Afghanistan

[2cents]

@2cents I'm interested if you know more about the women who were wearing that in pre-war Aleppo. Were they part of a particular sect or something?

I don’t know unfortunately, I had kind of forgotten about them until seeing these pictures from Afghanistan reminded me. I remember the effect of the outfit was quite striking to me because when they’re walking towards you it’s as if they’re walking backwards. I’d really be interested to know if there’s something more behind it.

 

[Agent Red]

It's fine. It's quite common we try to only understand what suits our own narrative.

If that’s a comment to me I don’t really think that’s what’s happened here! All your posts to date have been to the effect of women having equal status. When I and others have pointed out where that isn’t the case, eg in the legal system, you haven’t engaged. You made a similar reference to LGBT people ‘thriving’ in the majority of cases a few weeks ago, despite that clearly not being the case.

You now say you are fully aware of the suffering and the only reason you haven’t mentioned it is because it’s so obvious. I don’t really understand how that stacks up with your previous posts, but I’m glad you have at least acknowledged there is an issue for women in particular.

 

[Foxbatt]

There is a very good clip on YouTube as to what President Gamal Abdul Nasser said about the Hijab and The Brotherhood.

 

[Agent Red]

I don't think I've done a good job of getting my perspective across. I believe that the average Afghan and the Taliban have the same opinions on what a womans role in society is. It's not one I agree with, but I believe if it was a venn diagram, it'd be like 80% overlap. This is why I think they're able to successfully impose their views on what is a fractious and tribal society. The blue shuttlecock Burqa was common in Afghanistan much before the Taliban and much after them too. Afghan women not having a place in public is pretty much the same too.

When I mentioned Pakistan, I didn't intend to present Pakistan as a liberal alternative. We Pakistani are a conservative bunch by western standards, but we're not by Afghan standards. Although even in Pakistan, you will see that Afghans and even our Pakistani pukhtun population, act in a much more conservative way, than Punjabi's or Sindhi's or Kashmiri's might. Go to a bazar in an eastern city in Pakistan and you'll find a greater mix of women and men than you will in the western cities, closer. The streets will have a lot more men in them in KPK and Balochistan. If you go to a huge city like Karachi, you'll see the contrast between areas where pukhtuns and Baloch reside and areas where Sindhi's or Urdu speaking Muhajirs reside.

My point was that even when these people are in Pakistan, were there is no state based compulsion for their dress, many still adhere to their strict dress code and their lack of appearance in public life.

==========

On a wider note, that lady dressed in all black - thats not very traditionally Afghan. The blue Burqa with the netting is quite Afghan, although.

Ah I see, thanks for clarifying. Very interesting context.

 

[Brwned]

The women's situation in Afghanistan is frequently ascribed to Islamic beliefs and practices. Lets' be honest here there are hundreds of millions of Muslim women who are not purdah clad and aren't forced to either. They were wearing similar clothing hundreds of years prior to the existence of the Taliban. Where has all this sudden sympathy come from for the plight of women?

Like @crappycraperson said above it's mostly patriarchal and cultural and religious. Most importantly let's not assess them according to Western standards. The generalising view of the oppression of women in Afghanistan tends to be sensationalised by the media and journalists searching for stories attempting to characterise Afghanistan and its religion as a stick. The US and its friends spent billions trying to change the country but without much success. There's not much that can be done at present.

What does this mean? Caring about women's rights isn't a new thing...?

 

[Sultan]

All your posts to date have been to the effect of women having equal status. When I and others have pointed out where that isn’t the case, eg in the legal system, you haven’t engaged. You made a similar reference to LGBT people ‘thriving’ in the majority of cases a few weeks ago, despite that clearly not being the case.

LGBT have been in the open and thriving much more in parts of Pakistan, Bangladesh, and particularly India than here in the UK. It is only over the last few years there has been a focus on LGBT over here in the UK. I admit there would be your typical religious groups who would be against these people which is no different to any other country.

