Another Gem from Aurat March 2018

[El Sidd]

As per the Book, men are supposed to be their leaders and act towards them with justice and not transgressions. That's what I remember at the moment. I am pretty sure there's at least one(or maybe more) verse(s) dealing with the gender relations which I'll have to find.

Well that wont work.

The Book is definite. To the each punctuation. So should be there otherwisey theory is valid lol

 

[Metanoia]

Well that wont work.

The Book is definite. To the each punctuation. So should be there otherwisey theory is valid lol

The Book is definite no doubt. Baki rehe gayi "stories", some are highly authentic and some are not. They do complete the picture.

In the end I'll say, time will tell.

 

[El Sidd]

The Book is definite no doubt. Baki rehe gayi "stories", some are highly authentic and some are not. They do complete the picture.

In the end I'll say, time will tell.

Dekhte hai

Aar ya paar Surat e haal ha.

Like very nazuk

 

[Desert Fox]

View attachment 464023 View attachment 464024 View attachment 464025 View attachment 464026 View attachment 464027 View attachment 464028 View attachment 464029 View attachment 464030 View attachment 464031 View attachment 464032 View attachment 464033 View attachment 464034 View attachment 464035 View attachment 464036 View attachment 464037 View attachment 464038 View attachment 464039 View attachment 464040

While the rest of Pakistan is toiling to barely survive these pampered children and cat ladies have so much free time on their hands to organize this circus show.

 

[Desert Fox]

it’s about being equal. Equal as citizens and humans, in views and opinions, in professions and in household.

Sure, on paper this sounds good but it doesn't translate into reality.

Most women, even "Feminist" women, rarely marry a man who earns equal to or less than them, has equal or less education compared to them. Would you marry a school janitor? Or a Riksha driver?

When given the chance women go for the man whom they percieve to be "superior" to themselves (and to other men). It's called Hypergamy, it is a evolutionary survival strategy within women (to seek the most successful mate. Percieved success = better genes = ideal traits for potential offspring).

Like all left-wing ideologies, Feminism disregards human nature and is nothing but feel-good nonsense.

Henceforth the view of ‘dominance and superiority’ is offensive and delusional on both sides. It’s all about the mindset.

Would you marry a guy whom you percieve to be less educated than you? Earns less than you? Has less experience than you?

Of course, within Islam there are examples of great people who overcame these inherent limitations within the human being, like Hazrat Khadija (RA) when she married the Prophet (SAW) who worked for her, earned less than her, and could not read or write. How many of our "feminists" who preach overcoming gender biases and expectations will marry a illiterate Riksha driver making an honest living through manual labor?

At least Islam provides a powerful spiritual incentive to overcome the inherent limitations within human beings. What incentive does "feminism" and other secular ideologies provide, other than feel-good virtue signalling rhetoric?

This is why Communism and all leftist ideologies like "Feminism" will never work. There is no incentive. It's all feel-good rhetoric to show off or vent on society, and leftists in general tend to be hypocrites who seldom practice what they preach and constantly violate their own principles.

e.g. men are expected not to cry and women belong in the ‘kitchen’. This is a very misogynistic and backward concept, because ultimately Men do cry and some are even better cooks.

Everyone has cried at some point in their lives. Otherwise they're not human. So there's nothing wrong with crying once in a blue moon if you really have to do it (I'm talking about men here).

However, let's imagine two men: one guy tackles the problems life throws at him while the other one constantly complains and sobs. Which one of the two would a woman find attractive? The one who constantly cries about how difficult life is? Or the one who complains less, does more & overcomes the struggles of life?

I already know which type 99.9% of women would go for & it's definitely not the guy who collapses on his knees and cries out for Mommy, because human nature defies feel-good ideologies that sound great on paper. Would like your thoughts.

@Nilgiri @Psychic @Metanoia @Reichsmarschall @Ocean

 

[PAKjunoon]

in simple words
we have put women under restrictions which have stemmed from the age old customs and norms of our local culture. We justify those restrictions by utilizing Islam.

