Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Netha Hussain]

Dear Fred,

  We have 'n' number of mailing lists and forums to discuss politics and
religion. I am subscribing to many such mailing lists, and I take part in
active discussion in them. But now that we are here in gender gap mailing
list to discuss about women participation in Wikimedia projects, let us not
entertain off topic discussion. Let's discuss just enough politics and
religion that may concern gender gap issues on Wikimedia projects - not
more.

Thank you.

In Wikilove,
-- 
Netha Hussain
User: Netha Hussain
*nethahussain.blogspot.com
swethaambari.wordpress.com*


On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 2:58 AM, Fred Bauder  wrote:

> So you think we might get more done if we have the common sense not to
> discuss politics and religion?
>
> Fred
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Apologies for my bad English. English is not my mother tongue.
> >
> > Let us not use this mailing list to discuss religion. Let us concentrate
> > on
> > strategies to improve participation of women in Wikimedia projects
> > instead.
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > --
> > Netha Hussain
> > User: Netha Hussain
> > Student of Medicine and Surgery
> > *nethahussain.blogspot.com
> > swethaambari.wordpress.com*
> >
> >
> > remember that women's rights are way, way more important than
> > the interests of Wikimedia Foundation.
> > On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 12:58 AM, Ryan Kaldari
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Just wanted to say that I didn't take any offense from Michael's
> >> comments. I was probably a bit out of line in my characterization of
> >> Christianity. I was just trying to point out that any religion, when
> >> taken literally, can be problematic. There were actually many books
> >> published during the American Civil War about how the Bible endorsed
> >> slavery. They make a convincing argument if you accept all of their
> >> Bible quotes taken out of context.
> >>
> >> The part about women being subservient is actually quite pervasive in
> >> the bible, both old and new testament. See:
> >> 1 Peter 3:1-6
> >> 1 Timothy 2:11-14
> >> Colossians 3:18
> >> Ephesians 5:22-23
> >> 1 Corinthians 14:33-35
> >> 1 Corinthians 11:3-10
> >> Isaiah 19:16
> >> Deuteronomy 22:20-21
> >> Genesis 3:16
> >> Genesis 2:18
> >> This is certainly not a novel interpretation. Indeed it seems very
> >> difficult to argue that the Bible does not consider women subservient
> >> to
> >> men.
> >>
> >> The part about beards is Old Testament and only taken seriously by
> >> Orthodox Christians, Amish, Mennonites, etc.
> >>
> >> The part about putting adulterers to death is also Old Testament and
> >> obviously not taken seriously by most Christians, although John Calvin
> >> did argue that the Bible justified the death penalty for adultery (as
> >> have other Christians historically).
> >>
> >> All that said, I am not trying to imply that modern Christianity is an
> >> oppressive religion. I'm just saying that historically, it has a few
> >> skeletons in its closet and it went through some serious growing pains,
> >> as is Islam.
> >>
> >> Ryan Kaldari
> >>
> >> On 9/23/11 7:00 PM, Michael J. Lowrey wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Emily
> >> Monroe
> >>  wrote:
> >> >> Michael Lowry, what you just said was said was sarcastic and
> >> potentially
> >> >> uncivil.
> >> > So Ryan and Carol can lie about MY religion, and I'M the one accused
> >> > of incivility?
> >> >
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Gendergap mailing list
> >> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> >>
> > ___
> > Gendergap mailing list
> > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> >
>
>
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[carolmooredc]

A bit less on nudity too which might appeal to/attract/encourage 
prurient interests under the guise of helpfulness ;-(


On 9/27/2011 6:53 PM, Emily Monroe wrote:

Hmm. Perhaps, Fred, perhaps. ;-)

From,
Emily


On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Fred Bauder > wrote:


So you think we might get more done if we have the common sense not to
discuss politics and religion?

Fred

> Hi everyone,
>
> Apologies for my bad English. English is not my mother tongue.
>
> Let us not use this mailing list to discuss religion. Let us
concentrate
> on
> strategies to improve participation of women in Wikimedia projects
> instead.
>
> Thank you
>
> --
> Netha Hussain
> User: Netha Hussain
> Student of Medicine and Surgery
> *nethahussain.blogspot.com 
> swethaambari.wordpress.com *
>
>


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Emily Monroe]

Hmm. Perhaps, Fred, perhaps. ;-)

From,
Emily


On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Fred Bauder  wrote:

> So you think we might get more done if we have the common sense not to
> discuss politics and religion?
>
> Fred
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Apologies for my bad English. English is not my mother tongue.
> >
> > Let us not use this mailing list to discuss religion. Let us concentrate
> > on
> > strategies to improve participation of women in Wikimedia projects
> > instead.
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > --
> > Netha Hussain
> > User: Netha Hussain
> > Student of Medicine and Surgery
> > *nethahussain.blogspot.com
> > swethaambari.wordpress.com*
> >
> >
> > remember that women's rights are way, way more important than
> > the interests of Wikimedia Foundation.
> > On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 12:58 AM, Ryan Kaldari
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Just wanted to say that I didn't take any offense from Michael's
> >> comments. I was probably a bit out of line in my characterization of
> >> Christianity. I was just trying to point out that any religion, when
> >> taken literally, can be problematic. There were actually many books
> >> published during the American Civil War about how the Bible endorsed
> >> slavery. They make a convincing argument if you accept all of their
> >> Bible quotes taken out of context.
> >>
> >> The part about women being subservient is actually quite pervasive in
> >> the bible, both old and new testament. See:
> >> 1 Peter 3:1-6
> >> 1 Timothy 2:11-14
> >> Colossians 3:18
> >> Ephesians 5:22-23
> >> 1 Corinthians 14:33-35
> >> 1 Corinthians 11:3-10
> >> Isaiah 19:16
> >> Deuteronomy 22:20-21
> >> Genesis 3:16
> >> Genesis 2:18
> >> This is certainly not a novel interpretation. Indeed it seems very
> >> difficult to argue that the Bible does not consider women subservient
> >> to
> >> men.
> >>
> >> The part about beards is Old Testament and only taken seriously by
> >> Orthodox Christians, Amish, Mennonites, etc.
> >>
> >> The part about putting adulterers to death is also Old Testament and
> >> obviously not taken seriously by most Christians, although John Calvin
> >> did argue that the Bible justified the death penalty for adultery (as
> >> have other Christians historically).
> >>
> >> All that said, I am not trying to imply that modern Christianity is an
> >> oppressive religion. I'm just saying that historically, it has a few
> >> skeletons in its closet and it went through some serious growing pains,
> >> as is Islam.
> >>
> >> Ryan Kaldari
> >>
> >> On 9/23/11 7:00 PM, Michael J. Lowrey wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Emily
> >> Monroe
> >>  wrote:
> >> >> Michael Lowry, what you just said was said was sarcastic and
> >> potentially
> >> >> uncivil.
> >> > So Ryan and Carol can lie about MY religion, and I'M the one accused
> >> > of incivility?
> >> >
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Gendergap mailing list
> >> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> >>
> > ___
> > Gendergap mailing list
> > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> >
>
>
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Fred Bauder]

So you think we might get more done if we have the common sense not to
discuss politics and religion?