Please link me to any of my posts that say women have equal status. I have been persistent in saying as genders we are different and have different roles but no gender is superior to the other. I have always learnt in my religious studies men and women are helpers and partners to each other. Never ever heard or read any gender being superior over the other. If anything, the mother is has been afforded the most respect in Islam.

 

[Sultan]

What does this mean? Caring about women's rights isn't a new thing...?

It seems all this caring has been amplified in recent weeks since the troops moved out of the country. I hope the caring is genuine and not just a stick for the Taliban rule. The only way to improve their lot is to help.

 

[Agent Red]

LGBT have been in the open and thriving much more in parts of Pakistan, Bangladesh, and particularly India than here in the UK. It is only over the last few years there has been a focus on LGBT over here in the UK. I admit there would be your typical religious groups who would be against these people which is no different to any other country.

Please link me to any of my posts that say women have equal status. I have been persistent in saying as genders we are different and have different roles but no gender is superior to the other. I have always learnt in my religious studies men and women are helpers and partners to each other. Never ever heard or read any gender being superior over the other. If anything, the mother is has been afforded the most respect in Islam.

Homosexuality is illegal in some of the countries you mention there? It is simply not true to say there is a thriving LGBT culture and only a few religious groups are opposed. Most of the UK decriminalised homosexuality in the 60s. The recent developments are things like equal marriage and increased representation in the media but that's a far way ahead of where the countries you mention are - it isn't at all comparable.

You have said regularly in your posts that men and women are equal (I will retract the 'status' bit if that is what you disagree with, although if you think neither gender is above the other then I don't see how it follows that you have an issue with describing them as having equal status?). When myself and others have pointed out where the isn't the case e.g. in the law where a man's word is worth more than a woman's, you haven't responded other than with high level statements like the above where you say these are people's mother's, daughters etc. so 'of course' they are treated equally. The issue of willingly following traditional gender roles or not is irrelevant, it's also about their rights. Where is the respect for that mother if e.g. there is no maternal healthcare, or she is widowed and has no male relatives and then can't leave the house, or if she is the victim of abuse? The words are meaningless if they are not backed up by the actions.

 

[Sultan]

Homosexuality is illegal in some of the countries you mention there? It is simply not true to say there is a thriving LGBT culture and only a few religious groups are opposed. Most of the UK decriminalised homosexuality in the 60s. The recent developments are things like equal marriage and increased representation in the media but that's a far way ahead of where the countries you mention are - it isn't at all comparable.

You have said regularly in your posts that men and women are equal (I will retract the 'status' bit if that is what you disagree with, although if you think neither gender is above the other then I don't see how it follows that you have an issue with describing them as having equal status?). When myself and others have pointed out where the isn't the case e.g. in the law where a man's word is worth more than a woman's, you haven't responded other than with high level statements like the above where you say these are people's mother's, daughters etc. so 'of course' they are treated equally. The issue of willingly following traditional gender roles or not is irrelevant, it's also about their rights. Where is the respect for that mother if e.g. there is no maternal healthcare, or she is widowed and has no male relatives and then can't leave the house, or if she is the victim of abuse? The words are meaningless if they are not backed up by the actions.

Wiki

"In the Indian subcontinent, Hijra[n 1] are eunuchs, intersex people, asexual or transgender people.[1][2] Also known as Aravani, Aruvani, Jogappa,[3] the hijra community in India prefer to call themselves Kinnar or Kinner, referring to the mythological beings that excel at song and dance. In Pakistan, they are also called Khawaja Sira, the equivalent of transgender in the Urdu language.[4]

Hijras are officially recognized as third gender in the Indian subcontinent,[5][6][7] being considered neither completely male nor female. Hijras have a recorded history in the Indian subcontinent since antiquity, as suggested by the Kama Sutra.

Many live in well-defined and organised all-hijra communities, led by a guru.[8] These communities have consisted over generations."

I'm not sure where to start with the rest of your post.

