for every word you publish!

    • totally agree with you sister.

      The author follows pakistani islam, they’re recent converts from hindu/buddhists, so they still do a lot of shirk -she’s just inventing this stuff cause it’s part of her cultural upbringing and she’s badmouthing anything originating from the original Islam based in Arabia

          • Yeah i know right.
            Wait, didn’t Sakina go around topless, had 6 previous husbands and would strike someone who talks crap in front of her and yet is a Mother of the Believers?


      • I chuckled at this. Thank God for internet humor! I can’t speak for all other readers, but I’m *totally* convinced that you’re right because your ancestors were converted to Islam before mine were. #byebyelogic

      • How is the nationality of the person relevant to the strength of their faith?! I never said that I was an Arab! I know many converts whose faith is much stronger than people who were born to Muslim families.

    • VERY serious. You won’t believe how serious, actually.
      By the way, one’s faith can’t be strengthened by a consistent, patriarchal (oft-misogynistic) traditional and misguided, often empty but definitely incomplete sense of Islam. You need all kinds of perspectives to balance things out, including, sadly, the conventional, patriarchal ones that so many of our beloved sisters have fallen prey to. So wherever a perspective like the above article’s is not allowed is an unhealthy environment to be in, and you should get yourself out of it asap because, actually, that’s the real poison for your spirituality and mind.


      • There you go again, dismissing clear orders in Islam as cultural differences and traditions! There’s a huge difference between critical thinking and denying parts of Islam to feel better about yourself! Anyway, I’m wasting my time replying to you!

        • I agree. Wasting time isn’t a good habit. I find reading and spending time with my loved ones to be a very productive hobby instead. #fromonemuslimahtoanother

        • What “clear orders” are is a matter of interpretation.

          And accusing someone who has a different point of view of “deniying parts of Islam to feel better about yourself” is an unfair, nasty discussion “technique”.

          It’s a way of attacking someones intentions & integrity, because one doesn’t have any counter arguments.

        • I for me believe that there are clear orders, but not nearly as much as many of my brothers & sisters believe.

          Beyond the 5 pillars and rules as not swearing, lying, gossiping, stealing, killing, the more general moral rules of any & every religion & culture, there are very few clear rules, in my point of view/interpretation.

      • What a condescending and deliberate patronizing attitude you have ! hat so many of our beloved sisters have fallen prey to LOL wow that ones for the win. So a women is too dumb to know the truth of things unless it comes from a feminist lens and is not somehow, no matter what, I mean no matter what doing something against , patriarchal (oft-misogynistic) traditional and misguided… You always seem to follow suit the idea that by definition traditional = misguided.
        Maybe you should tell your mum to walk around in shorts, eh? Because right now she is oppressed.

        Horrendously one sided, and contradictory and only further proving the point, the biggest victims of feminism are women themselves.

        • “the biggest victims of feminism are women themselves.”

          – says a man angry that a girl dares to point to the role of patriarchy of religious knowledge … I’m stunned. Utterly stunned, I tell ya.

          • Not angry at all actually, the right tone to stand up to bullying. And yes women are victims since feminism purports itself as the only salvation for women rights…at least for the past 60 some years…before that the world was evil, all evil forever evil.

          • I agree with him. I’m a woman, and deeply resent feminists for their influence on my society and my life.

          • sup ilisha. so you can be upset with a group of people for their ‘influence on my society and my life.’ interesting. is this not a bigoted stance? so if a widow of one of the Charlie Hebdo people say they ‘deeply resent [muslims] for their influence on my society and my life.’
            what do you resent? abortion rights? working mothers? did you mom work well you were a kid and you resent that?

          • Muslims lack the will and ability to destroy French society. That happens from within, as feminists have done ine the USA.

            Muslims are seeking civil rights. If they try to overturn American secular society to create anvIslamic State here, people will resent them. Naturally.

            I have every right to oppose and despise feminist society wreckers.

          • “and my life” so you don’t think the widows and widowers resent the deaths of their spouses?

            “Muslims lack the will and ability to destroy French society” I thought in Islamic mythology jesus will return and fight alongside the al-madhi to defeat the anti-christ and make the whole word muslim?

            how are the feminist wreaking society?

          • alrighty then. you didn’t even like the sunshine state? oh well.
            no answer on how feminism has destroyed America?

          • If I have to explain, you won’t understand. All it should take is a good look around. I’ve consistently found people either already get it or they never get it, so don’t feel compelled to explain.

            It matters not at all whether you get it or not anyway. It’s not as if it can be fixed. Only, perhaps, avoided in places where this toxic ideology has not yet spread. Florida is not a candidate for ideological inoculation, and discussing anything with you, really, is a waste of time.

          • so you a fan of the book ‘sloughing towards Sodom and Gomorrah’? by Robert Bork?

            so where has it not spread? Idaho? Montana? Iowa? isn’t one of the oldest mosques in America in Iowa?

            so do you think Dearborn is ‘a candidate for ideological inoculation’?

          • Ilisha and I likely have very different views on/of the world – which is fine as hell by me, I love differences – and, she’s all good by me as you know. I personally don’t see that the USA has been destroyed, but enriched – however, in its own enrichment, the USA has become more polarized, person to person, herd to herd, due to suspicion and mistrust person to person, herd to herd. We have such great potential simply because of variant perspectives, yet we fail to listen to one another, we fail to personally enrich. A quagmire perhaps.

          • If you lived where I live, witnessing this crop of drug-addled feral children, you might see things differently. And I don’t live in an impoverished ghetto. I live in a once lovely little university town with middle class “families.” Not families really, because feminists destroyed them. I see the results of a half century of leftist garbage, from the Sexual Revolution to Third Wave Feminism, and am filled with sadness and horror.

            Obviously some people don’t see any of this as a problem. Fine. But I think I have the right to speak out against what I view as destructive. Especially when this directly and disastrously impacts my life.

            I speak out not so much for myself, but for younger people who deserve stability and a better life. And to warn people living in cultures the West is trying to destroy with the same cultural filth and poison. Gazing into American society should be enough, but sadly, I hear women from all over the world spewing Western feminist talking points. Even in places like Egypt and Pakistan. I guess they can’t wait for STD epifemics and drug-addled feral children of their own. Nevertheless, I feel the need to sound alarm bells and since no dissent is acceptable, I take a lot of heat. I’m used to being attacked by now.

            In my view, you are reasonable, even if we disagree. Most feminists and their allies are not. They’re mostly tyrants.

          • so were do you live?

            “since no dissent is acceptable, I take a lot of heat. I’m used to being attacked by now.” I hear ya sister. ironic isn’t it?

          • No, it’s not ironic. And as I said, I say it anyway. Ultimately, I couldn’t care less if feminists rant and fume. The growing backlash against them delights me.

          • no it is ironic because y’all censor so much on loonwatch. it’s ironic because you seem to be in charge of squashing dissent.
            it’s ironic because I could[n’t] care less if muslims rant and fume, yet I’m called a bigot for that. a racist.
            maybe I’m using the word irony wrong, perhaps I should say hypocrisy.

          • No, LW is not hypocritical. We SAY OUTRIGHT that comments are published at our discretion and believe other sites have the SAME RIGHT. We are not silencing you but depriving you of a venue–a PRIVATE website under no obligation to allow your stalking and trolling.

            You have the right to criticize Islam and Muslims. No one is stopping you. Calling you a bigot, a creepy stalking, or whatever, is other people’s free speech right.

            Of course feminists also have the rude, vulgar, obnoxious and tyrannical and a good number of them are. There is a silver lining in that in many ways, no one provides better evidence for the bankruptcy of feminism than feminists themselves. So I say let them keep on talking. A lot.

          • so as long as you say you don’t allow dissent, you aren’t hypocrite. yet you are here complaining about the feminist now allowing dissent. I find that to be both ironic and hypocritical. in fact that is the very definition of those words.

            you forgot sock puppet, lol. yes I know you don’t have to allow whatever you don’t want on your website. but to now complain about feminists. ok, LW isn’t hypocritical, just you.

            “So I say let them keep on talking. A lot.” I agree. give them enough rope to hang themselves. and that goes for anyone. dr1m is hilarious with his rants. and el cid. funny that you don’t practice what you preach though. I mean I was having a good debate with chameleon X. well he was ranting a bit, but the best was he ended one of his comments with, ‘I bet you have no response to that’. so I went to respond and my account was blocked. lmfao.
            did you see were AJ said uncircumcised men were more prone to rape? what do you think of that?

          • We do allow dissent. But we don’t have to allow every single person to say whatever they want, including creepy trolls.

            Also, I don’t care if you think I’m a hypocrite. I don’t care what you think at all. About anything.

          • sure, you allow the non-sense dissent. like you said, let them talk. what you don’t allow is knowledgeable dissent. you once said you wished some of the ‘trolls’ were smarter so you would at least have a challenge. but then block anyone who challenged you. trust me. you are a hypocrite. you may not care, but you are.
            so I’m a ‘creepy troll’ because you don’t like what I say. but your buddy dr1m is a great commentator. interesting.

          • Everyone who reads LW knows it’s a LIE that I block anyone who challenges me. I’ve had fierce, ongoing debates. You seem to think you’re a lot more impressive than you really are…and anyway, I CANNOT BLOCK PEOPLE on LW. Not sure how many times I have to repeat that. I AM NOT THE ADMIN.

          • ok. I will retract the word ‘anyone’. just some of us. at least one of us that I know of personally. yes, you said YOU are not the admin. so have YOU ever asked the admin to block an account? you can see IP ADDRESSES, why?
            are you not a moderator? do you not block comments from going through. this little caveat that I don’t actually do the blocking is quite hilarious. ‘ I don’t execute people, that is the executioner. I just sign the death warrants. lol.

