Egypt’s Brotherhood declares war on the bikini

[Pete]

Egypt’s Brotherhood declares war on the bikini

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=235687

"Freedom and Justice" party leader: "We must place regulations on tourists wishing to visit Egypt."..............."

&

"............"The pharaonic culture is a rotten culture," A-Shahhat told the London-based Arabic daily A-Sharq Al-Awsat on Wednesday, saying the faces of ancient statues "should be covered with wax, since they are religiously forbidden." He likened the Egyptian relics to the idols which circled the walls of Mecca in pre-Islamic times................."

The true face of Islam folks.

[PRB]

THIS MEANS WAR!

[mojaveman]

While in Egypt back in the day we were allowed a few days off right before we left and got to stay in a nice hotel in Cairo. A handful of the women had brought bikinis and were wearing them at the slightly rowdy party we were having near the pool. The male Egyptian hotel workers were looking at the scantly clad American gals like they had never seen a female before. Some of the women later complained of getting their backsides touched by the workers.

[Pete]

I bet old Brother M. Saad spends some time down at the beaches counting the bikinis. How else would he know they're such a problem.

All they need is a majority folks and the true face if Islam comes out.

[Peregrino]

And we can't even dry a "line in the sand" to stop them. The tides of Western Liberalism keep erasing it, thereby inviting unceasing encroachment. I probably won't see Sharia in America; I wish I were as sure of that for my brother's children.

[Richard]

Must be why the Egyptians want Eilat - like Abu Dhabi and Dubai, they need a nice, modern, thriving beach resort where they can drink alcohol, gamble, and practice their hedonism away from the disapproving glaring of the local gawd squads.

And so it goes...

Richard

I was told this by one of my long time Arab girlfriends after I went on a tirade of the oppression on Arab women after one of my women studies classes. She told me that wearing the hijab and dressing modestly to her was not oppression. She believed that Western Women were more oppressed than their Arab sisters. I dont believe in such a judgement; but, believe one oppression is direct and the other is overt. She went to say that Western women were oppressed to look a certain way, augment their bodies to meet that image, wear certain clothes that made them sexual objects. She felt that men treated her with more respect for being modest compared to her american girlfriends. I find it interesting that we use the conversative values in Egypt that say women shouldn't wear bikinis to spread fear, while politicians have done the same thing in our country.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by WayoftheWolf

........... I find it interesting that we use the conversative values in Egypt that say women shouldn't wear bikinis to spread fear, while politicians have done the same thing in our country.

True but we don't generally have gangs of modesty police running around beating women who wear bikinis.

We don't even have gangs of fashion police running around beating up women in burkas.

And you should have beat her for talking to a male who was not family - oh, wait, this is America we don't do that.

[alelks]

Scoreboard.jpg

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by PRB

THIS MEANS WAR!

I'm with you!!!!!!!

What's next the Hooters Girls!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by Pete

True but we don't generally have gangs of modesty police running around beating women who wear bikinis.

We don't even have gangs of fashion police running around beating up women in burkas.

And you should have beat her for talking to a male who was not family - oh, wait, this is America we don't do that.

So, it is your opinion that it is worse to be oppressed by physical means rather than by psychological means. I would argue that we do have fashion police running around. The societal pressure for women to fit a certain image that results in body augmentation, bulimia, anorexia. Even products solely for this oppression have been developed for diet food, diet pills, and a whole bunch of workout equipement. The way I look at it is that we tend to look at everthing as black or white; put techinically, a binary system. So, Arabs are one end of the continum where they do not want their female members of the family to talk to the other sex because they know what can happen to the point that they are very controlling. On the other end, we have Americans who have all the freedom in the world. We can talk to whom ever we want; but, then have many ramifications from that. Out of wedlock births, single parent mothers, abortions, promiscuity, stds, a highly sexualized culture,etc. I feel if we continue to make value judgements we will never move forward.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by WayoftheWolf

................... Out of wedlock births, single parent mothers, abortions, promiscuity, stds, a highly sexualized culture,etc. I feel if we continue to make value judgements we will never move forward.

I would say most of what you just listed was because we stopped making value judgements. Now anything goes.

So you're saying living under Sharia law would be good for everybody on earth?

Western women would be safer under a burka?

Originally Posted by Pete

I would say most of what you just listed was because we stopped making value judgements. Now anything goes.

So you're saying living under Sharia law would be good for everybody on earth?

Western women would be safer under a burka?

I would say we traded one set of value judgements for another. I am not saying at all that religious law is good for anybody. I do not believe in religion. And for cover, I believe anybody is allowed to wear whatever they want ; but, it is contigent on their reasons. The reasons must not be because of direct physical or overt psychological oppression. "If I want to understand somebody, I cannot condemn him, I must observe, study him. I must love the very thing I am studying. If you want to understand a child, you must love and not condemn him. You must play with him, watch his movements, his idiosyncrasies, his ways of behavior; but if you meerly condemn, resist or blame him, ther is no comprehension of the child." Krishnamurti 1954:42

[Roguish Lawyer]

Originally Posted by WayoftheWolf

I would say we traded one set of value judgements for another. I am not saying at all that religious law is good for anybody. I do not believe in religion. And for cover, I believe anybody is allowed to wear whatever they want ; but, it is contigent on their reasons. The reasons must not be because of direct physical or overt psychological oppression. "If I want to understand somebody, I cannot condemn him, I must observe, study him. I must love the very thing I am studying. If you want to understand a child, you must love and not condemn him. You must play with him, watch his movements, his idiosyncrasies, his ways of behavior; but if you meerly condemn, resist or blame him, ther is no comprehension of the child." Krishnamurti 1954:42

I'll bet you like Cannibals and Nazis too. Just different value systems, can't condemn them.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by WayoftheWolf

.... I believe anybody is allowed to wear whatever they want ; but, it is contigent on their reasons. The reasons must not be because of direct physical or overt psychological oppression.......

I'm trying to link your two thoughts from posts 11 and 13. I'm sorry but they just don't go together.

You say anyone should be allowed to wear anything they want with no direct or overt psychological oppression but you seem to agree that females in our society are under psychological oppression to dress the way they do and the solution would be to put them under the burka.

Hmmmmm.