What if the restriction were placed with the wishes of the females?

What if the females of the past loved or at least appreciated theses restrictions?

Why do you think there were restriction on the women in the past?
Restriction on going out alone,on doing jobs,on managing business and etc.

I will tell you the reasons.

• There was no system of policing nation wide.No cell phones to contact police in case of emergency or call a friend or family.Outside of your home,you were on your own.
• No nation wide network of roads or fast and secure transportation. It was very dangerous and risky to travel alone in the past.No population for miles,no sign boards,no rest place,no convenience store and etc.
• Most of the jobs at that time very physically intensive and very dangerous.Many people got injure or died on the jobs.No system of disability pension,no welfare funds,no insurance.There were hardly any desk jobs.
• Usually you were at the mercy of the rulers and the nobles.If they got irritated with you,there was a likely chance you will find yourself in prison or the hallows.
• Keeping the above points in mind, do you really think it was possible for a women to run her own business?

Do you really think the women of the past could overcome these problems,given the fact an average female only have 40%-50% of an average male strength or by fact that women tend to be more emotional then men?


Women of the past never complained or created s storm for removing these restriction because they were greatly benefiting from them.

Only today feminists complain that males have oppressed women for centuries without understanding the context of the Patriarchy system.

Women are the main beneficiary of the Patriarchy system.

Today's women can complain or do marches against men by using the technology,the communication system,the transportation system built by men to make their life easier.

Men builds civilizations,men protects the society,men earns a living for the family,men dies for the nation and the family and men invents technology for the betterment of women and children.

Women should appreciate Men,instead of criticizing them.

 

[TheLahoriGuy]

Sure, on paper this sounds good but it doesn't translate into reality.

Most women, even "Feminist" women, rarely marry a man who earns equal to or less than them, has equal or less education compared to them. Would you marry a school janitor? Or a Riksha driver?

When given the chance women go for the man whom they percieve to be "superior" to themselves (and to other men). It's called Hypergamy, it is a evolutionary survival strategy within women (to seek the most successful mate. Percieved success = better genes = ideal traits for potential offspring).

Like all left-wing ideologies, Feminism disregards human nature and is nothing but feel-good nonsense.


Would you marry a guy whom you percieve to be less educated than you? Earns less than you? Has less experience than you?

Of course, within Islam there are examples of great people who overcame these inherent limitations within the human being, like Hazrat Khadija when she married the Prophet (SAW) who worked for her, earned less, and could not read or write. How many of our "feminists" who preach overcoming gender biases and expectations will marry a illiterate Riksha driver making an honest living through manual labor?

At least Islam provides a powerful spiritual incentive to overcome the inherent limitations within human beings. What incentive does "feminism" and other secular ideologies provide, other than feel-good virtue signalling rhetoric?

This is why Communism and all leftist ideologies like "Feminism" will never work. There is no incentive. It's all feel-good rhetoric to show off or vent on society, and leftists in general tend to be hypocrites who seldom practice what they preach and constantly violate their own principles.

Everyone has cried at some point in their lives. Otherwise they're not human. So there's nothing wrong with crying once in a blue moon if you really have to do it (I'm talking about men here).

However, let's imagine two men: one guy tackles the problems life throws at him while the other one constantly complains and sobs. Which one of the two would a woman find attractive? The one who constantly cries about how difficult life is? Or the one who complains less, does more & overcomes the struggles of life?

I already know which type 99.9% of women would go for & it's definitely not the guy who collapses on his knees and cries out for Mommy, because human nature defies feel-good ideologies that sound great on paper. Would like your thoughts.

@Nilgiri @Psychic @Metanoia @Reichsmarschall @Ocean

Hmmm no. It doesn't work like that.

Your "fact" that women don't marry men "lower" than her isn't even logically possible. This would imply that there is a huge imbalance in marital status between the two sexes but pick any country's statistics (even the western ones) and you'll see that there is no gap (after all it takes a man and a woman to make a couple).