Fred

> Hi everyone,
>
> Apologies for my bad English. English is not my mother tongue.
>
> Let us not use this mailing list to discuss religion. Let us concentrate
> on
> strategies to improve participation of women in Wikimedia projects
> instead.
>
> Thank you
>
> --
> Netha Hussain
> User: Netha Hussain
> Student of Medicine and Surgery
> *nethahussain.blogspot.com
> swethaambari.wordpress.com*
>
>
> remember that women's rights are way, way more important than
> the interests of Wikimedia Foundation.
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 12:58 AM, Ryan Kaldari
> wrote:
>
>> Just wanted to say that I didn't take any offense from Michael's
>> comments. I was probably a bit out of line in my characterization of
>> Christianity. I was just trying to point out that any religion, when
>> taken literally, can be problematic. There were actually many books
>> published during the American Civil War about how the Bible endorsed
>> slavery. They make a convincing argument if you accept all of their
>> Bible quotes taken out of context.
>>
>> The part about women being subservient is actually quite pervasive in
>> the bible, both old and new testament. See:
>> 1 Peter 3:1-6
>> 1 Timothy 2:11-14
>> Colossians 3:18
>> Ephesians 5:22-23
>> 1 Corinthians 14:33-35
>> 1 Corinthians 11:3-10
>> Isaiah 19:16
>> Deuteronomy 22:20-21
>> Genesis 3:16
>> Genesis 2:18
>> This is certainly not a novel interpretation. Indeed it seems very
>> difficult to argue that the Bible does not consider women subservient
>> to
>> men.
>>
>> The part about beards is Old Testament and only taken seriously by
>> Orthodox Christians, Amish, Mennonites, etc.
>>
>> The part about putting adulterers to death is also Old Testament and
>> obviously not taken seriously by most Christians, although John Calvin
>> did argue that the Bible justified the death penalty for adultery (as
>> have other Christians historically).
>>
>> All that said, I am not trying to imply that modern Christianity is an
>> oppressive religion. I'm just saying that historically, it has a few
>> skeletons in its closet and it went through some serious growing pains,
>> as is Islam.
>>
>> Ryan Kaldari
>>
>> On 9/23/11 7:00 PM, Michael J. Lowrey wrote:
>> > On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Emily
>> Monroe
>>  wrote:
>> >> Michael Lowry, what you just said was said was sarcastic and
>> potentially
>> >> uncivil.
>> > So Ryan and Carol can lie about MY religion, and I'M the one accused
>> > of incivility?
>> >
>>
>> ___
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Marc Riddell]

on 9/27/11 5:02 PM, Netha Hussain at nethahuss...@gmail.com wrote:

Hi everyone,

Apologies for my bad English. English is not my mother tongue.

Let us not use this mailing list to discuss religion. Let us concentrate on
strategies to improve participation of women in Wikimedia projects instead.

Thank you

Netha,

Your English is fine - and your point is well made. I agree, completely.

Marc Riddell

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Netha Hussain]

Hi everyone,

Apologies for my bad English. English is not my mother tongue.

Let us not use this mailing list to discuss religion. Let us concentrate on
strategies to improve participation of women in Wikimedia projects instead.

Thank you

-- 
Netha Hussain
User: Netha Hussain
Student of Medicine and Surgery
*nethahussain.blogspot.com
swethaambari.wordpress.com*


remember that women's rights are way, way more important than
the interests of Wikimedia Foundation.
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 12:58 AM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:

> Just wanted to say that I didn't take any offense from Michael's
> comments. I was probably a bit out of line in my characterization of
> Christianity. I was just trying to point out that any religion, when
> taken literally, can be problematic. There were actually many books
> published during the American Civil War about how the Bible endorsed
> slavery. They make a convincing argument if you accept all of their
> Bible quotes taken out of context.
>
> The part about women being subservient is actually quite pervasive in
> the bible, both old and new testament. See:
> 1 Peter 3:1-6
> 1 Timothy 2:11-14
> Colossians 3:18
> Ephesians 5:22-23
> 1 Corinthians 14:33-35
> 1 Corinthians 11:3-10
> Isaiah 19:16
> Deuteronomy 22:20-21
> Genesis 3:16
> Genesis 2:18
> This is certainly not a novel interpretation. Indeed it seems very
> difficult to argue that the Bible does not consider women subservient to
> men.
>
> The part about beards is Old Testament and only taken seriously by
> Orthodox Christians, Amish, Mennonites, etc.
>
> The part about putting adulterers to death is also Old Testament and
> obviously not taken seriously by most Christians, although John Calvin
> did argue that the Bible justified the death penalty for adultery (as
> have other Christians historically).
>
> All that said, I am not trying to imply that modern Christianity is an
> oppressive religion. I'm just saying that historically, it has a few
> skeletons in its closet and it went through some serious growing pains,
> as is Islam.
>
> Ryan Kaldari
>
> On 9/23/11 7:00 PM, Michael J. Lowrey wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Emily Monroe
>  wrote:
> >> Michael Lowry, what you just said was said was sarcastic and potentially
> >> uncivil.
> > So Ryan and Carol can lie about MY religion, and I'M the one accused
> > of incivility?
> >
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Ryan Kaldari]

Just wanted to say that I didn't take any offense from Michael's 
comments. I was probably a bit out of line in my characterization of 
Christianity. I was just trying to point out that any religion, when 
taken literally, can be problematic. There were actually many books 
published during the American Civil War about how the Bible endorsed 
slavery. They make a convincing argument if you accept all of their 
Bible quotes taken out of context.

The part about women being subservient is actually quite pervasive in 
the bible, both old and new testament. See:
1 Peter 3:1-6
1 Timothy 2:11-14
Colossians 3:18
Ephesians 5:22-23
1 Corinthians 14:33-35
1 Corinthians 11:3-10
Isaiah 19:16
Deuteronomy 22:20-21
Genesis 3:16
Genesis 2:18
This is certainly not a novel interpretation. Indeed it seems very 
difficult to argue that the Bible does not consider women subservient to 
men.

The part about beards is Old Testament and only taken seriously by 
Orthodox Christians, Amish, Mennonites, etc.

The part about putting adulterers to death is also Old Testament and 
obviously not taken seriously by most Christians, although John Calvin 
did argue that the Bible justified the death penalty for adultery (as 
have other Christians historically).

All that said, I am not trying to imply that modern Christianity is an 
oppressive religion. I'm just saying that historically, it has a few 
skeletons in its closet and it went through some serious growing pains, 
as is Islam.

Ryan Kaldari

On 9/23/11 7:00 PM, Michael J. Lowrey wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Emily Monroe  wrote:
>> Michael Lowry, what you just said was said was sarcastic and potentially
>> uncivil.
> So Ryan and Carol can lie about MY religion, and I'M the one accused
> of incivility?
>

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Emily Monroe]

I wouldn't mind a religion-L list, if it means that the argument here ends.

Michael, I wasn't defending people from being confronted, I was defending
people from being confronted in a sarcastic manner, which is inappropriate
in an online forum.

From,
Emily


On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Fred Bauder wrote:

>
> > I'm sorry we lost Arnaud over a conversation like this, the power of
> > conversation is that people do disagree, and sometimes people don't quite
> > like disagreement.
> > --Sarah
>
> I guess Arnaud is a man, although I'm still not sure. I'm not all that
> firm in rejecting his viewpoint about Islam, which I think has some
> traction in Europe. Sometimes I wonder whether tolerance of Islam in any
> form isn't really dumb, but then I think about Muslims I have met though
> Wikipedia and elsewhere on the internet and know that this is not a black
> and white issue, as is also not the case with most gender issues.
>
> Fred
>
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Fred Bauder]

> I'm sorry we lost Arnaud over a conversation like this, the power of
> conversation is that people do disagree, and sometimes people don't quite
> like disagreement.
> --Sarah

I guess Arnaud is a man, although I'm still not sure. I'm not all that
firm in rejecting his viewpoint about Islam, which I think has some
traction in Europe. Sometimes I wonder whether tolerance of Islam in any
form isn't really dumb, but then I think about Muslims I have met though
Wikipedia and elsewhere on the internet and know that this is not a black
and white issue, as is also not the case with most gender issues.