          • “I wonder who will last the longest.”

            Aww, look at this little Muslamofascist, so brave inside his inbred loon community.

          • Then who’s the admin there at LW..? Why is there the campaign to tarnish Hindus and ban any Hindu or Indian commenting there? Maybe, you can say things clearly as you contribute there.

          • I can only speak for what ilisha said. We have our share of disagreements but there is no censorship and we get to debate on a respectful manner. LW has a moderation policy, which is not perfect but does allow different people to express their views.
            I don’t think there was a campaign against Hindus, some people did make some bigoted comments against Hindus which could have been (I think) moderated but I don’t see this as anti Hindu campaign. But that is my personal take, I just comment on LW and post some articles from time to time.

          • come on. does dr1m every not to get to say his ‘hate speech’? man if they have not let some of his stuff through, I can only imagine what it is.

          • Maybe you know this thing already that there’s no chameleoneX or whatever, it’s 1 DrM all the way on LW. He got lots of fake ID’s to confront others. As you might also be aware that, by just looking at the content and intent you can very well imagine the person behind it, hence you can also easily assume that mere 2-3 people have hundreds of fake ID’s which you often face but can’t prove that immediately.

          • no, I’ve never heard that theory. I generally try to take people at face value, even on the internet. but if that is the case, he managed to be much more reasonable as chameleon X. he still resorted to name calling, even the classic online attempted insult of calling me mikey. I never get that one? do they think I’m going to through a tantrum, ‘because that is a babies name, and I’m a big boy’. but he didn’t rant as dr1m or 1drm, whatever his name is. didn’t drop any f-bombs or call me a f***in fascist. not that I’m adverse to f-bombs when used appropriately.
            I’m not much of a conspiracy theorists. all I know is what I have seen. about 3 – 4 years ago I googled islamophobia because I kept hearing it in the news. came up. I checked it out. I found the articles and the few comments extremely slanted. I had never commented on a webpage before in my life, or called into a radio show or anything or that nature. so I challenged some of the comments and articles. the reaction that I got to my comments, which I thought were reasonable and quite docile, really surprised me. ‘your a hater, an islamopphobe, a bigot, a racist’!! I’m like, wow you got all that because I disagreed with you. lol. and islamophobiatoday carried articles from loonwatch. so I made some comments there. and they blocked me. so I’m like what the fuck is that? you block people, seriously? then I got blocked on islamophobia. so, what can you do? looks like some muslims don’t like debate, or dissent? but I noticed islamophobia hasn’t posted a new article since December of last year and loonwatch lost their one advertiser, the jon Stewart show some time ago. you would think they would want clicks, but I guess they have plenty of money. let em burn it.

          • Well, it’s hard to prove what you assume sometimes but small hints do bring consternation in mind. Lets for example take the case of “Friends of Bosnia” account at LW. Basically this guy never visited BiH and don’t know the real Bosnians ever but keeps talking like he’s the authority on Bosnian affairs which in actuality is just 1DrM. Seems that this 1DrM do read books about particular topics and then assumes himself to be master of that and go on berating everyone else. As I said somewhere, I did have innumerable run-off with that 1DrM guy in various forms so I just know where his mentality would go on. It’s strange somehow that you don’t know about yourself but do have more clear insight about some other people as you get along.

          • I’ve seen ‘friends of bosnia’ comment many times. I don’t know what BiH means? Bosnia hertgovania (however you spell that). may be 1drm or not. I don’t really care. most of the posters on LW show their hypocrisy and their bigoted nature, save mindy. and maybe HSkol and tanveer. maybe others.

            “It’s strange somehow that you don’t know about yourself ” perhaps English is not your first language, but I know all about myself. I have no idea what you are saying here?

            “but do have more clear insight about some other people as you get along.” yes, I pay attention as I get along. I don’t know what you are getting at?
            please HSkol speaks enough in riddles for me. state your fucking case. call a spade a spade. what are you accusing me of?

          • I’m not the person having english as first language. I just wanna point out that over internet chats I met several from Bosnia and nearby countries (EU). There were hardly anyone who was interested in talking about the past atrocities as this one 1DrM indulges in LW. Basically, there’s a difference between mindset. Seems europeans don’t harp much on atrocities of the past all the time, while Asians does have the obsession of singing the same song of persecution. This Pakistani person makes fool of all other by his Pakistan ideology.

          • I agree. friends of bosnia is the only person I’ve ever seen bringing up bosnia.
            so what do you think of modi? what of this documentary ‘india’s daughter’?

          • I don’t think of Modi as anything extra just for the fact that he’s another politician. Regarding the documentary. although the documentary was made with malicious intent as the director/producer duped the authorities into false notion of intent, and you don’t see interviews of convicts in prison in US or any other western country, but the question this documentary is pointing out is just matter of curiosity for foreigners. Anyone in India could be aware of the ills of society if he/she is educated enough hence, no need to sensationalise but it could be matter of curiosity for foreigners. To be not apologetic, certainly there are so many persecutions, outdated thinking and traditions, customs but they require much more efforts, creating awareness through media is good thing for a start.

          • Well, Pakistan unfortunately have many power centers working against each other or in dubious cohesion with selfish motives. Mostly the power center are the radical Jihadist/Islamist organizations, the Army, the Civilian set-up aka the political leaders. All want to impose their will on the people which is just getting crushed by these horrific incidents day-in-day-out. The situation gets murky when the Islamist are propped up and supported by the civil/military administration and also the same time denied full power to impose their will that’s absolute stricter form of Sharia aka ISIS/Taliban style. Thus both these Islamist and the Army which also wants its writ over power clash, Islamist kill other religions people, other sect people, ordinary people while the Army kills the Islamist everyday. However, the thing to be noted is the aid from the US, EU and Saudi, Gulf countries for their own selfish interest. It’s also a sad thing to say that almost all the aid amount goes in the hands of military, the Islamist, the crooked politician thus, the survival of all these psychos ensue and no-one is there to realise any sanity or bring about any change in the status-quo.

          • I have admired your articles in LW on time-to-time but still you telling me that there’s no censorship on LW is BS…! Hundreds of my ID’s have been banned outright and comments even remotely not concerning hate for Muslims or ever for any other religion or even personal in nature are banned without any rhyme nor reason. It’s just a hogwash that they ban the comment due to some malicious intent, they just look at IP address and there you go down…!

          • I can’t speak for your experience getting banned as I don’t have all the details. From my perspective yes I see some bigoted comments (a minority though but could still be moderated, I remember especially after the Charlie massacre or regarding Hindus) but I have seen for instance several comments from the other side and that weren’t particularly friendly, these people still could debate on the LW forum. That’s all I can say, I don’t know what it is in terms of proportions. Sorry, not sure whether you believe me but I mostly wanted to defend ilisha here whose honesty I can’t doubt.
            Btw thanks for praising my article and I did like this article here.

          • You’re not an armchair commentator but a widely travelled bloke so, that is the reason your article sounds more authentic and revealing in nature. That is the reason I’ve liked you always. However, if you aren’t aware of the day-to-day working of LW then so be it. And also, just for mentioning, you don’t have to defend Ilisha as I don’t want you to be seen as another brainless sycophant of hers nor she is that clean as you perceive her to be.

          • I am not in some sort of fan club of hers. We do have our share of disagreements, I didn’t get involved in much of your conversation but just got in when it came to the LW comments and the level of moderation there. There isn’t much more to it…
            Anyways thanks for your kind words, now time to take my kids to the market. Have a good day.

          • Thanks, Mehdi. Welcome to the LW virtual shisha lounge. 🙂

            Seriously, I think Muslim Girl has been pretty generous, allowing all these tangential comments from the lot of us. I’m going to do them a favor exit now.

            Ciao, everyone…back on break.

          • MuslimGirl has been very generous! Thank you MuslimGirlDotNet! I’m with you though, why infect this site with external/side concerns or disagreements. Take care MuslimGirl, and again thank you.

          • not everyone is as scared as LW of tangents and an organic conversation that can wind and go in other directions. plus why care? it’s not like they have limited storage capabilities, doesn’t disqus run the cyber backbone?

          • my account got blocked, so I created a new one. then she said she could see my IP address and that account was blocked. so then I got a new IP address and created a new account. quickly blocked again. chameleon X, a contributor, after responding to me said, i’ll await your response. but I’m sure you have none because I but you in your place. something like that. so I went to respond and I was blocked. lol.

          • Chameleon X hasn’t been around for a long time. What I was saying is that the website has a moderation policy and indeed (as per the Hindu discussions) some comments are indeed bigoted, the French aren’t particularly popular, I’ve been called a traitor there but I still see discussions with different views. I can’t speak for why you pr munna were blocked but we did exchange on LW recently.
            Again I’m not part of LW admins so can’t speak on the whole rationale.

          • yes I’ve seen dissent on LW as well. I shouldn’t have used the word ‘any’, my bad. but my own experience makes me wonder when that dissent ends and does the dissenter actually cede the point or give up, or are they cut off by the moderator (as I was). I found some of what el cid to be in dissent and some to be in support. but it looks like he has been blocked???
            hell I created one account and said, ‘lets read the Koran together’. so I posted the first surah and said we’ll go 7 verses a day. should only take like 3 years. or we can do 20, that would speed it up. and that comment was deleted and account blocked. lol.

          • Again I can’t tell how moderation works as I just comment and sometimes write articles.

          • I understand. I’m just letting you know what my experience has been. and I find it ironic that ilsiha complains about the feminist not allowing dissent (yet gave no evident to that, certainly not this thread) while she herself is a moderator that stops people form dissenting. and now she claims to be in favor of ‘letting them talk, a lot’. yeah right.