 

[Sultan]

@Agent Red

Indian subcontinent consists of all the countries I mentioned (India, Pakistan and Bangladesh).

 

[Agent Red]

Wiki

"In the Indian subcontinent, Hijra[n 1] are eunuchs, intersex people, asexual or transgender people.[1][2] Also known as Aravani, Aruvani, Jogappa,[3] the hijra community in India prefer to call themselves Kinnar or Kinner, referring to the mythological beings that excel at song and dance. In Pakistan, they are also called Khawaja Sira, the equivalent of transgender in the Urdu language.[4]

Hijras are officially recognized as third gender in the Indian subcontinent,[5][6][7] being considered neither completely male nor female. Hijras have a recorded history in the Indian subcontinent since antiquity, as suggested by the Kama Sutra.

Many live in well-defined and organised all-hijra communities, led by a guru.[8] These communities have consisted over generations."

I'm not sure where to start with the rest of your post.

This doesn't seem very relevant. There will be examples of transexuals in lots of ancient history but that doesn't correspond to modern day rights and as I pointed out, homosexuality is illegal in Pakistan and Bangladesh (and I think only recently decriminalised in India). I don't see how that can possibly fit with a claim the gay culture is thriving. This thread is not about LGBT rights and I don't want to derail things, but it's a linked point that you can't just make statements saying certain groups are treated well when it is clear they are both legally and societally oppressed in the majority of cases.

 

[Brwned]

It seems all this caring has been amplified in recent weeks since the troops moved out of the country. I hope the caring is genuine and not just a stick for the Taliban rule. The only way to improve their lot is to help.

I understand you're coming from a place of active compassion; you feel for these people, you invest your heart, body and soul into supporting them, and it's never enough, more people need to help. Words are nice but bodies on the ground and food in their mouths would be better. If there's such growing chorus of compassion, where's the growing tribe of active helpers? There's some truth to that, but it's a complicated one.

If you step away from some of that cynicism, I think you can re-assess that first sentence and come up with an alternative explanation. I absolutely agree with you that the caring has been amplified - and temporarily. Mostly because the images alerted or reminded people of one of the many tragedies of this situation. It's a tragic reality that without those images, most people don't think about it. Not because they don't care about the issue, but because it's psychologically impossible to think about every violation of every principle you care about at every place and time it's happening simultaneously, we don't have the mental or emotional bandwidth for it.

By spending your time helping Afghans, you're not spending your time helping other people. Those trade-offs are just an unfortunate reality. So people will stop talking about it after a while, this visible compassion will fade away. Some would say that means they don't really care about it. It might even raise suspicions whether it was simply a vehicle for some much less worthy agenda. I'm sympathetic to the view but it's just more complicated than that.

There are people in places and times I've never heard of that have suffered in ways I've never known. I can't choose to help them over those people I know and see suffering. That means I care less about them as individuals, unfortunately. Our capacity for empathy is limited by things like physical realities and cultural ties, that's just the reality we live in. Part of the reason you choose to help Afghans (and others) rather than many, many other people and places is because of that, it's just hard-wired into us. Outside forces can break through that with unnatural, almost unseemly methods: the media, charities and other organisations that transport people and places into our lives that otherwise would be invisible, often with tools and tricks to deliberately stir up emotions. I don't think it's right to question the sincerity of those emotions, nor the validity of the views underpinning them.

Let's break away from the moral relativism and broader discussion for a second. I think it's disgusting that women are described as lollipops. That's not a convenient viewpoint to support my agenda against the Taliban, it's a deep feeling, and yes that feeling is triggered by it being put in front of me. I don't expect everyone to feel the same way about it, but I'm surprised you can't even contemplate it. I've had many conversations with people who feel that way about women. I'm sure you have too. Not using that exact phrase, but describing them as objects, under the control of men, who don't even deserve basic levels of human dignity. It doesn't matter to me whether they're from the Taliban or 19th century England.