Fred


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Sarah Stierch]

I adore all of you people, really I do.  From the bottom of my chaos
Erisloving heart...

Do you want me to try to develop a Religion-L list? Because I have no shame
in bringing out the WIKILOVE to make you people all snuggly and content with
fighting the good fight against systematic bias in Wikimedia, and that can
include religion of course.

;D

Btw, I believe Orange Mike is Quaker, if I read his previous added touch to
his signature.

I'm sorry we lost Arnaud over a conversation like this, the power of
conversation is that people do disagree, and sometimes people don't quite
like disagreement.  One bizarre thing about Wikimedia lists is that no
matter how much shit slinging (or "Gods-slinging?" heh! I kid.I kid...)
people generally still like each other at the end of the day.

Generally, being the key word, and "like" is a loosely used term.

So calm down..calm down.

Just like sex...whatever you're into..you're into..as long as you're not
forcing me into it against my own will!

xo
--Sarah




On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Michael J. Lowrey wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Laura Hale  wrote:
> > Your "religion" includes  Roman Catholicism, the Church of Latter Day
> > Saints, Christian Scientists, Watchtower Society, Russian Orthodox,
> > Anglican, Coptic, Quakers, and Amish?
> > Christianity, like Islam, has a lot of branches and you could say almost
> > anything about Christianity and some sects it would be true in and others
> it
> > would not.  It would be accurate to say "Jesus Christ is not divine" and
> > "Jesus Christ is divine" and different sects hold this to be true.  It
> would
> > also be true to say that Christianity is a driving force in the United
> > States towards pushing women out of work and into the home, is opposed to
> > women having access to birth control, and is opposed to abortion in all
> > cases, and that women should be totally subservient to men, and that if
> you
> > are moral, you don't need a doctor because Jesus will provide.  The
> opposite
> > could also be said and be equally as true.   If you want to see how two
> > opposite sides have aspects of the truth, look
> > at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Abortion/Evidence .
>
> Okay, Ryan's statement was more sweepingly generalized than Carol's; I
> still consider that such sweeping "more or less" statements about
> other people's faiths have no place in a discussion forum such as this
> one; and I refuse to be even remotely apologetic for defending the
> religion of Martin Luther King, Ammon Hennacy, Ivan Illich, Dorothy
> Day and Norman Thomas.
>
> --
> Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey
>
> "When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food
> and clothes."
>  --  Desiderius Erasmus
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>



-- 
GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for Wikimedia 
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American
Art
and
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.*
--
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Michael J. Lowrey]

On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Laura Hale  wrote:
> Your "religion" includes  Roman Catholicism, the Church of Latter Day
> Saints, Christian Scientists, Watchtower Society, Russian Orthodox,
> Anglican, Coptic, Quakers, and Amish?
> Christianity, like Islam, has a lot of branches and you could say almost
> anything about Christianity and some sects it would be true in and others it
> would not.  It would be accurate to say "Jesus Christ is not divine" and
> "Jesus Christ is divine" and different sects hold this to be true.  It would
> also be true to say that Christianity is a driving force in the United
> States towards pushing women out of work and into the home, is opposed to
> women having access to birth control, and is opposed to abortion in all
> cases, and that women should be totally subservient to men, and that if you
> are moral, you don't need a doctor because Jesus will provide.  The opposite
> could also be said and be equally as true.   If you want to see how two
> opposite sides have aspects of the truth, look
> at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Abortion/Evidence .

Okay, Ryan's statement was more sweepingly generalized than Carol's; I
still consider that such sweeping "more or less" statements about
other people's faiths have no place in a discussion forum such as this
one; and I refuse to be even remotely apologetic for defending the
religion of Martin Luther King, Ammon Hennacy, Ivan Illich, Dorothy
Day and Norman Thomas.

-- 
Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey

"When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food
and clothes."
     --  Desiderius Erasmus

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Laura Hale]

On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Michael J. Lowrey wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Emily Monroe 
> wrote:
> > Michael Lowry, what you just said was said was sarcastic and potentially
> > uncivil.
>
> So Ryan and Carol can lie about MY religion, and I'M the one accused
> of incivility?
>
>
Your "religion" includes  Roman Catholicism, the Church of Latter Day
Saints, Christian Scientists, Watchtower Society, Russian Orthodox,
Anglican, Coptic, Quakers, and Amish?

Christianity, like Islam, has a lot of branches and you could say almost
anything about Christianity and some sects it would be true in and others it
would not.  It would be accurate to say "Jesus Christ is not divine" and
"Jesus Christ is divine" and different sects hold this to be true.  It would
also be true to say that Christianity is a driving force in the United
States towards pushing women out of work and into the home, is opposed to
women having access to birth control, and is opposed to abortion in all
cases, and that women should be totally subservient to men, and that if you
are moral, you don't need a doctor because Jesus will provide.  The opposite
could also be said and be equally as true.   If you want to see how two
opposite sides have aspects of the truth, look at
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Abortion/Evidence
 .

Anyone have any stats regarding female participation on Wikipedia by
religion?  Most of the data I've seen suggests about 45%/45% split between
Christians and Atheists as contributors on Wikipedia, with non-Christian
pockets in countries outside Europe and North America.

-- 
twitter: purplepopple
blog: ozziesport.com
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Michael J. Lowrey]

On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Emily Monroe  wrote:
> Michael Lowry, what you just said was said was sarcastic and potentially
> uncivil.

So Ryan and Carol can lie about MY religion, and I'M the one accused
of incivility?

-- 
Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey
Milwaukee Friends Meeting

"When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food
and clothes."
     --  Desiderius Erasmus (one of them Christian bigots)

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Emily Monroe]

Michael Lowry, what you just said was said was sarcastic and potentially
uncivil.

Arnaud, (if you can read this) if you are serious about unsubscribing, be my
guest, but if you should resubscribe, please don't threaten to unsubscribe.
Just do it.

I asked my question under the assumption that a lot of Muslims are either
liberal or moderate, and therefore don't necessarily always interpret the
koran literally (or even reject parts of it outright!) and that even
conservative Muslims are going to be reasonable enough to realize that woman
deserve equal rights as men.

From,
Emily


On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 7:01 PM, Carol Moore in DC  wrote:

> Actually that's the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible which is accepted more or
> less by most of Christianity. Though obviously evangelicals take all of
> it more seriously, even some of the parts Jesus (allegedly) rejected.
>
> On 9/23/2011 7:23 PM, Michael J. Lowrey wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Ryan Kaldari
>  wrote:
> >> Of course the Christian Bible still says that women are
> >> subservient to their husbands (as Michelle Bachmann recently reminded
> us).
> >> It also endorses slavery, says that adulterers must be put to death, and
> >> requires men to grow beards.
> > Gee, thanks for telling me what my religion teaches and believes - NOT!
> >
> > Try studying the variety of Christian teachings outside the
> > televangelists sometime.
> >
>
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Carol Moore in DC]

Actually that's the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible which is accepted more or 
less by most of Christianity. Though obviously evangelicals take all of 
it more seriously, even some of the parts Jesus (allegedly) rejected.

On 9/23/2011 7:23 PM, Michael J. Lowrey wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Ryan Kaldari  wrote:
>> Of course the Christian Bible still says that women are
>> subservient to their husbands (as Michelle Bachmann recently reminded us).
>> It also endorses slavery, says that adulterers must be put to death, and
>> requires men to grow beards.
> Gee, thanks for telling me what my religion teaches and believes - NOT!
>
> Try studying the variety of Christian teachings outside the
> televangelists sometime.
>


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Michael J. Lowrey]

On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Ryan Kaldari  wrote:
> Of course the Christian Bible still says that women are
> subservient to their husbands (as Michelle Bachmann recently reminded us).
> It also endorses slavery, says that adulterers must be put to death, and
> requires men to grow beards.