And there is no "hypergamy". Its simply called survival of the fittest where both men and women have a natural inclination to seek a more favourable mate in order to pass more favourable genetics onto the next generation (a behaviour seen all the way from a single cell of bacteria to complex beings like humans). Don't tell me if you had the choice of marrying a plain Jane or a supermodel you'd settle for less. All the examples you are giving have the answers within them. Of course women or any other living creature would choose a mate with a more favourable traits and mindset.

 

[Jf Thunder]

What if the restriction were placed with the wishes of the females?

What if the females of the past loved or at least appreciated theses restrictions?

Why do you think there were restriction on the women in the past?
Restriction on going out alone,on doing jobs,on managing business and etc.

I will tell you the reasons.

• There was no system of policing nation wide.No cell phones to contact police in case of emergency or call a friend or family.Outside of your home,you were on your own.
• No nation wide network of roads or fast and secure transportation. It was very dangerous and risky to travel alone in the past.No population for miles,no sign boards,no rest place,no convenience store and etc.
• Most of the jobs at that time very physically intensive and very dangerous.Many people got injure or died on the jobs.No system of disability pension,no welfare funds,no insurance.There were hardly any desk jobs.
• Usually you were at the mercy of the rulers and the nobles.If they got irritated with you,there was a likely chance you will find yourself in prison or the hallows.
• Keeping the above points in mind, do you really think it was possible for a women to run her own business?

Do you really think the women of the past could overcome these problems,given the fact an average female only have 40%-50% of an average male strength or by fact that women tend to be more emotional then men?


Women of the past never complained or created s storm for removing these restriction because they were greatly benefiting from them.

Only today feminists complain that males have oppressed women for centuries without understanding the context of the Patriarchy system.

Women are the main beneficiary of the Patriarchy system.

Today's women can complain or do marches against men by using the technology,the communication system,the transportation system built by men to make their life easier.

Men builds civilizations,men protects the society,men earns a living for the family,men dies for the nation and the family and men invents technology for the betterment of women and children.

Women should appreciate Men,instead of criticizing them.

All the points you have mentioned have become null and void, why? because now a policing system exists, cell phones exist, roads exist and now the jobs have been made easier. The reasons for the restrictions are now, no more, so the restrictions should also cease to exist.

Dont think of men as all high and mighty, they simply play their part, and now women also get involved in this, women are Mechanical Engineers, Managers, Nation Heads, Armed Soldiers

so please, evolve your thinking as well, the time has advanced a lot further

 

[Desert Fox]

Your "fact" that women don't marry men "lower" than her isn't even logically possible. This would imply that there is a huge imbalance in marital status between the two sexes but pick any country's statistics (even the western ones) and you'll see that there is no gap (after all it takes a man and a woman to make a couple).

Nice how you word it as "your "fact"".

Btw gravity is real, I guess that's also "my fact" now

https://ifstudies.org/blog/better-educated-women-still-prefer-higher-earning-husbands

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jomf.12372

"Between 1980 and 2008–2012, educational assortative mating reversed from a tendency for women to marry up to a tendency for women to marry down in education, whereas the tendency for women to marry men with higher incomes than themselves persisted. Moreover, in both time periods, the tendency for women to marry up in income was generally greater among couples in which the wife's education level equaled or surpassed that of the husband than among couples in which the wife was less educated than the husband."

. Its simply called survival of the fittest where both men and women have a natural inclination to seek a more favourable mate in order to pass more favourable genetics onto the next generation

No kidding. It's called Hypergamy in scientific terminology. Where exactly is the disagreement?

What are you even arguing over?

Don't tell me if you had the choice of marrying a plain Jane or a supermodel you'd settle for less. All the examples you are giving have the answers within them. Of course women or any other living creature would choose a mate with a more favourable traits and mindset

Well, you're not disputing what I said. Only confirming it.

And hell yeah I'd marry a "super model" over "plane Jane" (whatever that means). But then again I'm not the one preaching "we all need to be equal and blah blah blah" feel-good nonsense.