          • he said it a great act to manumit a slave while at the same time claiming slavery isn’t allowed. how can you free someone from slavery without first enslaving them.

          • If I met a slave owner and wanted to try to free a slave of his, I could have either done so violently or by buying him and then setting him free, both methods were used by people who wanted to abolish slavery, it all depended on what was possible, so not really contradictory, even if the second option can appear as legitimizing to the slave owner.

          • but elwood quoted the Koran were it said if you accidently killed a muslim you are to free a believing slave. that means you have to have a slave. not that you have instantly set all slaves you come across free immediately.
            and it is interesting that a ‘believing’ slave is mandated. no such luck with for the pagans?

          • If you want the answers for a discussion taking place with him, ask him directly.

          • I was looking for your opinion. having read your posts on ‘jews and muslims, it’s complimented’ and thought you to be a sober and honest broker of facts? and I saw you voted up elwood’s comment so I thought you must agree with him.
            plus he is saying his computer turns fuzzy with too many comments on a disqus thread.

          • Michael Elwood is much more knowlegeable than I am on this, so please have this discussion with him, I agreed with most of what he wrote. Anyways, I’ll be brief as I’m busy.
            In general, his views which are close to mine, are that Muslims were not allowed to own slaves, but slavery was prevalent/universal back then, so living in a world where people owned slaves meant that there were choices to be made when dealing with slave owners: how to free a slave (taking him against his owner’s will or by buying him back)? which slaves to free in priority? how to provide incentive for people to free slaves (as in the case of accidental murder)? etc. Circumstances were different, and the sense of universal human rights didn’t exist back then, nevertheless the idea was to ban slavery for Muslims and find the ways of freeing them when it was possible. That’s my reading of this, again, Michael is much more knowledgeable on this and I’m sure you’ll find cases where you’ll consider my views as insufficiently precise or inaccurate.

          • “Circumstances were different, and the sense of universal human rights didn’t exist back then” true. but don’t you think morality is timeless?

          • My standards of what is moral in the 21st century are quite different from what was prevalent 2 centuries ago in terms of religious freedom, slavery or not, age of marriage, respect of other cultures (tolerance was the term used then), etc. So I don’t think this was timeless.

          • ok. so something can be a moral act one day and immoral the next? or be immoral and then made moral?

          • Depends what we talk about but it can be the case, just see how societies change drastrically. Sorry gotta go, my kids are waiting for me.

          • yes societies have changed, evolved if you will. this is one of the great problems with islam. the whole concept of unlawful bidah.
            the Koran claims perfection, yet it is greatly flawed. this is how rational people know it is not ‘divine revelation’ and most certainly not ‘divine writ’.
            if there was such a thing as an everlasting, all-knowing god, it would have set moral rules from the beginning.
            you spend some quality time with your kids.

          • It’s your opinion and I respect it as such, but I see things differently. Live and let live. Will do as for kids. Bye.

          • Nice one. I could show you links of heinous acts from other groups or against Muslims, but I’m not interested in pursuing this debate in any case. Bye.

          • what do you think of 4:11 in the Koran? is it still the moral guide for today that it was in the 7th century? or are something’s that are in the Koran no longer applicable?

          • cool. hopefully you will give it some thought at dinner. here, I got a crazy idea, how about some dinner table conversation? do y’all do that in france? sounds like a great subject to discuss with the family, family law and inheritance per the Koran.
            we can talk after dinner. enjoy your meal.

          • Thanks. Having a good dinner and not planning to give it any thought afterwards. Will go to bed then. Good night.

          • I just don’t have the time nor the willingness to discuss whatever comes to your mind (a quran verse, Badawi, slavery or Ahmadi persecution on a previous discussion).
            In any case you seem to have several interesting discussions with Sir David, M Elwood or others, enjoy!

          • no nothing going with elwood. he is back to work. he does that a lot.

            that is too bad. I don’t even know what badawi is?
            and we didn’t even have time to discuss your article on loonwatch.

          • Raif Badawi, the guy whose fate I’m supposed to rejoice about. Back to work for me too.

          • oh the Saudi blogger. that was sarcasm. it was a play on your girl ilisha’s comment.
            you are working on another article for loonwatch?

          • I didn’t mean your girl as in your ‘significant other’ just as in a pal. y’all aren’t pals? oh well, it doesn’t matter.
            you a journalist?

          • ok, so what do you do if you don’t mind me asking.
            ok. so there is a membership to loonwatch? that’s kind of weird. do you know what you have to do to be a member? don’t tell me people pay dues? do you have to be muslim? do they give you a card or have a secret handshake? that would be even weirder over the internet.

          • Not a member in the sense that I’m not part of the site team. I just visit it when I have time and contribute sometimes (like jsb and some others).
            As for my job, given your spare time I’m surprised you didn’t find out in one of my previous comments.

          • ok. you aren’t a ‘member’ of loonwatch, just an occasional contributor and a reader. I’m not sure why you felt a need to make that point, but fine.
            yeah I got lots of spare time. sorry I don’t recall if I’ve read many of your previous comments. I did ask you if you had written a past article on lw, but you said no. other than that, I don’t think I’ve read many of your comments. are your comments good? should I go back through your history in my spare time?

          • You asked if Ilisha and I were pals, we never met and just discuss on LW, this is why I wanted to clarify.
            As for writing or not on LW I understood you were asking me if I was writing an article currently, which I’m not. I did write some articles in the past.
            Are my comments good, don’t know, up for people to judge, you are following me under mike3 and Joe, so I assume you’ve read some of my writings, but if you don’t it’s not that important

          • yeah I didn’t mean to imply that y’all are neighbors or cousins or anything. she is and American and as far as I can tell, you are French, or at least up to date on French periodicals. sorry, it must be a southern thing. when I say ‘your girl’ or ‘your boy’, it just means someone I know you know.
            I thought I had read an article by you on lw, but when I asked if it was you, you said you where flattered, but no? maybe the ‘jews and muslims, it’s complicated’ series. was that another Mehdi?
            yeah mike3 didn’t last long. mike4, 5 & 6 even shorter, so I switched to my middle name. but now I’ve gone back to just plain old mike, with memike in between. oh yeah, and sockpuppet36.
            yeah I’ve read some of your posts. you seem quite level headed and not extreme at all. that is why I’m interested in your opinion on islam. and of course I’m assuming you are a muslim.

          • Got it.
            The articles I wrote on LW are a series on the arab spring (thinking beyond the moment), the jew muslim series indeed (when I said I was flattered it meant I did write it), and the Marianne one.
            I’m Moroccan and currently living in France.
            As for discussing Islam, yes I’m a Muslim, and I can answer questions, but sometimes we are also a bit tired of having to answer to anything or people assuming that we are some monolithic group whose behavior can be explained by their views on Quran. We (Muslims) are like everybody else, we have liberals, conservatives, communists (less now ok but still several in my family), there are several religious groups and views, we have great people and idiots, and yes we deal but a pretty awful bunch of extremists (that’s an understatement), who seem to be the only Muslims that exist according to some views.
            So yes, I’m open to discuss any topic provided that 1) I have time to do so 3) I know about the topic (not always the case) 3) I feel that the person in front wants an open discussion and not just confirm its own prejudices on Islam
            Depending on how I feel on these 3 points I can be available for a chat 🙂 Take care for now

          • obviously muslims aren’t a monolithic group. the sufi are much different from the salafi. some muslims say music is haram, others not. this article is about a girl wearing shorts. some wear niqabs and burkas. hell, some muslims say plucking of the eyebrows is haram.
            yes there are lots of communists among the muslims. one reason that the Syrian/Egypt nation didn’t last. do you still have some pan-arab Nasser types in your family?
            I talk to this Moroccan all the time at the YMCA back home. he is a very nice guy. I’ve been to his mosque a couple of times. spoke with the iman once. he also seemed like a nice guy, but his answerers to some questions wear very disconcerting. I asked him abut the hadith that says there are 3 things you execute a muslim for: adultery, apostate and murder. he said that that was correct. so I then made sure that by apostate we were talking about simply leaving islam, (no ‘fighting’ the ummah) and he said that was correct. so, what do you think of the death penalty for leaving islam?

          • I’m against death penalty in general and also against it in this case. Many muslims don’t think like me and many do.

          • dude, you don’t have to keep saying not all muslims think alike. I know that.
            so you disagree with the Koran when it says, an eye for an eye, an ear for an ear, a nose for a nose a tooth for a tooth and a life for a life? what is that? 5:45?

          • That verse is not about death penalty for apostasy. Besides such verses are related to specific contexts and different times. It’s not about disagreeing, the Qur’an states principles of defensive war which is a different matter, the eye for eye aspect comes in that context, and people can come to it to justify acts of resistance but also injustifiable violence. But putting someone to death for leaving religion is not the same thing and not part of what this verse states. As for being against death penalty, it’s not just driven from my religious perspective, the world has changed.

          • I don’t follow you. where did I say it was about death to apostates?

            you said: “I’m against death penalty in general” so I asked if you disagree with the Koran.

            Sahih International

            5:45 And We ordained for them therein a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and for wounds is legal retribution. But whoever gives [up his right as] charity, it is an expiation for him. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed – then it is those who are the wrongdoers.
            it is 5:32 and 33 that say to kill someone for ‘spreading corruption’, and that is often interpreted to include apostasy and blasphemy. (by muslims who don’t think like you, of course. you know, like all four major sunni madhabs) plus, there is the much more direct quote dealing with apostasy, “whoever changes his Islamic religion, kill him”, in the 84th book of bukhari. apply named, ‘dealing with apostates’.
            I’m glad you are against the death penalty, I am too. but unfortunately, as the last sentence in verse 45 says, we are ‘wrongdoers’. best be careful, your bidah just might get you declared takfir. 😉

          • So this is an interrogation where you change topics?
            Death penalty was widespread up until 40 years ago and back at the birth of Islam. The death sentence you mention was for people who were harming others and in the verse it is stated that those would forgive would be rewarded by god. Death punishment is not the goal but a means of making justice and it was consistent with the time. It is much less now. So when I’m against it I am still in favor of justice but it can be done in different ways. It’s not about disagreeing with the Qur’an, when someone commits a murder he should still be judged and punished, I just think the punishment time is to be adapted to today’s world. Ijtihad.