Gee, thanks for telling me what my religion teaches and believes - NOT!

Try studying the variety of Christian teachings outside the
televangelists sometime.

-- 
Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey

"When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food
and clothes."
     --  Desiderius Erasmus

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Ryan Kaldari]

Arnaud, I think you should not underestimate the impact of poverty as 
compared to religion. Before the Western world became the 1st World, the 
typical Christian was just as intolerant, bigoted, and patriarchal as 
your most extreme Muslim. Once Westerners went from being peasants to 
middle-class professionals, business became more important than 
religion, and the enemies of capitalism (communists) became the bogeyman 
rather than other religions. This pulled the rug out from Christianity, 
which used to have a monopoly on bogeymen. So Christianity had to go for 
the soft-sell and reinvent itself as a feel-good spiritual social club 
rather than fire and brimstone. All the sudden women could wear pants 
and run for office (and become priests). Of course the Christian Bible 
still says that women are subservient to their husbands (as Michelle 
Bachmann recently reminded us). It also endorses slavery, says that 
adulterers must be put to death, and requires men to grow beards. But 
who cares? If you live a comfortable life, religious dogma doesn't have 
much appeal.


Sociological studies have shown a strong correlation between patriarchal 
attitudes and lack of economic development. Look at the difference 
between Pakistan and Indonesia. Both are majority Muslim countries which 
officially endorse Sharia law. In Pakistan, religious fundamentalism is 
strong and women have little access to education, employment, or power. 
In Indonesia, there is far less religious fundamentalism and women have 
far more access to education, employment, and power (though still 
pitiful by Western standards). Women can even serve as Sharia judges in 
Indonesia, which would be heresy in Pakistan. If you compare the GDP per 
capita between the 2 counties, Indonesia's is over twice that of 
Pakistan. The effect is even more pronounced if you compare rural areas 
to urban areas rather than country to country.


Ryan Kaldari


On 9/23/11 1:56 AM, Arnaud HERVE wrote:

Ok I will be a bit long here.

On 23/09/2011 01:07, Emily Monroe wrote:
Personally, I really don't understand why people get upset about 
Islamic women /choosing/ to wear hijabs, or niqabs, under the 
pretense of feminism. Part of what feminism fights for is the right 
to choose. This is the unintended consequence.


I get the practical arguments (ie, "I don't know who this person is" 
etc.) is, though, and I think any girl or women who has their 
wardrobe dictated by another person is being abused, unless there's a 
non-abusive reason behind it; I doubt that anyone wearing a work or 
school uniform would qualify as being abused.


That is probably because you still consider the niqab as a piece of 
garment only. But the niqab doesn't come alone, it comes in a set, 
with Islamic law included. And that law necessarily includes the 
submission of women to men.


It is very important to understand that Islam is not exactly a 
personal choice faith, in the sense that you would consider tolerance 
between different churches of Protestantism on the American territory. 
Islam doesn't do tolerance, in the sense that we understand it. In 
Islam you cannot leave, it is death penalty if you chose another religion.


It is not either to be considered with a benevolent multicultural 
mind, like you would tolerate the differences of Buddhist immigrants. 
A law-abiding good-citizen attitude is recommended to Muslims only if 
they are a minority in a Western country. If they become a majority, 
then they must take power, and impose Islamic law. This entails 
dividing the population into three categories ; Muslims who have full 
dignity, Christians and Jews who are sub-citizens subjected to 
occasional abuse, non believers or heathens who have no rights. This 
also necessarily includes a loss of civic rights for all women.


During the twentieth century there were positive signs from the Muslim 
world. They were due to :


- local customs atoning Islamic law
- The modernist mentalities of post-colonization Nation-States

However this is disappearing now, due to :

- New globalized generations who conceive Islam not as local custom 
but as globally opposed to the Western world

- The systematic destruction of the modern Muslim Nation-States by NATO

Only in the mainstream media you hear that Bin Laden was captured 
because it suddenly became possible, and Lybian democratic forces 
suddenly rebelled against dictator Khadafi. In fact Bin Laden's 
capture was a public relations operation, which helped conceal the 
fact that Nato has been promoting Al-Qaida to fight in Lybia. This in 
turn helps establishing business interests in NATO-controlled Muslim 
countries, with Western capital controlling the big business, the 
local population subjected to religious obscurantism and not 
participating to the democratic defense of their rights, and in 
between a zealots mafia..


In Islam women do have rights, yes, like your teenage daughter has 
rights. Not like an adult professional woman has r

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Arnaud HERVE]

On 23/09/2011 16:23, Fred Bauder wrote:
> This rant is inappropriate.
>

Mmh... Yes, ok, goodbye.

Anyway this list has been concentrating on hte appearance of women, not 
on the participation of women of women to generic topics, which was what 
I was looking for when I first came.

I will unsubscribe now.

To all : remember that women's rights are way, way more important than 
the interests of Wikimedia Foundation.

Arnaud

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Carol Moore in DC]

I've been procrastinating on replying, but I do agree with Fred and Emily.

Additionally, realize that many Islamists are really just a few decades 
behind most forms of Christianity and Judaism in its patriarchal 
dominance and bad attitudes towards women.


This is due in part to the reaction and over-reaction to continuing 
Western imperialism (including the dominant forms of expansionist 
Zionism), and the fact that "moderate" Muslims too often have sold out 
to the west. These facts have empowered the radical and anti-feminist 
Islamist elements.


And the U.S. and Israel particularly need a radical enemy so they can 
excuse massive war machines paid for by terrorized taxpayers who excuse 
the atrocities carried out by their militaries in their names.  I really 
resent and work to change various Wikipedia articles that use feminism 
as an excuse to slam all Muslims and make them the "enemy" worthy of 
attack.


Gender apartheid was one particularly bad article where there was 
WP:UNDUE emphasis (whole sections and long paragraphs) on this phrase 
being used against Islam, especially Undue considering that there is 
already a whole article on Sex segregation in Islam 
. The editor 
trying to keep in the Undue material not only resorted to sock puppetry 
but vandalism of my web page and threat-laced emails galore.


So let's not forget that the the psychos on the issue of Islam and woman 
are everywhere.


On 9/23/2011 10:23 AM, Fred Bauder wrote:

This rant is inappropriate.

"Islam doesn't do tolerance, in the sense that we understand it. In Islam
you cannot leave, it is death penalty if you chose another religion."

There is a grain of truth in such accusations, but you ascribe them to
the entire religion.

A part of what we are doing here is attempting to foster an atmosphere on
Wikipedia where Muslim women feel welcome to edit. Wikimedia is a global
multicultural organization.

Fred


Ok I will be a bit long here.

On 23/09/2011 01:07, Emily Monroe wrote:

Personally, I really don't understand why people get upset about
Islamic women /choosing/ to wear hijabs, or niqabs, under the pretense
of feminism. Part of what feminism fights for is the right to choose.
This is the unintended consequence.

I get the practical arguments (ie, "I don't know who this person is"
etc.) is, though, and I think any girl or women who has their wardrobe
dictated by another person is being abused, unless there's a
non-abusive reason behind it; I doubt that anyone wearing a work or
school uniform would qualify as being abused.

That is probably because you still consider the niqab as a piece of
garment only. But the niqab doesn't come alone, it comes in a set, with
Islamic law included. And that law necessarily includes the submission
of women to men.

It is very important to understand that Islam is not exactly a personal
choice faith, in the sense that you would consider tolerance between
different churches of Protestantism on the American territory. Islam
doesn't do tolerance, in the sense that we understand it. In Islam you
cannot leave, it is death penalty if you chose another religion.