In real life, might makes right, not "boo hoo you hurt my feelings, we must all be equal and sit by the fire and sing kumbaya"

 

[El Sidd]

Nice how you word it as "your "fact"".

Btw gravity is real, I guess that's also "my fact" now

https://ifstudies.org/blog/better-educated-women-still-prefer-higher-earning-husbands

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jomf.12372

"Between 1980 and 2008–2012, educational assortative mating reversed from a tendency for women to marry up to a tendency for women to marry down in education, whereas the tendency for women to marry men with higher incomes than themselves persisted. Moreover, in both time periods, the tendency for women to marry up in income was generally greater among couples in which the wife's education level equaled or surpassed that of the husband than among couples in which the wife was less educated than the husband."



No kidding. It's called Hypergamy in scientific terminology. Where exactly is the disagreement?

What are you even arguing over?


Well, you're not disputing what I said. Only confirming it.

And hell yeah I'd marry a "super model" over "plane Jane" (whatever that means). But then again I'm not the one preaching "we all need to be equal and blah blah blah" feel-good nonsense.

In real life, might makes right, not "boo hoo you hurt my feelings, we must all be equal and sit by the fire and sing kumbaya"

You are mean.

You broke madrassah boys heart

 

[PAKjunoon]

Feminism is a movement about equality and goes against lines drawn by society which expects Women to stay in based on their own beliefs or societal norms, be it political, economical or even work. It’s to rid the ideology of being viewed as the ‘weaker sex’. Both Men and Women can be feminists. For e.g. men are expected not to cry and women belong in the ‘kitchen’. This is a very misogynistic and backward concept, because ultimately Men do cry and some are even better cooks. Whereas some Women are more diplomatic and possess fine DIY skills. Skills which aren’t categorised and can be performed better irrespective to what ‘traditional’ societal expectations are in terms of gender roles.

Feminism is not about equality.Feminism is about getting preferential treatment.

• If it was about equality then feminist would have demanded quotas in blue collar jobs like garbage picking,working in mines,construction industry and etc.

• If it was about equality they would have not demanded same pay as men when research shows that women usually work in less valuably jobs and work less time as compares to women.

• If it was about equality then feminist would have demanded the gov. to decrease social welfare funds for women as most of the taxes that generate these funds are paid by men.

Feminist are demanding preferential treatment under the guise of equality.

Why should they be given preferential treatment?

There are certain qualities that Women posses Men can never have, equally there are certain qualities Men posses that Women can never have - both function differently. FUNCTION DIFFERENTLY. Men in terms of physical strength are generally stronger, Women are emotionally generally stronger. Henceforth the view of ‘dominance and superiority’ is offensive and delusional on both sides. It’s all about the mindset.

Women are emotionally stronger?WHAT???

Women are emotionally weaker then men. That's why women are more prone to crying,getting scared easily,can't work under stress,complaint more and etc.

Men are emotionally and physically stronger then women.That why almost all the dangerous and stressful jobs are done by men.Not women.

Men's physical strength and emotional control is the reason that almost all religions and cultures have given men authority over women.

Real feminism isn’t about disregarding Men and insulting nor about being ‘better’ - it’s about being equal. Equal as citizens and humans, in views and opinions, in professions and in household. It’s absolutely fine if someone wants to work their household in a very traditional structure so long as it’s mutually agreed - but it’s also absolutely fine if someone wants to have equal decision making. That is a right and not an extra incentive.

Yes every person has a right to his or her opinion.But this does not mean that the value of every person's opinion is same.The more value person provides,the more valuable is his or her opinion.

Decisions are only made by one person.The rest can give suggestions,but the final authority is always the single individual.If every individual had the same authority for decision making, then nothing gets done.Each decision making authority will give different/contradictory orders.This result in chaos. and confusion.

That why every organization has only one leader,one CEO,one prime minister and etc.Single leadership is the key to success for family as well as organizations.

And that leadership role in family belongs to man,due to their physical,emotional and intellectual superiority.