          • “So this is an interrogation where you change topics?” lol. I suppose you could characterize this as such. I personally would say this is a conversation were I go with the flow. I think some might use the word organic in there somewhere. sorry to hear you feel you are being ‘interrogated’. I’m not sure if that implies a hostility or not. I have debates about this with friends all the time and we ask questions of each other. I don’t think anyone has every accused me of ‘interrogating’ them. perhaps we come from very different cultures?
            yes you can be against the death penalty and still be for justice. now to me that would naturally lead me to the question of the forgiveness mentioned in the verse and of course the concept of diyya (blood-money) in islam. perhaps I’m reading you too literally. to me, if you say I’m against the death penalty and the Koran says to execute people, you are in disagreement. and you ended with ijithad which would then prompt me to ask, does ijma trump ijithad.? also you say ‘today’s world’, which would lead me to ask if the inheritance laws, mostly the female getting half that of a male (4:11) are still applicable? I would call that a tangent, not a change of topic. to me the topic is islam and its fiqh. and I like to ask people who believe in god if morality is timeless? now that could be considered a bit off topic, but I would consider it part and parcel (risking the use of a tautology) to the ‘interrogation’.
            sorry for my ramblings, let’s see if I can stay more focused. let me enumerate, I’ve noticed muslims like to enumerate. (not to imply EVERY muslim in the world does)
            1. you are against the death penalty – good
            2. therefore you are obviously against killing and apostate – great
            3. you don’t disagree with the Koran, but you do believe that the punishments in it need to be seen in the context of the time, the 7th century. through independent thought you have concluded some things can be modernized without that being considered and unlawful innovation – awesome.
            if I’ve mischaracterized your positions anywhere in there please correct me. also, am I right to assume that you wouldn’t favor any punishment for the apostate? or blasphemy?
            so can I get your take on blood money? is that only for an accident killing? can a murderer get off scott-free if they have enough money to ‘bribe’ the surviving family members of the decedent?
            oh yeah. and is morality timeless. as in, can something be moral today but immoral tomorrow, or vise verse?

          • I think i answered enough questions for now.i think you got my mindset. I don’t have time for more.

          • ok. well thank you for your time. perhaps in the future you will have some more spare time?
            I look forward to reading more of your articles on LW. maybe you could do something on independent reasoning verse ‘established’ principles in islam? or a question as to whether the inheritance laws are still applicable and if an adult female still needs a male wali in modern times?
            fyi, muslimgirl has an interesting post about the gay iman in DC. should make for some interesting comments. maybe jeyhkll and AJ might show up again? that blog doesn’t seem to get the traffic I think it deserves.

          • so they Tunisian gunman told his fellow muslims to get out of the way, so he would only shot non-muslims. I wonder where he gets that idea from?

          • Just to butt in:
            The great thing about blood money is that it is much easier to enforce against the powerful than a more drastic punishment, and is nevertheless potentially enough to heavily disincentivise murder. Many pre-modern societies had some sort of blood money concept, because, without the state being able to enforce the law with a standing army, the enforcement of legal redress requires the widespread consent of the population.

            I know nothing about Islam specifically, but I do know that local customs in many parts of the world, including Afghanistan, involve blood-money as a resolution to such matters, and that Islam in practice (rather than abstract theory) often coexisted with, and merged with, local customary systems of law.

            And, of course, it may be the case that relatives of the bereaved may be able to choose to refuse blood money.

          • thanks for your input. yes many societies have accepted compensation for murder in many parts of the world. it is in no way unique to islam. and yes, they relatives can refuse the money.

            but the obvious imperfection and unfairness of this law is that a rich person may avoid the death penalty while a poor person may have no such option. muslims often claim islam to be perfect and sometimes point to hadith like where Muhammad said he would cut of the hand of Fatima, his daughter, if she stole something worth a dinar. they point this out to claim to show that sharia and the hudud punishments are blind to the status of people. clearly this is not true.

          • 1DrM • 8 days ago

            Modi monkeys at it again in the banana republic of India. Most likely no one will be arrested or prosecuted. Whats truly disturbing are the number of “educated” Hindus supporting this criminal attack.
            Expect Hindutva fecal fascists trolling here with their usual squat and stain barking points. Also expect a not so subtle response.

          • I noticed. just seems strange to me that garabali tells cyme (something like that) not to paint all of india with a broad brush but says nothing about 1drm calling it a banana republic and referring to people as monkeys. in many parts of the world that is considered quite racist.
            how ya doing just stopping by? didn’t want to actually stop by?

          • Garibaldi had words with him several times on such topics, and you can just ask him directly (and at the same time to JSB).

          • I certainly do see what you’re saying. I happen to be a boots on the ground kind of father, engaging my children and their friends – guiding and caring for my children and their friends to the very best of my ability – simply because it really matters at home and on a grand scale – more so today than ever in my own past. If I can have any bit of impact, the impact that I wish to have (or even part way there), the world that is immediately around me (at the very least) will be tolerable/OK. We’re different, but we’re not that different. 🙂

          • so you don’t think America is doomed by our loose morals?
            you know many muslims consider atheism to be the biggest cancer on the planet. you ever read the book of jihad by ibn nuhass?jihad is the cure and disbelieve is the greatest disease. he equates it to a cancer that must be cut out. how could it be cruel to the body to remove the arm, if the arm is killing the body?
            and who knows if wearing short shorts is a form of spreading corruption? or if it is a forerunner to fornication and therefore must be eliminated through lashing.

          • I am done wrecking this nice board here. Many within the U.S. are doomed, likely enough. I can doom no one, that is, other than myself. My moral structure is good. The U.S. is fine with me. Religious people may not be fine with me. I’m OK with that. I answer to and for myself.

          • mike3, we atheists are considered a cancer by many – even most, I think. Who cares? I don’t, especially when people think that others such as Sam what’s-his-ass’-name is representative of us. He is not. Either we will be cut out or not. Any which way, none of us will make it to ValHalla. Not a choice, just the way it is. Live and let live, to each his own. That should be far more important than trying to override the faithful, whatever faithful. No?

          • yeah this guy Michael Elwood on patheos keeps bring up Richard Dawkins and ‘atheist morality’ and ‘moderate pedophilia’. I’m like I know the name and I’ve never heard of either of those terms? nor have I read any of sam harris’ stuff.

            well the reason to care is because the ‘most’ have the power to influence our lives. just like ilisha thinks the feminists are having an negative impact on her life and society, so to can the ‘most’. fortunately I think they are actually loosing the fight to control everyone and everything. used to be 8 states had it in their constitutions that you have to believe in god to hold office. the clauses are still there, but they can’t enforce it anymore. if the faithful only would ‘live and let live’. ‘override the faithful’, shouldn’t all ideologies be up for debate? haven’t you heard muslim say that islam is more than a religion, it’s a way of life. including a form of government. the devil is in the details. they are just like the donimionists.

            just look at the comments here: “You can’t change Islam to enjoy your desires! You don’t worship Allah the way you decide suitable for you. Yoy worship Allah the way He decides. Hijab IS A FARD whether you like it or not. Plucking your eyebrows IS HARAM whether you like it or not”
            did you know they aren’t allowed to pluck their eyebrows? that is how detailed they get with this.
            I thought you had to die in battle to go to Valhalla?

          • mike3, one must die in battle – and, further, be battle-appropriate – in order that one might ascend to ValHalla. I “somewhat” truly hope that it is either you or El Cid that forces me, an atheist, there. Unfortunately, you will not – either Ilisha or AJ will do so, for both of them challenge Me more than anyone else I know – and, I love them both for that. You might not see their challenge of me, I’ll guess (though I hope I’m wrong). Either way, I’ve got my work cut out for me – not by choice, but by design … no, not by the Blind Watch-Maker but by …

          • no need to pick up your sword, yet. don’t kill ilisha or AJ just for disagreeing with you. we have freedom of speech and religion here in America. remember, ‘when fighting monsters on must not become the monster which he fights’. they challenge you more than your father? anyway, always a pleasure speaking to you, even if I don’t get your riddles. and I have no idea who the blind watch-maker is. i’ll have to google, which is always fun.

          • Can you give examples of what these Western feminist talking points are, and how exactly they directly and disastrously impact your life?

            I personally cannot see how ideas (e.g. Feminism) can directly, unequivocally lead to sand be solely responsible for gynaecological disease or drug abuse. Do you really think these problems are unique to the U.S. and western world? Some of the poorest rates of sexual health and highest levels of drug abuse are observed in countries with large Muslim populations.

            It’s not feminism to blame here, it’s ignora and lack of education – particularly lack of female education.

            I don’t class myself as a feminist – I firmly believe our roles in family and society should not be determined by something as course as gender. Everyone should make their own path based on their ability and skill, and should also be free to change that path as they move through life.

          • I NEVER SAID feminists are “solely responsible,” and naturally, YOU MUST use this opportunity to say, “well Muslims are as bad or worse.” NO, they aren’t. Look at sexually transmitted disease maps. The Muslim-majority countries have some of the LOWEST rates whereas int the US, the CDC says there are 110 million cases of STDs in the US each year–not all of them new–which means over 40% of the population. Nearly 15,000 people–five x 9/11–die every year because of AIDS. Muslims for the most part are not jumping on everyone, living like dogs, and therefore do not YET have these problems on this scale–but if the West has its way, they most certainly will. Pumping their cultural FILTH into traditional countries, poisoning the youth.