It is not either to be considered with a benevolent multicultural mind,
like you would tolerate the differences of Buddhist immigrants. A
law-abiding good-citizen attitude is recommended to Muslims only if they
are a minority in a Western country. If they become a majority, then
they must take power, and impose Islamic law. This entails dividing the
population into three categories ; Muslims who have full dignity,
Christians and Jews who are sub-citizens subjected to occasional abuse,
non believers or heathens who have no rights. This also necessarily
includes a loss of civic rights for all women.

During the twentieth century there were positive signs from the Muslim
world. They were due to :

- local customs atoning Islamic law
- The modernist mentalities of post-colonization Nation-States

However this is disappearing now, due to :

- New globalized generations who conceive Islam not as local custom but
as globally opposed to the Western world
- The systematic destruction of the modern Muslim Nation-States by NATO

Only in the mainstream media you hear that Bin Laden was captured
because it suddenly became possible, and Lybian democratic forces
suddenly rebelled against dictator Khadafi. In fact Bin Laden's capture
was a public relations operation, which helped conceal the fact that
Nato has been promoting Al-Qaida to fight in Lybia. This in turn helps
establishing business interests in NATO-controlled Muslim countries,
with Western capital controlling the big business, the local population
subjected to religious obscurantism and not participating to the
democratic defense of their rights, and in between a zealots mafia..

In Islam women do have rights, yes, like your teenage daughter has
rights. Not like an adult professional woman has rights and can call her
lawyer. In Isla

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Fred Bauder]

This rant is inappropriate.

"Islam doesn't do tolerance, in the sense that we understand it. In Islam
you cannot leave, it is death penalty if you chose another religion."

There is a grain of truth in such accusations, but you ascribe them to
the entire religion.

A part of what we are doing here is attempting to foster an atmosphere on
Wikipedia where Muslim women feel welcome to edit. Wikimedia is a global
multicultural organization.

Fred

> Ok I will be a bit long here.
>
> On 23/09/2011 01:07, Emily Monroe wrote:
>> Personally, I really don't understand why people get upset about
>> Islamic women /choosing/ to wear hijabs, or niqabs, under the pretense
>> of feminism. Part of what feminism fights for is the right to choose.
>> This is the unintended consequence.
>>
>> I get the practical arguments (ie, "I don't know who this person is"
>> etc.) is, though, and I think any girl or women who has their wardrobe
>> dictated by another person is being abused, unless there's a
>> non-abusive reason behind it; I doubt that anyone wearing a work or
>> school uniform would qualify as being abused.
>
> That is probably because you still consider the niqab as a piece of
> garment only. But the niqab doesn't come alone, it comes in a set, with
> Islamic law included. And that law necessarily includes the submission
> of women to men.
>
> It is very important to understand that Islam is not exactly a personal
> choice faith, in the sense that you would consider tolerance between
> different churches of Protestantism on the American territory. Islam
> doesn't do tolerance, in the sense that we understand it. In Islam you
> cannot leave, it is death penalty if you chose another religion.
>
> It is not either to be considered with a benevolent multicultural mind,
> like you would tolerate the differences of Buddhist immigrants. A
> law-abiding good-citizen attitude is recommended to Muslims only if they
> are a minority in a Western country. If they become a majority, then
> they must take power, and impose Islamic law. This entails dividing the
> population into three categories ; Muslims who have full dignity,
> Christians and Jews who are sub-citizens subjected to occasional abuse,
> non believers or heathens who have no rights. This also necessarily
> includes a loss of civic rights for all women.
>
> During the twentieth century there were positive signs from the Muslim
> world. They were due to :
>
> - local customs atoning Islamic law
> - The modernist mentalities of post-colonization Nation-States
>
> However this is disappearing now, due to :
>
> - New globalized generations who conceive Islam not as local custom but
> as globally opposed to the Western world
> - The systematic destruction of the modern Muslim Nation-States by NATO
>
> Only in the mainstream media you hear that Bin Laden was captured
> because it suddenly became possible, and Lybian democratic forces
> suddenly rebelled against dictator Khadafi. In fact Bin Laden's capture
> was a public relations operation, which helped conceal the fact that
> Nato has been promoting Al-Qaida to fight in Lybia. This in turn helps
> establishing business interests in NATO-controlled Muslim countries,
> with Western capital controlling the big business, the local population
> subjected to religious obscurantism and not participating to the
> democratic defense of their rights, and in between a zealots mafia..
>
> In Islam women do have rights, yes, like your teenage daughter has
> rights. Not like an adult professional woman has rights and can call her
> lawyer. In Islam if you have no husband and no father, then you are
> subjected to the authority of your younger brother, who can decide of
> your life for you, and occasionally beat you up if you don't obey. In
> Islam you cannot divorce if you wish, only if the Muslim judge thinks
> that your husband did something wrong according to Islamic law. In Islam
> you cannot be raped by your husband, he is your husband it's the word of
> God that he can do what he wants with you. In Islam if you complain that
> you were raped by strangers, you have to prove first that you were not
> sexually provocative. In Islam if you are found with a person of the
> same sex, the community can stone you to death as they wish.
>
> The reason why I write all that is that I have talked with feminists
> from Muslim countries, so I try to convey their message.
>
> The first thing is that they really would like to get rid of Islam. Not
> being mildly respected as a member of the Muslim community, but really
> get rid of Islam, and being actively protected from it. They want to
> have a life, they cannot even subscribe an insurance policy, buy a car,
> go visit friends without the agreement of male relatives.
>
> Then there is the sociological problem, that Islam doesn't tolerate a
> sexually neutral civic life. It might not be obvious in North America
> because you are so used to it, but in order to have a professional life
> women 

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Arnaud HERVE]

Ok I will be a bit long here.

On 23/09/2011 01:07, Emily Monroe wrote:
Personally, I really don't understand why people get upset about 
Islamic women /choosing/ to wear hijabs, or niqabs, under the pretense 
of feminism. Part of what feminism fights for is the right to choose. 
This is the unintended consequence.


I get the practical arguments (ie, "I don't know who this person is" 
etc.) is, though, and I think any girl or women who has their wardrobe 
dictated by another person is being abused, unless there's a 
non-abusive reason behind it; I doubt that anyone wearing a work or 
school uniform would qualify as being abused.


That is probably because you still consider the niqab as a piece of 
garment only. But the niqab doesn't come alone, it comes in a set, with 
Islamic law included. And that law necessarily includes the submission 
of women to men.


It is very important to understand that Islam is not exactly a personal 
choice faith, in the sense that you would consider tolerance between 
different churches of Protestantism on the American territory. Islam 
doesn't do tolerance, in the sense that we understand it. In Islam you 
cannot leave, it is death penalty if you chose another religion.


It is not either to be considered with a benevolent multicultural mind, 
like you would tolerate the differences of Buddhist immigrants. A 
law-abiding good-citizen attitude is recommended to Muslims only if they 
are a minority in a Western country. If they become a majority, then 
they must take power, and impose Islamic law. This entails dividing the 
population into three categories ; Muslims who have full dignity, 
Christians and Jews who are sub-citizens subjected to occasional abuse, 
non believers or heathens who have no rights. This also necessarily 
includes a loss of civic rights for all women.


During the twentieth century there were positive signs from the Muslim 
world. They were due to :


- local customs atoning Islamic law
- The modernist mentalities of post-colonization Nation-States

However this is disappearing now, due to :

- New globalized generations who conceive Islam not as local custom but 
as globally opposed to the Western world

- The systematic destruction of the modern Muslim Nation-States by NATO

Only in the mainstream media you hear that Bin Laden was captured 
because it suddenly became possible, and Lybian democratic forces 
suddenly rebelled against dictator Khadafi. In fact Bin Laden's capture 
was a public relations operation, which helped conceal the fact that 
Nato has been promoting Al-Qaida to fight in Lybia. This in turn helps 
establishing business interests in NATO-controlled Muslim countries, 
with Western capital controlling the big business, the local population 
subjected to religious obscurantism and not participating to the 
democratic defense of their rights, and in between a zealots mafia..