For those Women who willingly and by their own choice prefer to stick to normal traditional cultural structure - that’s fine and it’s wrong for another Woman to enforce her views or intervene, as that is oppressing. Everyone is free to make their own choices and what suits them.

The thing is that feminist are hell bent on making women work for corporations instead of their family.In west where feminist have turned the social structure upside down,Stay-at-home wives are shamed for their choice.

I believe it is the typical Man who usually turns a perfectly normal Woman rebellious due to restrictions they enforce based upon their own beliefs. In Particular the South Asian society - it’s almost acceptable for a boy to harass a female who is outdoor and when questioned, they point the finger saying ‘you shouldn’t be out’. So a Woman now is not only accountable for the opposite genders misbehaviour but also made to feel guilty for doing something absolutely normal and EQUAL to a Man - as mere as going out. When we start teaching our boys from a very young age that if it’s not okay for your sister to be out during late hours, then it’s not okay for you too. Period. Nothing justifies a Man harassing a female irrespective of attire or hours. If you won’t do it to the females of your own household, then respect females of a different household even IF they are different. Pride and Honour isn’t restricted to Female.

It is a typical patriarchal men who give a women happiness.

Take the example of a child.If you fulfill every of wish a child and give him complete freedom to do all things he want,then that child turns into a miserable and unhappy spoiled brat.
The leadership and discipline provided by parents makes the child happy and successful.Parents do say no the child's wishes,scold him/her,spank him/her and places restriction on the child that's because it benefits the child.
Same way a men acts as a protector and guardian of women.A men provides women with a structured,secure and stable life.This structure and disciplined life results in women's content and happiness.

WHAT?? Female harassment acceptable??

It's the opposite.

In Pakistan just a mere accusation by a girl that a boy harassed her,even if with no proof,the public will beat the poor boy an inch to his death.I have witnessed it myself.
And if the male member of girls family find that a boy just stopped her on the streets they will kill the boy and feel no remorse.And you know what the society will say?That they were justified in doing it just because he stopped a female on the street.

More male are killed in honor killing then females.But feminist and the media won't highlight it.


‘you shouldn’t be out’

They say this because an individual's should do his/her utmost best for his/her safety and honor.Your safety is first your responsibility,then anyone else.
Never put yourself in a position in which there is a chance for being harmed. Precaution is better then cure.

A female due to her physical and emotional weakness is unable to protect herself against any aggression. That's why females are not outside alone or stay out late.

The boy is being taight that he has to look after his sister.To protect her against every harm.

For example:If I am walk alone at night through a bad neighborhood,flashing my cash full of wallets and expensive mobile.Then if I get robbed,the yes the robber was bad and he committed a crime against me BUT I WAS THE FOOL who walked alone at night ,through a bad neighborhood flashing cash and expensive mobile.Because my safety is my responsibility,not the robbers.

So,is asking someone to be more responsible for their own safety wrong?

 

[TheLahoriGuy]

Nice how you word it as "your "fact"".

Btw gravity is real, I guess that's also "my fact" now

https://ifstudies.org/blog/better-educated-women-still-prefer-higher-earning-husbands

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jomf.12372

"Between 1980 and 2008–2012, educational assortative mating reversed from a tendency for women to marry up to a tendency for women to marry down in education, whereas the tendency for women to marry men with higher incomes than themselves persisted. Moreover, in both time periods, the tendency for women to marry up in income was generally greater among couples in which the wife's education level equaled or surpassed that of the husband than among couples in which the wife was less educated than the husband."



No kidding. It's called Hypergamy in scientific terminology. Where exactly is the disagreement?

What are you even arguing over?


Well, you're not disputing what I said. Only confirming it.

And hell yeah I'd marry a "super model" over "plane Jane" (whatever that means). But then again I'm not the one preaching "we all need to be equal and blah blah blah" feel-good nonsense.

In real life, might makes right, not "boo hoo you hurt my feelings, we must all be equal and sit by the fire and sing kumbaya"

Uhhh what ?

You're trying to negate the concept of human equality by drawing in the concept of human tendency to be drawn to a more favourable mate.