Some principles are so core to one's understanding of the world that when they're violated, they hurt deeply, they cause outrage, they temporarily jerk you out of your normal sense of priorities. The fact that I'm going to go back to my normal set of priorities doesn't invalidate those feelings. It shouldn't trigger questions about their sincerity or raise suspicions of political motivations. It's just an unfortunate reality that our existence is defined by limited resources and time and not everything you would like to do, or feel one ought to do, is practically feasible. So sometimes words are all we can give. But they matter too.

 

[Agent Red]

I understand you're coming from a place of active compassion; you feel for these people, you invest your heart, body and soul into supporting them, and it's never enough, more people need to help. Words are nice but bodies on the ground and food in their mouths would be better. If there's such growing chorus of compassion, where's the growing tribe of active helpers? There's some truth to that, but it's a complicated one.

If you step away from some of that cynicism, I think you can re-assess that first sentence and come up with an alternative explanation. I absolutely agree with you that the caring has been amplified - and temporarily. Mostly because the images alerted or reminded people of one of the many tragedies of this situation. It's a tragic reality that without those images, most people don't think about it. Not because they don't care about the issue, but because it's psychologically impossible to think about every violation of every principle you care about at every place and time it's happening simultaneously, we don't have the mental or emotional bandwidth for it.

By spending your time helping Afghans, you're not spending your time helping other people. Those trade-offs are just an unfortunate reality. So people will stop talking about it after a while, this visible compassion will fade away. Some would say that means they don't really care about it. It might even raise suspicions whether it was simply a vehicle for some much less worth agenda. I'm sympathetic to the view but it's just more complicated than that.

There are people in places and times I've never heard of that have suffered in ways I've never known. I can't choose to help them over those people I know and see suffering. That means I care less about them as individuals, unfortunately. Our capacity for empathy is limited by things like physical realities and cultural ties, that's just the reality we live in. Part of the reason you choose to help Afghans (and others) rather than many, many other people and places is because of that, it's just hard-wired into us. Outside forces can break through that with unnatural, almost unseemly methods: the media, charities and other organisations that transport people and places into our lives that otherwise would be invisible, often with tools and tricks to deliberately stir up emotions. I don't think it's right to question the sincerity of those emotions, nor the validity of the views underpinning them.

Let's break away from the moral relativism and broader discussion for a second. I think it's disgusting that women are described as lollipops. That's not a convenient viewpoint to support my agenda against the Taliban, it's a deep feeling, and yes that feeling is triggered by it being put in front of me. I don't expect everyone to feel the same way about it, but I'm surprised you can't even contemplate it. I've had many conversations with people who feel that way about women. I'm sure you have too. Not using that exact phrase, but describing them as objects, under the control of men, who don't even deserve basic levels of human dignity. It doesn't matter to me whether they're from the Taliban or 19th century England.

Some principles are so core to one's understanding of the world that when they're violated, they hurt deeply, they cause outrage, they temporarily jerk you out of your normal sense of priorities. The fact that I'm going to go back to my normal set of priorities doesn't invalidate those feelings. It shouldn't trigger questions about their sincerity or raise suspicions of political motivations. It's just an unfortunate reality that our existence is defined by limited resources and time and not everything you would like to do, or feel one ought to do, is practically feasible.

Really good, thoughtful post.

 

[Roane]

If you consider someone has a different role, and you set things up to impose that different role, then obviously there is no equality.
If you like, you can argue that Talibani rules about women mean they think they're their betters. I will argue the opposite. For example, inheriting less than male children, carrying less/no weight as witnesses, not being allowed to move freely - all these to me show that they think of their "mothers, daughters, and grandmothers" as lesser people.

Don't want to divert the conversation but the whole inheritance being less for a girl and the two female witness argument is in the same league as the "kill them where you find them" argument I hear about Muslims towards non Muslims, as in it is part verses and without context and explanation. To be fair it's not only non Muslims who misunderstand these concepts.