            Nothing makes me sicker than hearing a Pakistani, Egyptian or Jordanian spewing nonsense about cis-gender heteronomative patriarchy intersectionality lexicon of idiocy. 97% of people are heterosexual, despite relentless propaganda. It IS NORMAL, dear feminist weirdos.

            Yes, feminists do promote sexual degeneracy and promiscuity and if you can’t see that, you must be blind. The Sexual Revolution and the advent of TV and the Internet played a role as well. Feminists DELIBERATELY decimated the family and herded women into the workforce, whether they liked it or not, and we know this because THEY SAID SO.

            Feminism is for crazy, broken women to try to reduce everyone else to the same degenerate level as the freakiest freaks. That’s fine here in the West, where the damage is already done. But I’d literally sacrifice my life to prevent this poison from seeping in lands where people are still sane and decent.

            Read Robert Stacy McCain’s series, “Sex Trouble.” If after that, you can’t see what’s wrong with feminism, then I can’t help you.


          • Nazis would ironically agree…Everyone should make their own path based on their ability and skill, and should also be free to change that path as they move through life.

          • Yes, feminists believe everyone a special snowflake with a unique set of euqally valid standards. Which means no standards and no shared ethos.

            By promoting everything, they leave us nothing. An atomized cluster of confused degenerates. That’s Feministan

          • I imagine so. I hope so. it’s always good to hear other’s views, that is why I find it funny when websites like this and others with comment sections ban people and delete their comments. I’m not sure how you measure this polarization you claim. just look at the outcry over this OU frat bus ride incident. 50 years ago I doubt that would have even raised an eyebrow.

            “however, in its own enrichment, the USA has become more polarized,” I have no idea what you are talking about here? sounds like you are referencing the robber barons of the last century?

          • I see you were at Selma. did they release the dogs? Obama didn’t get clubbed did he?

            so do these muslim girls on this page need to listen to AJ and Ilisah and Jekyll? or are those three failing to listen to the author? round and round we go. who are the liars.

            you knew love and rockets, did you ever listen to anything a little more industrial?


          • Civil rights for Muslims in countries where they live as minorities while denying the very same civil rights for other minorities/religions in countries where they are in majority (Muslim nations). Clearly you got your priorities bullshit-way right and absolutely hypocritical. Everyone must commend your crazy fight.

          • Civil rights in one’s own country aren’t predicated on policies in other countries. It’s moronic to suggest people are accountable for everything their co-religionists do everywhere. By your logic, we could steal the land and homes of Jews and shoot them in the streets in the US because that’s what the Jewish State does to Palestinians. Collectivr punishment nonsense.

            Notice how you and mike have to bring Islam into every discussion. I’m criticizing secular feminism here, you obsessed freaks.

          • You’re used to using the term Muslim civil rights as if Muslims are some specific entity and thus supposed to be treated separately. Either you prove any subjugation/injustice done in specific country based on religion per se or forget the term Muslim in your mind, this is perfectly justified since you wanna be specific.
            I’m also surprised at your attitude now since earlier you used to demand all western’s to shun away from Muslim lands, now you picked your new obsession…what happened to your earlier tirade against the West?

          • My views go together quite well. I still want the West out of Muslim-majority lands, and in part so this poison is not spread to traditional societies–of any kind, not just Muslim-majority. No contradiction here.

            The West needs to keep both its bombs and it’s vile cultural sewage within Western borders. Nevertheless, I also live here so I have every right to participate in shaping this society. I’m not alone as a traditionalist, and I’m not trying to make this an Islamic society but rather to return to the decency we once had, rooted in Christianity and basic morality in this Christian-majority country. I’m certainly not alone in that view.

          • Why you so much obsessed on creating walls between people on the basis of culture, religion and traditions..? Why is it that you have such a fascination that Islam or any other religion provides the elusive morality or culture that is best magic potion for the humanity?
            Maybe, you don’t believe in the concept of constant competition which human race indulge in as they go on in their march for newer destinations or you so much wary of competing to survive. But believe me, the competition is always there, so many civilizations, cultures, languages, traditions have mushroomed and got their doom as they couldn’t compete however, you just want to embrace relics in the form of decrepit religion which only makes people sound uncompetitive to progress and rationalization.
            Regarding your tirade against West, it’s the Islamic fundamentalist forces that indulge in inhumanities these days, the ISIS, Boko Haram so-on-so-forth are the examples of it. Maybe, they are all justified since they fighting western concepts as per your imagination or maybe not but, don’t tell me that religion got the whole right to dictate morality, cultural norms or laws befitting for the progress and well-being of humanity…it always gotta be the good intelligence that should prevail.

          • Love how you equate Muslim society with terrorist groups–many of them funded and trained by the West, or arising from the chaos created BY THE WEST.

            Terrorists are not a society. They are the violent fringe, and much of what they’re doing is a REACTION to and PRODUCT of the West. Not everything Muslims do ties directly back to Islamic doctrine, anymore than everything the West does ties directly to Christianity–or even secularism. The world is complex. But the existence of Boko Haram is not evidence we need “SlutWalks” in Nigeria. At least not to me.

            YES, I do think religion is the answer for humanity. Absolutely. And the drunken debauched filth I see everywhere only reinforces the point.

          • You used the word “Love” and also endorsed the thing “Religion”. Unfortunately, both these things are contradictory in practical life. Since, we live a loveless life, so we have the religion. If there was any love then, there wouldn’t be the great need for any desire to embrace religion. Maybe, someday you would know whether we need LOVE or just the religion.
            Regarding the reason for terrorist or violence, what you speak are just excuses for doing crimes. If you think that some religion, society, culture is trying to subjugate other religion then it doesn’t have to be just the violent reaction or playing fire-with-fire answer. I’m sure you’re wise enough to suggest better ways to fight any lowering standard of morality or culture or anything that you find outdated but it should have to have the stamp of good intellect or progression of mind, not the mind of one who is supposed to go back to the earlier times or seen enough.

          • You take care too, however, just to mention, disagreement shouldn’t be construed as disappointment for loss of expectations. Wish you could continue to have expectations…somehow I gather the impression that you have expectations from the people always.

          • “I still want the West out of Muslim-majority lands”

            And the West wants scum like you out of majority-civilized Western lands.

          • You speak for the ENTIRE WEST? I think not. I was BORN and raised in the USA, and have just as much right to be here as anyone else. I also have EVERY RIGHT to criticize American foreign policy and will continue to do so.

          • “I think not.”

            We can all see that thinking is indeed something foreign to you, dear.

          • Islam doesn’t require our indeed tolerate critical thinking, only mindless submission.

          • Do you think if I studied Feminism I’d know you more by that I mean know what you are not, what you stand against, or have run away from? And how can it possibly effect and affect you at a personal level so intentness that it makes me cry. You don’t, never cry of course.

            You seem kind of obsessed by it as if it has burned you without you being a feminist. How could it do that? Puzzles me because I want to know you, how you think because I am always on the wrong side of you much to my chagrin while those I don’t think much of are always on your right side to my perpetual regret. I wonder at times if it is an illusion.

            There muct be a knack to what is missing in me. I wonder if the missing part can be fixed. Do you know what it is.? Do you think it can be done ?

            I knew one feminist. Not good to have around. But how can you pin all that long list you have on them which totally avoids discussion of the economy the two major wars the industrial age and so on. Perhaps your woman study courses did not include that overlap.

            BTW what is your analytical degree in: Operations Research; Econometrics, Financial Accounting…Micro Macro Economics, Project Planing…that sort of thing.

            Did did you go in through self study or formal /examination, since your majors were in humanities, women studies, may be languages though you never talk about those. Is your mother tongue English? Father’s?

          • @Ilisha:

            Ilisha, I tried to post this at your site but did not get through for some reason I don’t know.

            So I tried to post it again but again it was lost. I am now posting it here and expect it will reach you. Tell me what you think. Thanks for your interest.
            And you take care Ilisha:

            You said “People aren’t always rational and logical”
            Good point. I am assuming that you are an adult: Now if you are rational and logical you can tell me why you keep removing my posts to any and all, for no good reason? So what seems the problem?

            Again, I am assuming that you are rational and logical and not stupid and not on some mental drug. I mean a legally prescribed psychotropic drug.

            A drug that has the side effect of making you stupid and irrational. A drug that is making you stupid and irrational and self destructive and destructive o the bog you are responsible for. And this time you may choose to and may want to give a rational answer.

            I am not questioning your authority, ability, or right to do so or even the whim to do so. I am humanly curious. I want to know why?

            Going over the Blogs I could find only two possible rational reasons and one whimsical one:
            #1. That I said I don’t think you are a Muslim? If I am mistaken then you could just as easily have removed the doubt in my thinking by simply saying that you are a Muslim. And done with it. Over, gone. Period.

            Why play games with me by removing my posts. I have no interest in playing games with you. Why compound the issue. You are nothing to me but a cyber digital entity with no real personalty and a fake name I just want to know why?

            Please know that: A Muslim is proud to be a Muslim. A Muslim says that often and enough every day.

            More important and mandatory for a Muslim: And the Qur’an requires and states it explicit that a Muslim *MUST*do so
            assertively and with pride, when asked.

            To acknowledge that you are Muslim: This is a fundamental command in the Qur’an. Muslims in fact go further. They don’t just say that ” I am a Muslim” but elaborate on it by saying more: ” Alhamodillah ! I am proud to
            be a Muslim. I am a Muslim. I take pride in being a Muslim”.