What are YOU even arguing about ? Both of these concepts are miles apart.

 

[Desert Fox]

You're trying to negate the concept of human equality by drawing in the concept of human tendency to be drawn to a more favourable mate.

"Favorable", "equality"

You just refuted your own nonsense. Thanks for doing my job for me.

When something is favored it is not equal to others. Equality does not exist, never existed and never will exist.

What are YOU even arguing about ?

You quoted me first and I asked this question to you because all you did in your previous post was regurgitate what I said. You didn't bring anything new.

 

[PAKjunoon]

All the points you have mentioned have become null and void, why? because now a policing system exists, cell phones exist, roads exist and now the jobs have been made easier. The reasons for the restrictions are now, no more, so the restrictions should also cease to exist.

First, my point was that women have been not oppressed by men for centuries, as claimed by feminist,rather they were protected by men for centuries.

Second, technology has provided many ease but it still does not guarantee full safety.USA is so advanced,but still has one of the highest rape rate in the world.Technology has provided some protection but not full.

In Pakistan, a safety of women is more important then men's.That's why people are still reluctant to send their daughters out alone.That's why there are still restrictions on them.

Dont think of men as all high and mighty, they simply play their part, and now women also get involved in this, women are Mechanical Engineers, Managers, Nation Heads, Armed Soldiers

Yes women are graduating in high numbers.But most of them in non-competitive field.Hardly any female are graduating in STEM fields.Even those who get in the STEM field don't stay long because the reality of working in a competitive field in not a Disney dream. Men are more suitable and are highly successful in all most all the fields.

Women are good in those field which includes nourishing like small children teachers,day care worker,secretaries or in medical field.

Most of Nation Heads used their fathers name for success,hardly any self-made women.

All most, all the top executives of Fortune 500 companies are male.

In Military,women are serving primary in support roles,the roles hat can be done by sitting on desk,not on the field.All the fighting members of every armed forces are males.

so please, evolve your thinking as well, the time has advanced a lot further

Time has advance,but not biology.It same as ever.

The truth is male are superior to female in term of strength and intelligence.

Truth leads to happiness and content.

 

[Jf Thunder]

First, my point was that women have been not oppressed by men for centuries, as claimed by feminist,rather they were protected by men for centuries.

Second, technology has provided many ease but it still does not guarantee full safety.USA is so advanced,but still has one of the highest rape rate in the world.Technology has provided some protection but not full.

In Pakistan, a safety of women is more important then men's.That's why people are still reluctant to send their daughters out alone.That's why there are still restrictions on them.

the rules and restrictions have been made by MEN, not by women
who do you think women fear when they go out into the street, obviously MEN
the same MEN who are trying to protect women according to you.

Yes women are graduating in high numbers.But most of them in non-competitive field.Hardly any female are graduating in STEM fields.Even those who get in the STEM field don't stay long because the reality of working in a competitive field in not a Disney dream. Men are more suitable and are highly successful in all most all the fields.

Women are good in those field which includes nourishing like small children teachers,day care worker,secretaries or in medical field.

Most of Nation Heads used their fathers name for success,hardly any self-made women.

All most, all the top executives of Fortune 500 companies are male.

In Military,women are serving primary in support roles,the roles hat can be done by sitting on desk,not on the field.All the fighting members of every armed forces are males.

Rubbish, the only reason women are not joining STEM field is because pressure from their family nothing else

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phebe_Novakovic

so what kind of nourishment occurs in Secretarial work?
every nation head uses his/her father's or some superiors name, this fact is not limited to women:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_I_of_England

Apparently her father was not very positively known.

again, women are serving fighting roles in many militaries such as IDF and the US armed forces, many of them have even remained P.O.Vs

Time has advance,but not biology.It same as ever.

The truth is male are superior to female in term of strength and intelligence.

Truth leads to happiness and content.

The truth is male are superior to female in term of strength and intelligence.

both can be attained by training and practice, however

Women are superior to men in spirituality.

which is very difficult to attain my training and practice