For instance the inheritance is less for a girl but then so is the responsibility she has with that inheritance. The money the girl gets is hers. The money the boy gets isn't. His responsibilities towards family and relatives are the reasons he gets more.

Similarly the 2 witness thing isn't a general rule, according to many ulema. If you read the full verse in surah baqarah it starts with testimony when writing a contract for loans etc. The second woman is an "assistant" to the main witness not a second witness as such.

Just to clarify the kill them where you find them, from memory, that's surah maidah v5 and it's about battles and those surrendering. It is the duty of Muslims to look after the welfare of those who surrender and ensure they get safe passage. IF they negate on agreement and kill after that then kill them where you find them. Also it isn't a verse against the "infidel" as it is translated to mean. Classic Arabic and Islam has a different definition for the word kufaar over what we often believe now. It was never a derogatory term.


Sorry to digress.

 

[midnightmare]

...
I have been persistent in saying as genders we are different and have different roles but no gender is superior to the other. I have always learnt in my religious studies men and women are helpers and partners to each other. Never ever heard or read any gender being superior over the other. If anything, the mother is has been afforded the most respect in Islam.

And therein lies the tragic problem. Genders are different, true (a full spectrum indeed and not just binary) but that does not and should not imply that their roles are different. The moment one has this as the as the starting point, there can be no question of equality. There is nothing in nature to suggest that the different genders are meant to play different roles and that they need to exist within some set boundaries. Nothing, barring the word of man (male, that is) and those words were written at a time where "might is right" prevailed.

As regards the attire and the gender roles being accepted by the masses (including women) willingly, that too is quite meaningless. Brainwashing works. Scientifically proven and unarguable. Also, if you bring up entire populations from their earliest years and over multiple generations, with the consistent brainwashing of "This is what you are meant to be and this is the right way", you will develop entire populations that completely agree with the doctrine in question. That a large number women brought up in such cultures therefore accept "their place in the world" has no bearing on how a rational and evolved human being should see their plight. Again, therefore, starting with the point of "Hey! The women are okay with it; why're you so hot and bothered about it?" is just fundamentally wrong.

I see no point going further since, as I highlighted, the starting point itself is so fundamentally flawed in both arguments.

 

[Sultan]

And therein lies the tragic problem. Genders are different, true (a full spectrum indeed and not just binary) but that does not and should not imply that their roles are different. The moment one has this as the as the starting point, there can be no question of equality. There is nothing in nature to suggest that the different genders are meant to play different roles and that they need to exist within some set boundaries. Nothing, barring the word of man (male, that is) and those words were written at a time where "might is right" prevailed.

As regards the attire and the gender roles being accepted by the masses (including women) willingly, that too is quite meaningless. Brainwashing works. Scientifically proven and unarguable. Also, if you bring up entire populations from their earliest years and over multiple generations, with the consistent brainwashing of "This is what you are meant to be and this is the right way", you will develop entire populations that completely agree with the doctrine in question. That a large number women brought up in such cultures therefore accept "their place in the world" has no bearing on how a rational and evolved human being should see their plight. Again, therefore, starting with the point of "Hey! The women are okay with it; why're you so hot and bothered about it?" is just fundamentally wrong.

I see no point going further since, as I highlighted, the starting point itself is so fundamentally flawed in both arguments.

I have likely made an error in describing "different" I should have made it more clear and say physically and emotionally different.

My basic view of women and men comes from an understanding of my religion. We men and women share complementing or differing functions. Humanity has been created in a pair and we cannot be complete without the other. I often say to women they are selling themselves short when asking for equality. Women are often better at many tasks than men and men better at certain other tasks. It's not a competition. I'm not even sure why there is even a debate about who's better.

 

[Sultan]

I understand you're coming from a place of active compassion; you feel for these people, you invest your heart, body and soul into supporting them, and it's never enough, more people need to help. Words are nice but bodies on the ground and food in their mouths would be better. If there's such growing chorus of compassion, where's the growing tribe of active helpers? There's some truth to that, but it's a complicated one.