In Islam women do have rights, yes, like your teenage daughter has 
rights. Not like an adult professional woman has rights and can call her 
lawyer. In Islam if you have no husband and no father, then you are 
subjected to the authority of your younger brother, who can decide of 
your life for you, and occasionally beat you up if you don't obey. In 
Islam you cannot divorce if you wish, only if the Muslim judge thinks 
that your husband did something wrong according to Islamic law. In Islam 
you cannot be raped by your husband, he is your husband it's the word of 
God that he can do what he wants with you. In Islam if you complain that 
you were raped by strangers, you have to prove first that you were not 
sexually provocative. In Islam if you are found with a person of the 
same sex, the community can stone you to death as they wish.


The reason why I write all that is that I have talked with feminists 
from Muslim countries, so I try to convey their message.


The first thing is that they really would like to get rid of Islam. Not 
being mildly respected as a member of the Muslim community, but really 
get rid of Islam, and being actively protected from it. They want to 
have a life, they cannot even subscribe an insurance policy, buy a car, 
go visit friends without the agreement of male relatives.


Then there is the sociological problem, that Islam doesn't tolerate a 
sexually neutral civic life. It might not be obvious in North America 
because you are so used to it, but in order to have a professional life 
women need to work in an environment where there are male colleagues and 
clients, and therefore need laws against sexual harassment, for the 
simple common sense reason that when you work you work, you don't date. 
Islam doesn't do that, in Islam a woman is either owned by the males of 
her family or her husband, and if she she walks free from male authority 
then she is sexually available. The male in turn is considered as 
immediately sexually eager and willing to rape as soon as he sees a 
female in the absence of a relative from her family.

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Emily Monroe]

Personally, I really don't understand why people get upset about Islamic
women *choosing* to wear hijabs, or niqabs, under the pretense of feminism.
Part of what feminism fights for is the right to choose. This is the
unintended consequence.

I get the practical arguments (ie, "I don't know who this person is" etc.)
is, though, and I think any girl or women who has their wardrobe dictated by
another person is being abused, unless there's a non-abusive reason behind
it; I doubt that anyone wearing a work or school uniform would qualify as
being abused.

From,
Emily


On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 8:21 AM, Arnaud HERVE wrote:

> I am not sure this is strictly on-topic, but I thought it might be
> interesting concerning female appearance issues.
>
> We are starting presidential campaigns in France now, and there is a
> candidate for the right of women to wear the niqab (full clothing except
> for the eyes)
>
> Here is an article, you probably won't understand it but you will see
> the video, which I think is telling :
>
>
> http://www.lepoint.fr/societe/2012-la-candidate-du-niqab-22-09-2011-1376118_23.php
>
> In this interview, basically she claims it is her individual right as a
> woman, to wear the niqab as she would wear a mini-skirt. Feminists on
> the contrary argue that it is not a mere piece of clothe, but a
> submission to Islamic law, which implies a loss of civic rights for women.
>
> So that's what I said earlier, there is now a contradiction between
> multiculturalism and women's rights. Both of which used to belong
> together in the side of progress, traditionally.
>
> On a more practical level, you can understand that she won't be able to
> run the full campaign, because it will not be possible to identify her.
> It could be her sister or her mom any time. Women wearing the niqab are
> already refused in many jobs, because precisely it is impossible to know
> who is the employee. In the case of a kindergarten for example it could
> even be a man impersonating his sister.
>
> But here it will make some noise, because it is her intention to get
> banned for the presidential campaign, and it is precisely that sort of
> publicity she is looking for.
>
> Arnaud
>
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Arnaud HERVE]

I am not sure this is strictly on-topic, but I thought it might be 
interesting concerning female appearance issues.

We are starting presidential campaigns in France now, and there is a 
candidate for the right of women to wear the niqab (full clothing except 
for the eyes)

Here is an article, you probably won't understand it but you will see 
the video, which I think is telling :

http://www.lepoint.fr/societe/2012-la-candidate-du-niqab-22-09-2011-1376118_23.php

In this interview, basically she claims it is her individual right as a 
woman, to wear the niqab as she would wear a mini-skirt. Feminists on 
the contrary argue that it is not a mere piece of clothe, but a 
submission to Islamic law, which implies a loss of civic rights for women.

So that's what I said earlier, there is now a contradiction between 
multiculturalism and women's rights. Both of which used to belong 
together in the side of progress, traditionally.

On a more practical level, you can understand that she won't be able to 
run the full campaign, because it will not be possible to identify her. 
It could be her sister or her mom any time. Women wearing the niqab are 
already refused in many jobs, because precisely it is impossible to know 
who is the employee. In the case of a kindergarten for example it could 
even be a man impersonating his sister.

But here it will make some noise, because it is her intention to get 
banned for the presidential campaign, and it is precisely that sort of 
publicity she is looking for.

Arnaud


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[carolmooredc]

Couple thoughts:
*A  few moderate Muslim editors chiming in on some of the things we 
don't like either on Wikipedia wouldn't hurt.
*It would be nice if the most obvious of  "corruption" of liberal or 
libertarian views wasn't lascivious female nudity; but even the 
Christian Conservatives have come to adapt.
* And of course it should be recognized that most of these 
liberal/libertarian individuals and groups DO recognize that having the 
US/Europe constantly attacking Muslim countries to choose their leaders 
only increases the power and influence of the radical Muslims.

On 9/7/2011 4:34 AM, Arnaud HERVE wrote:
> Some radical Muslims want the sharia immediately applied to all 
> populations, even non Muslims, because sharia is the law from God, and 
> God is far superior to any parliament or constitution. Some Muslims 
> are more tolerant for other populations, but for their own family it 
> is still the law, the law as in not a personal choice. Some other 
> Muslims would like to get rid of Islam, but they are not helped by the 
> prevailing multicultural policies, which tend to accept community 
> leaders as the true representatives of what they wish. In the past, 
> xenophobia was restricted to extreme-right political groups. However 
> recently there has been a change, and the liberal lobbies have turned 
> against Islam, which creates a new situation as it is the immigrant 
> population which is now perceived as culturally backwards and 
> threatening for civic rights. The majority of native European 
> populations now perceive immigration as civilization threatening, and 
> in this context Islam is perceived as particularly incompatible with 
> Western civilization. Gender issues have become a major landmark for 
> that in public debate. Gay groups, feminist groups, secular groups, 
> now perceive the right to show female nudity, the right to celibate 
> autonomous life, the right to gender orientation as gains of modern 
> civilization, to defend actively and specifically against Islam. In 
> the past it was against the local conservative right, now it is 
> explicitly against Islam.

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Ryan Kaldari]

On 9/7/11 1:34 AM, Arnaud HERVE wrote:
> Western Europeans will hardly notice an
> ad with a naked woman.

Yes, I remember being in Berlin where every billboard was either a woman 
in a bikini or a man dressed as a clown. It was disturbing on multiple 
levels. At least in San Francisco we have a few billboards of men in 
their underwear (although they are still rather rare). Personally, I 
have no problem with nudity, but when women are the only gender being 
exposed, I can't help hearing Ariel Levy and Andrea Dworkin in my head 
talking about the commodification of women's bodies and the prevalence 
of rape culture in Western society. Of course, these are not easy 
concepts to explain to people who only see nudity as a black and white 
issue of censorship or freedom.