            You on the other hand have repeatedly avoided/evaded that question. A fact not lost on me. Why this charade, Ilisha. Why are you playing games with me?

            Now tell me this: Should I believe God’s command made explicit in the Qur’an or should I believe you?

            Whether you are a Muslim or not is of no relevance, not my concern. But a Muslim is require to acknowledge it when asked.

            To me you are nothing but the Senior Blog Moderator, Controller and Monitor. The operational authority over the Blog. There is NO reason for me to offend you. In fact it would be foolish for me to to offend you if I want to post in your blog. This is simple logic.

            I may not be smart as the rest of you folks but am not totally stupid either. And can figure that one dimensional power equation at least. So why would I want to rub you the wrong way?

            You have given me the privilege to post here by your authority to a 100%. Why would I want to offend you, of all people, Ilisha? To me you are just a fake digital name. You are no more than a digital nic, but with total unquestioned power and arbitrary authority to allow me the privilege to post on your blog. Not unlike the military.

            From my point of view your are a digital person, a non-person. All I can interact with is to be on the receiving end of your authority. An equation I am familiar with and used to in my profession and training. There is no other way that I can relate to you, or want to. This is cyber space, not real space. I don’t know you and likely never will. And have no interest in knowing you personally.

            I am now based in Turkey after suffering minor non-life threatening injuries in Afghanistan. First they sent me to Germany for check up and some stitching, then to Turkey for recovery and some R&R. We have a major base and nuclear
            installations in Turkey.

            So I had the time to browse the internet to sort of keep my mind occupied and away from potential PTSD, so the doctors told me. I have to do few hours of desk work in logistic and engineering on the computer, that is all. Its a desk job now, will be for a while. Unless we get into another war.

            Rest of the time I enjoy my officers privileges of rest and recuperation, leisure, movies, talking to others less fortunate than me in their wounds and recovery. I hope for visitors, that may be a buddy, even a stranger will come on occasion, be welcome to talk to me. So I started to browse the Internet and blogging now and then to fill the time as I heal.

            #2. The one other potentially rational reason I could find, of potential misunderstanding, is that you have been told by a poster named “mike” that according to him I was some one else by the name of “El Cid”.

            Initially you used your own judgement and told him that he was wrong. A number of others agreed with you that there were major difference in personalities, that some things like IS and style of writing overlapped.

            Later somehow “mike’ was was able to impose his mind on your, convince you and made you change your mind and judgment about me. That you, anyone can so easily be beguiled is beyond me.

            And when I asked you who is El Cid? That everyone seems to know him, interested in him and talking about him, so where is he? But that post was removed without an answer. All it did was focus my attention on your budding intimacy with “mike”. The sexual teasing and innuendo you were doing with him almost 24/7 is on record for all to see. The rest one can guess. But your habits and men you seduce are of no interest to me.

            I am a Muslim and don’t care what Pagans, Kafirs, Atheists, agnostic, non-Muslims do with each other in private. They no different in their sexual habits than feral dogs. So what you do in your private life is little to no special interest to me…except some normal curiosity and a bit of amusement at the lack of morals they exhibit.

            Well I am no El Cid but can sense that you had a love hate relationship with him and that he adored you, and you him. Don’t make me a scapegoat for what hurt remains or feelings you may carry for him.

            You keep doing that what you are trying with “mike” and you will never get over him emotionally even if you deny the lost relationship. Casual sex cannot replace true love and commitment. You lose both ways. Get disgusted with yourself and graduate to mental drugs and alcohol.

            I understand “mike’ has invited you to a beer tryst with him. I guess beer goggles would be necessary in that kind of a set up. But you know that already.

            Ilisha, please understand that I am not El Cid. Not half the man he obviously was. I am not him and am unnecessarily being brought into it by proxy and by perception, for no rational reason whatsoever.

            Now if you are rational and logical then allow me to be a neutral poster on your blog without your emotions projected on to me by you.

            You clearly are a very sensitive and emotional possessive controlling, possibly loving but shy person who suppresses her feelings as a defense against being hurt by men again. And carry the hurt nonetheless.

            But why do you try to get me into your obsessive passive aggressive compulsive mind games. Just leave me alone and live your life the best you can. Don’t foolishly try to make it more complicated. Just leave me alone. I have no interest in you, sexual or otherwise.

            Now I cannot invite you to drink beer with me, as your new picked up friend “mike” had the privilege to invite you to drink with him. I don’ drink. I am a Muslim.

            And I don’t intend or want to ask of you anything except that you not delete my posts form your blog for no rational reason other then whimsy. Your running hot and cold on El Cid, as recorded in your profile, your hot and cold feelings projected onto me because of some perception you have of me that I am El Cid.

            That is the irrational thought process of some out of control mental disease. You should see a better doctor than the one treating you now. Always get a second opinion. Too many drugs are not the way to go. Drugs are never a panacea.

            If anything you need a friend in me not use me as scapegoat for you screwed up emotions. I have no desire to be used as a pinata punching bag for your anchor less emotions. Try to get a hold of yourself. I want nothing to do with crazy creepy psycho women.

            Ilisha get a hold of yourself. This is a small world, who knows one day you may invite me to meet your family, husband and
            children and I get to know who this magical romantic charismatic figure is. This El Cid you keep secretly in your heart. Yet deny him and yourself.

            I hope this clears up any false perceptions that you built up about me and that you will now stop deleting/removing my posts from your blog. Please know: I am *NOT* El Cid.

            In the end before I go, one piece of advice: You should rely on your own judgment rather than be subdued by others. Rest assured that we are complete strangers and will so remain. I have no interest in you. You are only imposing your emotions on to me.

            Thank you for listening to me, Ilisha.
            You take care.

          • Shrimana, ek shubhchintak ki drisht-taa hai ki, kripya el-cid namak bhadrajan se Hindi bhasha mein vartalaap na karey, anyatha unka asatya astitiva yathartha siddh ho jaata hai.

          • Jekyll was upset when Pamela Taylor lead men in prayer in Toronto.
            so I’m pretty sure he is enraged by women wearing shorts. your picture without the hijab probably sends him into a frenzy every time he sees it.
            this whole article reminds me of when Christiane Amanpour had a panel discussing islam. she had anjem choundry on satellite and daisy khan was in studio. daisy said something about islalm and choundry said something to the effect of: ‘who are you to talk about islam? you aren’t a muslim, you aren’t even wearing a hijab.’

        • Right, women are “victims” of a movement that defends their rights. That’s just as idiotic a statement as claiming that African-Americans were “victims” of the civil rights movement.

          • No, what is idiotic you comparing this ideology to the civil rights mvt. Almost as insensitive and indeed idiotic as comparing the civil rights mvt to that of the homosexuals

      • “Islamic law was established by a group of elite Muslim men … a woman, has every right, every reason to distance herself from Islamic law”

        Would you extend your perspective of Islamic law to what’s written in the Qur’an? Say, for example:

        Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great. – Surat An-Nisā 4:34

        Do you agree that this view is right and good? If not, how far do you go, and then what does it really mean to be a good Muslim?

        • interesting translation? is that the ‘sublime koran’? ‘and scourge them’ that usually says beat them.

          • Don’t Know, Don’t Care. As I said before this holier than thou attitude of encompassing all Muslims as my brothers and sister and caring for their needs means diddly squat to me. I I get to choose who is mt brother and sister.

          • There are two many Muslims doing too many dumb things for me to believe in this mythical umma. You are lucky you do not have to do with these millennial Muslim women, esp of “color” who think at 25, they can re-write history because they have a four year gender degree.

    • Shame on you. No, really because WHY CANT PEOPLE LIKE YOU WRITE ARTICLES INSTEAD? Where are you people ????? Why do we only get this degenerate millennial feminist version? When are people like you going to raise your concerns ?

    • dear sister, i understand your point of view somewhat and i wish that you did not feel upset about this. i do find that this website is perhaps more “free thinking” or less caught up in all the rules (many of which i like to follow myself) than the mainstream. however, i do not think that it encourages us to go astray or necessarily provides false/misleading information. by encouraging us to think critically, we are also being encouraged to dismiss what we read that doesn’t fit into our understanding and beliefs. the crux is that we don’t have to be treated like children and told what to believe…we can come to that conclusion all by ourselves.

      to me, the point of this website is to provide an outlet to all the voices of our beloved sisters who are drowned out by the “system”. i truly believe that we have an issue within the ummah that we need to address: that “mainstream islam(ic interpretation and practices)” (a phrase i use all too often and can mean different things to different people) isn’t as granting of the rights of women that i believe it should be..and definitely holds a patriarchal bias.

      praise be to the Lord of all that exists, Allah is giving us this opportunity to learn from one another and practice all the virtues that “good Muslim women *should* have”, including tolerance and kindness. the internet doesn’t take away these “obligations” of character.

    • Exactly this kind of attitude is prevalent in the ummah, you are either all in or all out. This is so suffocating. Where is the space and platform for young muslim to honestly express or discuss their concerns, dissatisfaction or queries? Don’t you think the masjid nowadays is not addressing the issues that the community are facing? What is the use of only condemning the behavior is haram? Let me tell you, if there is not tons but at least a big portion of the issues that Islam is facing are being reflected in the “short short” article. Is it time for us to really reflect and ask: what’s wrong with our ummah and what’s wrong with Islam?

  • More importantly, why does a guy think he can
    have an opinion on whether a girl can or can’t practice Islam in
    The [feminist] arrogance itself is despicable,
    but hey I get your point right, because lol as a nudist, I also feel so hurt
    when fellow Muslims refuse to offer salaam back to me…I mean how
    can they not see this is how I feel when it comes to my religion?
    my imaginary transsexual friend who works in the adult
    industry…but he/she is also a Muslim…what about his/her practice? Yeah
    Orbala, I guess if the girl in shorts was a lesbian, it would have been icing
    on the cake, i.e. the only thing missing from the recipe.

    Aside from your (and yes I am aware of
    your background) ideological feminist paradigm & your
    graceless opening by stating how dare a Muslim man even raise an
    eyebrow concerning, you go en route to try to “rehabilitate” Muslims by ipso
    facto stating basically, and this is the crux of this new degenerate millennial
    pseudo scholarship.”

    • This video was inspired by this article! this article sparked a heated debate with the Muslims and the radical conservative Muslims.
      I say radical because they are radical. Clinging tightly to their interpretation of Islam! anyone who disagrees with a judgemental radical Muslim will be told that they are “sinful” and “going to hell”. Questioning them means that you have questioned Allah/God himself! these people know NO logic. Unless you follow their warped twisted version of Islam than you are “LESS THAN”.

      I want all my Muslim sisters to know that they are never less than, their interpretation is no less valid than a person who wears niqab.

      Judgemental Muslims hav an issue with others saying that only Allah can judge! because judgemental Muslims are soo arrogant and blind that they want the divine right to play Allah and judge others! as if their judgement means anything! It is true! ONLY GOD CAN JUDGE US! dont you dare try it! it bothers you that I speak the truth? the truth that my Creator’s final judgement is THE ONLY JUDGEMENT?

      The judgemental Muslims looove to go on the net and copy/paste from random “islamic sites” and issue out religious rulings. Here is a quote DIRECTLY from Allah himself

      “O you who believe, no people shall ridicule other people, for they may be better than they. Nor shall any women ridicule other women, for they may be better than they. Nor shall you mock one another, or make fun of your names. Evil indeed is the reversion to wickedness after attaining faith. Anyone who does not repent after this, these are the transgressors.” (Ch.49 Al Hujurat V. 12)

      Allah is addressing the believers, those who have got faith in the unicity of God, that God is One, that they should well understand this verse of the Holy Quran. He is warning them that one group from among them must not mock at another group. They must not also ridicule others and look for faults in them.

      Nowadays, there are many situations in which people find faults in others, and they ridicule these people. God, the Creator (Allah), has warned people that beware of these actions for the other group whom they are mocking at may be better than them. He is also warning them that, they must not laugh at others, backbite them or spy them to find faults and create disorder and disputes, because this would be a grievous thing. There are also those types of people who are prepared to talk all sorts of things and to assemble around a table to ridicule others, and make them the subjects of their conversation. Allah warns them and say that maybe the ones whom who are taking as inferior are in fact much better than you, that they are good people with a good hearts!

      It bothers judgemental Muslims when you tell them that they shouldnt judge people!

      • It bothers judgmental Muslims when you tell them that they shouldn’t judge people! that would have been sufficient enough…because that is what these mid-twenties self-professed scholars tend to do.
        You missed the point.

      • It is fact that Muslims can actually judge actions, just NOT intentions. ‘You are (the) best (of) people raised for the mankind – enjoining the right and forbidding [from] the wrong and believing in Allah…’ 3:110

    • The thing is, we’re not talking about “opinions” here, but about nasty judgmentallness.

      It is not your place or the place of anyone else to pass judgment about the decisions of adults that don’t harm other people.

      Yes, you may have an opinion that goes as far as that it’s not your style. But judging, especially about matters of dress and faith, is only up to God. Period.

      O and your equations with nudism, trans folk, lesbian women and the adult industry (which have nothing to do with eachother) say a lot about your world view, which seems to be colored by homophobia, transphobia and sexism.

      • Actually you are completely wrong. We can judge actions, we just can’t judge intentions. In fact it is a command of Allah to judge actions. Judging actions and reminding each other to do good and stay away from bad is part of being a Muslim. ‘You are (the) best (of) people raised for the mankind – enjoining the right and forbidding [from] the wrong and believing in Allah….’ 3:110

  • i love this article because i strongly believe that critical thinking about how one practices islam and why it a fundamental part of worshiping Allah correctly. i sit somewhere between the author of the original article and the response in terms of my own interpretations and practices but i love that we can discuss this – even passionately at times – because i am down with ijtihad and isn’t this exactly what this discussion is?

  • i’ve just read many of the comments in this string and am saddened about all that hate or hate-like sentiment. as muslims aren’t we trying to be better than that? …or are we just trying to prove Makke right, Allah forbid? i get wound up with the rest of them and am no angel but let’s pick our battles and direct our energies towards injustice rather than verbally ripping each others’ heads off. to empower women, we must allow all women to be heard

  • A lot of psychobabble to justify that Islam allows short shorts – but it doesn’t. It’s like saying I eat a meat burger every day but I am a vegetarian.

  • A year ago, I read an article by a woman that thought praying in a bikini is fine. This girl in short shorts obviously is not trying to pray in that attire, right?

      • Didn’t know about that one? The world is becoming really strange. I am just watching this video on CNN where Iranian women are putting up pictures without hijab and the CNN anchors seem so happy.

        • It’s there business to show that…’a victory for the West’. Whenever Muslim and women are mentioned, it will attract attention like crazy anyway.

      • Good Lord. You really have a dirty mind.

        And yes, it’s also not up to you to judge or even worse, takfir a gay pornstar.

        Lord knows that there are “Muslim” men who do much worse things (sex trafficking of women and children, massacring religious minority, torturing the opposition in their countries)……….and none of them are takfired, so go figure.

        But none of this can be just as bad as a woman in shorts. Right.

        • Did a Super Mario cloud chase you for you to say that?
          The point which you missed utterly is the justification of the new norm supposedly.

          • Really, do you have to be so childish by starting about Super Mario? This is a rational discussion, based on arguemnts.

            The point which YOU missed is the fact that El Naggar, and Islamic feminists are the last people in the world to force their norms on others.

            The problem is thea there are many people who want to force their norms on others, judge people, and try to use religion/ religious values to justify that.

            And that is the essence of the whole discussion & the trouble many Muslim women, and women of all faiths for that matter, have/experience.

          • No, they want to make their own lives be exonerated by the religion they purport to follow. It is a modernity excuse. What if I wanted to have sex openly and say it is okay, from an Islamic pov would I ever…why am I even bothering to explain to another millennial reject…smh

  • Orbala,

    You make quite a few claims in your article and offer no support for them:
    “…Islamic law was established by a group of elite Muslim men…”
    “hadiths that are actually very destructive and offensive to women, such
    as those saying that women have to have sex with their husbands whenever
    the husband wants it even if the wife is on the back of a camel or at
    the stove”
    “a Muslim, and especially a woman, has every right, every reason to
    distance herself from Islamic law, grounded in patriarchy and some

    Can you cite your sources? Because you cite none.


  • Since a woman body does ensue the formation of hormones necessary to create semen in men along with the necessary formalities like heightened desire for procreation, sex and desires hence, it is expected that women should take care to show off their body parts in whatever greater proportions as possible. The more the nakedness the more chances of men getting the cupid shots. Islam religion itself per se is an hindrance in that great endeavor so it must be abhorred or banished from the mindset of women specially or else they would be denying the simple things badly needed by men for their usual task of engaging in pro creativity activities. And also is to noted that these days as per moral trends women tend to enjoy each other bodies as well through somewhat lesbian imagination, thus, it should be ensured that lesser veil over body is encouraged in whatever form or manner.

    • Munna, pardon my response, but the typical male can and often will undress a woman with his eyes and imagination if even she’s wearing a full snowmobile suit. Semen and so forth occur without scantily clad prompts and triggers. A man’s nature is a man’s nature – good, bad, or ugly. Yes, we’re all different – but, most of us are certainly the same.

      • Not just the male, even females these days have pretty much the same eyes and imagination so denying them the pleasure of savoring the delight of bare body is not justified. There is also the need to somehow be more tolerant of female presence, whether the women is clothed or not, it’s the tolerance level that determines the civilized attitude of yours. Religion doesn’t ensures the scaling of tolerance hence, harping on religious prescription only muddies the waters.

      • This is some poor reasoning.

        It’s like stating since you’ll still get wet even with an umbrella in really heavy rain, you should just not use an umbrella.

        Even worse though, since inflaming male desire purposely creates a society where that becomes the norm. When women are dressed modestly, the good men are able to curb the bad men. When the women are dressed immodestly and also take the attitude you take, the good men are silenced and then repelled, and only the bad men are left, wallowing in their new power and voice in society.

        Well whatever, it’s not like anything will get through to you feminists. If God can’t get through to you, certainly I won’t either, your hearts and minds have long been closed off. I guess I’m just here as a warner.

        • Your comment, “It’s like stating since you’ll still get wet even with an umbrella in really heavy rain, you should just not use an umbrella.”
          As you know, times change and the perception should also change. Since even the best of philosophies have a life of their own therefore, I don’t think that in a heavy rain an umbrella would suffice….hence, I recommend use of rain-coat (New Ideology).
          Your comment, “Even worse though, since inflaming male desire purposely creates a society where that becomes the norm. When women are dressed modestly, the good men are able to curb the bad men. When the women are dressed immodestly and also take the attitude you take, the good men are silenced and then repelled, and only the bad men are left, wallowing in their new power and voice in society.”

          Since you think mere tolerance is not enough hence the need for religion or religious codes which I resent. Religion is not the solution for all the problems. It can be used as a supplementary device not the solution itself. Off-course, religion is also misused which you clearly avoided to dwell upon. For instance, ISIS…Boko Haram are the examples. I can agree to the measures that will enhance the tolerance level. And also, it’s only your mere perception that fully dressed women according to some religious prescription is sure-shot way of deflecting any evil eyes. It got to be lot more wider dimension.