I agree with Nathan's comment that we are not going to be able to 
educate every person on Commons and overturn the culture there (given 
the demographics we are working with), so we should choose our battles 
carefully. We should also be very conscious about how we are framing 
these debates. If we frame them as "protecting children and the 
culturally sensitive" we will certainly be ignored. If we frame them as 
"making Wikipedia safe for work" we will also be ignored. In most of 
these cases we need to concentrate on leveraging existing policies and 
guidelines, as well as arguing for small incremental changes in those 
policies. For example, until recently we had a blatant double standard 
in Commons nudity guidelines regarding photos of men's genitalia versus 
photos of women's genitalia. Through persistent and reasoned argument, 
the guidelines were eventually changed. We now have a board resolution 
endorsing the "Principle of least astonishment", which should help to 
address some of these problems. We just need to identify where it makes 
sense to push for changes and be smart about it. We also have to realize 
that we aren't going to win a lot of these debates. Such is the nature 
of consensus-building.

Ryan Kaldari

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Daniel and Elizabeth Case]

> Did anyone realize just how provocative the illustrations of the
> arabic pregnancy article must appear for certain people then?
> http://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%85%D9%84%D9%81:Hoact21.jpg in the
> lead section of the article.
>
> The question now: Should we consider this a good thing or a bad thing?
> Should the picture of the male doctor touching the belly of the
> pregnant woman be removed from the article, like the picture of the
> nude woman in the english wikipedia? Better to replace it with a
> pregnant woman wearing hijab? does anyone want to start a RFC?

That should be up to the Arabic Wikipedia community, IMO (To have an RFC on 
it and participate, one would not only need an account there but Arabic more 
fluent than I would consider my own to be).

Interestingly, the picture is from a clinic in Central America.

Daniel Case 



___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Fred Bauder]

Our goal, admittedly an impossible resolution, should be to deliver full
information in a format accessible to Muslim women to both view and edit,
and not just women in Europe, but also in the Middle East.

Fred


___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[elisabeth bauer]

2011/9/7 Arnaud HERVE :

> As far as medical treatment of women is concerned, the sharia explicitly
> states that :
>
> - A woman patient cannot be seen naked, or even touched, by a male
> doctor. When the doctor is female that is not an issue, and fortunately
> many doctors are female. However, for specialized or emergency
> treatment, we now have a record of of life threatening situations or
> severe lasting damages, because the husband, the father or even the
> brother did not allow treatment.

Did anyone realize just how provocative the illustrations of the
arabic pregnancy article must appear for certain people then?
http://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%85%D9%84%D9%81:Hoact21.jpg in the
lead section of the article.

The question now: Should we consider this a good thing or a bad thing?
Should the picture of the male doctor touching the belly of the
pregnant woman be removed from the article, like the picture of the
nude woman in the english wikipedia? Better to replace it with a
pregnant woman wearing hijab? does anyone want to start a RFC?

greetings,
elian

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Chris Keating]

While this is an interesting post, I do feel that most of it needs a
big {{citation needed}} tag

> All this to explain to you that in Western Europe as it is now, the
> refusal to show nudity is becoming clearly identified with Islam, and
> feminists are turning clearly against Islam.

This is not my experience in the UK. Both feminism and Islam are too
diverse for any of this to be "clear".

Chris

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Helga Hansen]

On 07.09.2011, at 13:15, Sydney Poore  wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 4:34 AM, Arnaud HERVE  wrote:
> On 07/09/2011 04:02, Nathan wrote:
> All this to explain to you that in Western Europe as it is now, the
> refusal to show nudity is becoming clearly identified with Islam, and
> feminists are turning clearly against Islam.

Not all Western European feminists do so and refusal to show nudity is not 
commonly associated with Islam. This are broad generalizations about Muslims, 
feminists and "Europeans". Not all Muslims have problems with nudity, not all 
feminists hate Muslims and there are "normal Europeans" who dislike public 
nudity.

The US-American debate sometimes comes across as "OMG let's remove all pics of 
naked people in Wikipedia" and that sounds probably ridiculous to many 
Europeans, who would nonetheless object the use of pornographic pictures.

Regards from Germany,
Helga___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Sydney Poore]

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 5:24 AM, paolo massa  wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Arnaud HERVE 
> wrote:
> > On 07/09/2011 04:02, Nathan wrote:
> > If you have time you can have a look at the photos in pregnancy pages in
> > Farsi and Arabic. You have the languages column in the left of the
> > English page. The decency of those pages, which in North American
> > feminism would be typically considered as protecting women, is now in
> > Western Europe becoming associated with a threat to civic rights of
> > women. The pages with the naked woman are the pages of countries with
> > strong women rights.
>
> You can possibly more easily check Linguistic Points Of View (LPOV) of
> different Wikipedia communities using Manypedia, a tool we developed
> for cross-cultural investigations.
>

Paolo,

This is very cool, and useful for cross wiki work. :-)

Thank you for your work on this and bringing it to our attention.

Sydney
User:FloNight
___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Sydney Poore]

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 4:34 AM, Arnaud HERVE  wrote:

> On 07/09/2011 04:02, Nathan wrote:
> >
> >
> > Since we know that the gender gap exists in many cultures, and not
> > just the U.S. or Europe, being aware of and sensitive to specific
> > cultural biases takes on special merit here. Far more "gratuitous"
> > nudity is not terribly uncommon throughout Western Europe, for
> > example, in everything from general interest magazines and newspapers
> > to street ads, movies, other media and even in personal interaction
> > (see [[Love parade]]).
>
> Yes nudity in Western Europe has become so frequent that it is devoid of
> any significance now. Showing sexual intercourse can provoke a debate
> about proper and improper, but Western Europeans will hardly notice an
> ad with a naked woman.
>
> However, there is a new element. That is the pressure from Islamic
> immigration.
>
> Some radical Muslims want the sharia immediately applied to all
> populations, even non Muslims, because sharia is the law from God, and
> God is far superior to any parliament or constitution. Some Muslims are
> more tolerant for other populations, but for their own family it is
> still the law, the law as in not a personal choice. Some other Muslims
> would like to get rid of Islam, but they are not helped by the
> prevailing multicultural policies, which tend to accept community
> leaders as the true representatives of what they wish.
>
> In the past, xenophobia was restricted to extreme-right political
> groups. However recently there has been a change, and the liberal
> lobbies have turned against Islam, which creates a new situation as it
> is the immigrant population which is now perceived as culturally
> backwards and threatening for civic rights. The majority of native
> European populations now perceive immigration as civilization
> threatening, and in this context Islam is perceived as particularly
> incompatible with Western civilization. Gender issues have become a
> major landmark for that in public debate. Gay groups, feminist groups,
> secular groups, now perceive the right to show female nudity, the right
> to celibate autonomous life, the right to gender orientation as gains of
> modern civilization, to defend actively and specifically against Islam.
> In the past it was against the local conservative right, now it is
> explicitly against Islam.
>
> As far as medical treatment of women is concerned, the sharia explicitly
> states that :
>
> - A woman patient cannot be seen naked, or even touched, by a male
> doctor. When the doctor is female that is not an issue, and fortunately
> many doctors are female. However, for specialized or emergency
> treatment, we now have a record of of life threatening situations or
> severe lasting damages, because the husband, the father or even the
> brother did not allow treatment.
>
> This also includes severe damages to the baby in obstetrics, when a
> complication occurred and the intervention of a male specialist was
> refused by the "man in charge".
> All this to explain to you that in Western Europe as it is now, the
> refusal to show nudity is becoming clearly identified with Islam, and
> feminists are turning clearly against Islam.
>
snip

>
> If you have time you can have a look at the photos in pregnancy pages in
> Farsi and Arabic. You have the languages column in the left of the
> English page. The decency of those pages, which in North American
> feminism would be typically considered as protecting women, is now in
> Western Europe becoming associated with a threat to civic rights of
> women. The pages with the naked woman are the pages of countries with
> strong women rights.
>
> Urdu and Punjabi pages are not developed, but then they are seldom
> developed for anything, so it is not very relevant. Some European
> languages have very little population and contributors, so they are not
> very relevant either. The Dutch page is surprising, as it shows more
> nudity, and in Holland they both enjoy high standards of women's rights,
> and Islam has become widely considered as an equivalent for political
> murder and threats to civic rights.
>
>
> Arnaud
>

Hi Arnaud,

Thank you for this enlightening email.