      • Going along with that argument one can say that a typical male does not need a woman or undressing her to get arousal. At seventeen a cars exhaust pipe can seem interesting.

        And for a middle aged woman no longer attractive to men a banana or a cucumber would do for a quickie. Later there are enormous number of options in a sex shop to be browsed at leaser to find a good fit with all the bells and whistles.

        So your statement does not count for much. His does not carry weight either.

  • Muslim ales are teh trash of this planet! not all of them! but the comments written here and the other condescending comments to women is despicable

  • This video was inspired by this article! this article sparked a heated debate with the Muslims and the radical conservative Muslims.

    I say radical because they are radical. Clinging tightly to their interpretation of Islam! anyone who disagrees with a judgemental radical Muslim will be told that they are “sinful” and “going to hell”. Questioning them means that you have questioned Allah/God himself! these people know NO logic. Unless you follow their warped twisted version of Islam than you are “LESS THAN”.

    I want all my Muslim sisters to know that they are never less than, their interpretation is no less valid than a person who wears niqab.

    Judgemental Muslims hav an issue with others saying that only Allah can judge! because judgemental Muslims are soo arrogant and blind that they want the divine right to play Allah and judge others! as if their judgement means anything! It is true! ONLY GOD CAN JUDGE US! dont you dare try it! it bothers you that I speak the truth? the truth that my Creator’s final judgement is THE ONLY JUDGEMENT?

    The judgemental Muslims looove to go on the net and copy/paste from random “islamic sites” and issue out religious rulings. Here is a quote DIRECTLY from Allah himself

    “O you who believe, no people shall ridicule other people, for they may be better than they. Nor shall any women ridicule other women, for they may be better than they. Nor shall you mock one another, or make fun of your names. Evil indeed is the reversion to wickedness after attaining faith. Anyone who does not repent after this, these are the transgressors.” (Ch.49 Al Hujurat V. 12)

    Allah is addressing the believers, those who have got faith in the unicity of God, that God is One, that they should well understand this verse of the Holy Quran. He is warning them that one group from among them must not mock at another group. They must not also ridicule others and look for faults in them.

    Nowadays, there are many situations in which people find faults in others, and they ridicule these people. God, the Creator (Allah), has warned people that beware of these actions for the other group whom they are mocking at may be better than them. He is also warning them that, they must not laugh at others, backbite them or spy them to find faults and create disorder and disputes, because this would be a grievous thing. There are also those types of people who are prepared to talk all sorts of things and to assemble around a table to ridicule others, and make them the subjects of their conversation. Allah warns them and say that maybe the ones whom who are taking as inferior are in fact much better than you, that they are good people with a good hearts!

    It bothers judgemental Muslims when you tell them that they shouldnt judge people!

    • Looks like you are guilty of picking and choosing, and also hypocrisy. If you meant your words, you would also agree that the sinning Muslims can’t then turn around and call the non-sinners “boring” for not sinning with them. You can’t judge people for judging you, and then turn around and claim yourself better for going one level higher.

      But it’s even more complicated than that. Allah veils sins of believers, but these so called believers openly sin and are proud of doing so.

      When that happens, Allah does in fact order punishment by Islamic law. The protection you are speaking about is for those that when they sin hide their sins, in those cases Muslims are not supposed to seek out sins.

      However even that has limits. If there are thefts, murders, violence and yes fornication, those are things that are supposed to be investigated and then punished. If the person is found out, we don’t just then ignore the sin and let them go, we are commanded to punish them under Islamic Law.

      The only protection being a Muslim has against another Muslim is to be safe in your life and property. You can even be beaten by another Muslim and that’s okay, in response to your sins. You can certainly be attacked verbally for your sins. You just won’t be killed, unless the laws call for it, and usually only after a trial, where the community also can testify against you and you will be judged.

      As for niqab, there is no requirement to wear it, and since it isn’t made a clear command there is freedom in it. However things like drinking, fornication, nakedness are all explicit sins. And wearing a niqab is obviously far preferable to short shorts, which are clearly prohibited. The “screen” is mentioned explicitly, we read that generally to mean at least a hijab. And also mentioned explicitly is dress must go below the knees. Even if it is a centimeter below the knees that is actually fine, but most men and women prefer to cover lower than that.

  • How is this even a debate?

    Wearing short shorts is not OK. Looking at someone (from the opposite gender) who is wearing short shorts is not OK. Judging someone’s iman is not OK. Reminding them of the boundaries of Islam is OK, if it’s done respectfully.

    It’s really not that complicated, folks.

  • And here is another reaction to that article, invoking peer pressure:

    What about the peer pressure coming from Muslim communities, pressuring young women to conform to patriarchal Muslim notions of behaviour & dress? The irony of the thing is, that it is just this peer pressure El Naggar talks about, and this is totally overlooked by the writer of this reply.

  • This is wonderful, I wanted to write a response to that article by Hussain Makke myself and glad you wrote a good one. Masha’Allah sister.

  • Let me tell you my 2 cents. I think the main is issue is that there are indeed some extremes in Islam this day that cause this reactionary behaviour in western culture. I agree these extremes have to change. The middle ground is best. But also there also moral values that should be upheld, such as, value of yourself as a person and for the name Islam. Today’s illinformed society governed by internet search based knowledge, has developed an enormous arrogance, which is I think a normal -but wrong- reaction. Therefore a wide gap has been created between the “conservatives” less internet prone group and the “liberal” more internet based group. Looking into the internet for simple things in Islam causes a huge amount of misinformation. I’d like to say that this generation who have partially abandoned Islam only are muslim just by “name”, I mean smoking, drugs, drinking not praying (or almost) wearing too revealing clothes, is all acceptable in current society… but just don’t call yourself a muslim. You know why? Because you are bringing it down with your nonsense. Nobody is judging you if you’re an atheist. Live a happy life, but don’t set a bad example for people who think Islam stands for morals standard and purity. Not sex drugs and rock n roll.

  • Abdullah ibn Utbah ibn Mas’oud said:

    “I heard Umar ibn Khattab say, “there were some people excused by the wahi in the time of rasulullah, but now the wahi has stopped. now we account you by what you do that is apparent. And whoever shows us any corruption, we will never believe him nor trust him even if your intention was good.” [Bukhari]

  • There is nothing stopping a woman praying in shorts or naked for that matter but it doesn’t fulfill the conditions of the salat and therefore her salat will not be accepted. However she will not get the sin of NOT praying. Covering the ‘awrah. If a person prays with his ‘awrah uncovered, his prayer is not valid, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

    “O Children of Adam! Take your adornment (by wearing your clean clothes) while praying”

    [al-A’raaf 7:31]

    Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: They are unanimously agreed that the prayer of one who does not wear his clothes when he is able to cover himself with them, and prays naked, is invalid. End quote.

    For more information please see the answer to question no. 81281.

    ‘Awrahs for people who are praying fall into several categories:

    (i) Minimum ‘awrah. This is the ‘awrah of a male between the ages of seven and ten; his ‘awrah is the two private parts only, front and back.

    (ii) Moderate ‘awrah. This is the ‘awrah of one who has reached the age of ten and above, between the navel and the knee.

    (iii) Maximum ‘awrah. This is the ‘awrah of an adult, free woman. All of her body is ‘awrah when praying, except for her hands and face. The scholars differed with regard to showing the feet.

  • It’s not that hijab and covering up your body is expected in Islam, it’s required. The punishment for not concealing your hair from the gazes of men outside of your direct family (i.e. brother, father) is that each strand of hair will be snakes biting your face on the Day of Judgement.

  • “See, what made him think he should respond to that article, anyway? What makes us think we can respond to something that someone else says based on their experience?”
    This line, along with the title of your article, stood out. I feel like discussion needs to be an important facet of Islam in today’s world. If we can’t have a healthy discussion going on, with responses and sharing of ideas between groups, then we’ve got each group within the groups within Islam drifting farther apart. Our Ummah needs to come together in unity, and we can only do this through some legitimate understanding. Which will come about with some deep, insightful discussions

  • I would like to reply to the author as she said ” What about the hadiths that are actually very destructive and offensive to women, such as those saying that women have to have sex with their husbands whenever the husband wants it even if the wife is on the back of a camel or at the stove?but for women, these are realities because we are the ones who have to live with the consequences of hadiths like these.”

    Well If you really want to know the explanation of the Hadees then check the link below:

  • Part of the premise of the article is saying that Muslim women who wear shorts can be as close to God as women who wear a niqab. But how can that be? Because our Lord himself states throughout the Quran and in many Hadith that women should cover themselves and be modest in order to preserve the beauty that they posses, the beauty which is given to them. So how can you be a practicing, modest women of Islam if you are showing your legs off to every man and women who sees you?

  • I emphasize that Islamic law was established by a group of elite Muslim men (most of whom held views on women that would be offensive to many contemporary Muslims, men and women alike)

    Sorry to correct you but I think Islamic law was established by The Creator Allah (swt) – man merely put it into action,
    Totally agree with you prohumanity.
    Having been unable to defeat muslim ummah militarily, the West are trying to slaughter the ideas of Islam in muslim minds, especially the youth. But, as Russians well know, West will be unable to defeat the ummah of Mohammad(saw).

  • I believe that it is VERY important for Muslim Scholars to announce whether or not an hadith is fabricated or not. In Islam, we do not accept something just because we believe that it is ‘beautiful and useful’. We accept things because it is the truth. Sure, I would go around and tell people to seek knowledge even if they had to go to China but I would never attribute it to the Prophet (SAW) because that is not what he said. This is not the truth. Instead I would use other *authentic* hadiths like “Seeking knowledge is a duty upon every Muslim.”

Leave a Reply

Scroll To Top