In the past I work as an obstetrical and gynecological nurse, and know some
of the difficulties in treating Muslim women in the United States where they
would be a minority population. In the United States, our health care system
is totally inadequate to meets the needs of people who wanted high quality
medical care and have religious/cultural  beliefs that prevent people from
the opposite gender from seeing them nude.

The way that it can effect women who want to be educated is important, too,
and very relevant to our work on Wikimedia projects.

I find your information about feminist reaction in Western Europe to be
interesting and informative. As I mentioned in another thread today, there
can be vastly differing opinions among feminists about issues related to
sexually 

Re: [Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[paolo massa]

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Arnaud HERVE  wrote:
> On 07/09/2011 04:02, Nathan wrote:
> If you have time you can have a look at the photos in pregnancy pages in
> Farsi and Arabic. You have the languages column in the left of the
> English page. The decency of those pages, which in North American
> feminism would be typically considered as protecting women, is now in
> Western Europe becoming associated with a threat to civic rights of
> women. The pages with the naked woman are the pages of countries with
> strong women rights.

You can possibly more easily check Linguistic Points Of View (LPOV) of
different Wikipedia communities using Manypedia, a tool we developed
for cross-cultural investigations.
For example,
http://manypedia.com/#|en|Pregnancy|ar
is the comparison of page "Pregnancy" in English Wikipedia and Arabic
Wikipedia (translated into English).
http://manypedia.com/#|en|Pregnancy|fa
is the comparison of page "Pregnancy" in English Wikipedia and
Persian/Farsi Wikipedia (translated into English).
http://manypedia.com/#|en|Pregnancy|hi
English and Hindi Wikipedia (translated into English).
For more, just use the "Compare with the" other language dropdown menu
on top left of the interface. Currently 56 languages are supported
(the ones the  Google translate API provides)

Moreover note that English is not the only language supported, since
you can have the pages translated in any of the 56 languages.
For example, if you know Arabic and Dutch you can have
the comparison of page حمل (pregnancy in Arabic) from Arabic Wikipedia
and Dutch Wikipedia (translated into Arabic).
http://manypedia.com/#|ar|%D8%AD%D9%85%D9%84%7Cnl

Images present in the page are grouped on top of the page (along with
other statistics such as most frequent words, top editors, number of
edits, creation and last edit dates, ...)
so that you can have a quick visual hint about the differences in
representations of the concepts by images.

I'll be presenting Manypedia at next WikiSym (3 October, California).
And of course I'll be very happy to hear any
suggestion/criticism/feedback about Manypedia by people interested in
the gendergap issue
and suggestions on how to improve Manypedia in order to ease
cross-cultural investigations and studies.

Thanks a lot and have a good time browsing Manypedia!!! ;)

-- 
--
Paolo Massa
Email: paolo AT gnuband DOT org
Blog: http://gnuband.org

___
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

[Gendergap] Nudity vs Islam in Western Europe

[Arnaud HERVE]

On 07/09/2011 04:02, Nathan wrote:
>
>
> Since we know that the gender gap exists in many cultures, and not 
> just the U.S. or Europe, being aware of and sensitive to specific 
> cultural biases takes on special merit here. Far more "gratuitous" 
> nudity is not terribly uncommon throughout Western Europe, for 
> example, in everything from general interest magazines and newspapers 
> to street ads, movies, other media and even in personal interaction 
> (see [[Love parade]]).

Yes nudity in Western Europe has become so frequent that it is devoid of 
any significance now. Showing sexual intercourse can provoke a debate 
about proper and improper, but Western Europeans will hardly notice an 
ad with a naked woman.

However, there is a new element. That is the pressure from Islamic 
immigration.

Some radical Muslims want the sharia immediately applied to all 
populations, even non Muslims, because sharia is the law from God, and 
God is far superior to any parliament or constitution. Some Muslims are 
more tolerant for other populations, but for their own family it is 
still the law, the law as in not a personal choice. Some other Muslims 
would like to get rid of Islam, but they are not helped by the 
prevailing multicultural policies, which tend to accept community 
leaders as the true representatives of what they wish.

In the past, xenophobia was restricted to extreme-right political 
groups. However recently there has been a change, and the liberal 
lobbies have turned against Islam, which creates a new situation as it 
is the immigrant population which is now perceived as culturally 
backwards and threatening for civic rights. The majority of native 
European populations now perceive immigration as civilization 
threatening, and in this context Islam is perceived as particularly 
incompatible with Western civilization. Gender issues have become a 
major landmark for that in public debate. Gay groups, feminist groups, 
secular groups, now perceive the right to show female nudity, the right 
to celibate autonomous life, the right to gender orientation as gains of 
modern civilization, to defend actively and specifically against Islam. 
In the past it was against the local conservative right, now it is 
explicitly against Islam.

As far as medical treatment of women is concerned, the sharia explicitly 
states that :

- A woman patient cannot be seen naked, or even touched, by a male 
doctor. When the doctor is female that is not an issue, and fortunately 
many doctors are female. However, for specialized or emergency 
treatment, we now have a record of of life threatening situations or 
severe lasting damages, because the husband, the father or even the 
brother did not allow treatment.

This also includes severe damages to the baby in obstetrics, when a 
complication occurred and the intervention of a male specialist was 
refused by the "man in charge".

- A woman doctor cannot be alone in a room with a male patient. This 
obviously will in term prevent all Muslim women to work in the medical 
field. We find ourselves in more and more impractical situations. Like 
for instance a female nurse refusing to enter the room of a totally 
incapacitated man alone to give him his pills, or refusing to lift the 
head of an old guy to fix his pillow.

For other fields of work it also prevents the educated yet intent Muslim 
woman to work properly (law, education...), but mentalities notably 
focus on the medical field, because of the obvious promiscuity that it 
entails. The simple fact of a male patient showing his naked back to his 
female doctor to check the evolution of his sciatica is considered 
horrendous and condemnable obscenity by the sharia.

Sure there have been numerous ad hoc adaptations in the past, but 
Islamic pressure is growing and western patience is decreasing. The 
quantitative pressure of immigration, the qualitative risks of 
criminality, the geopolitical situation also don't help.

If you want a North American image, you can try to imagine the Latino 
immigration in the US, with a less severe criminality than in Colorado 
but nevertheless very present, and a strong revendication from Latinos 
to apply a community medieval Catholic law, only more severe than 
medieval Catholic law. Then you imagine the feminist groups actively 
joining the crowd of the xenophobic right, and the xenophobic right 
changing to become the main defender of women's rights and secular 
scientific enlightenment. With traditional liberal multicultural 
thinkers slowly dwindling into irrelevance. If that makes sense to you...

All this to explain to you that in Western Europe as it is now, the 
refusal to show nudity is becoming clearly identified with Islam, and 
feminists are turning clearly against Islam.

If you have time you can have a look at the photos in pregnancy pages in 
Farsi and Arabic. You have the languages column in the left of the 
English page. The decency of those pages, which in North American 
f