If you step away from some of that cynicism, I think you can re-assess that first sentence and come up with an alternative explanation. I absolutely agree with you that the caring has been amplified - and temporarily. Mostly because the images alerted or reminded people of one of the many tragedies of this situation. It's a tragic reality that without those images, most people don't think about it. Not because they don't care about the issue, but because it's psychologically impossible to think about every violation of every principle you care about at every place and time it's happening simultaneously, we don't have the mental or emotional bandwidth for it.

By spending your time helping Afghans, you're not spending your time helping other people. Those trade-offs are just an unfortunate reality. So people will stop talking about it after a while, this visible compassion will fade away. Some would say that means they don't really care about it. It might even raise suspicions whether it was simply a vehicle for some much less worthy agenda. I'm sympathetic to the view but it's just more complicated than that.

There are people in places and times I've never heard of that have suffered in ways I've never known. I can't choose to help them over those people I know and see suffering. That means I care less about them as individuals, unfortunately. Our capacity for empathy is limited by things like physical realities and cultural ties, that's just the reality we live in. Part of the reason you choose to help Afghans (and others) rather than many, many other people and places is because of that, it's just hard-wired into us. Outside forces can break through that with unnatural, almost unseemly methods: the media, charities and other organisations that transport people and places into our lives that otherwise would be invisible, often with tools and tricks to deliberately stir up emotions. I don't think it's right to question the sincerity of those emotions, nor the validity of the views underpinning them.

Let's break away from the moral relativism and broader discussion for a second. I think it's disgusting that women are described as lollipops. That's not a convenient viewpoint to support my agenda against the Taliban, it's a deep feeling, and yes that feeling is triggered by it being put in front of me. I don't expect everyone to feel the same way about it, but I'm surprised you can't even contemplate it. I've had many conversations with people who feel that way about women. I'm sure you have too. Not using that exact phrase, but describing them as objects, under the control of men, who don't even deserve basic levels of human dignity. It doesn't matter to me whether they're from the Taliban or 19th century England.

Some principles are so core to one's understanding of the world that when they're violated, they hurt deeply, they cause outrage, they temporarily jerk you out of your normal sense of priorities. The fact that I'm going to go back to my normal set of priorities doesn't invalidate those feelings. It shouldn't trigger questions about their sincerity or raise suspicions of political motivations. It's just an unfortunate reality that our existence is defined by limited resources and time and not everything you would like to do, or feel one ought to do, is practically feasible. So sometimes words are all we can give. But they matter too.

I have already said the description of women in that video is not something I agree with and should be condemned as with anyone downplaying the respect of women or their roles in society. However, some of the videos emanating from Afghanistan you'll now see circulating in abundance will be from uneducated men. The media will sensationalise and attribute these stories to the Taliban hierarchy or Islam which will not be correct. Afghanistan is a news story at the moment and any controversial story will be milked until the masses get bored. Taliban like most governments are no saints. However, a chance would be a fine thing. I am sure they will have their good points will be bringing security and safety for women.

As I mentioned I have been involved in running schools on the borders of Afghanistan in KPK since the 2001 refugee crisis. I have had conversations and meetings with religious figures with a similar mindset as the Taliban and they have never been discriminatory about us setting up schools and teaching girls or heard disparaging comments about women on the ground.

See PM for the link.

Anyway, as always, a brilliant post.

 

[Brwned]

I have already said the description of women in that video is not something I agree with and should be condemned as with anyone downplaying the respect of women or their roles in society. However, some of the videos emanating from Afghanistan you'll now see circulating in abundance will be from uneducated men. The media will sensationalise and attribute these stories to the Taliban hierarchy or Islam which will not be correct. Afghanistan is a news story at the moment and any controversial story will be milked until the masses get bored. Taliban like most governments are no saints. However, a chance would be a fine thing. I am sure they will have their good points will be bringing security and safety for women.

As I mentioned I have been involved in running schools on the borders of Afghanistan in KPK since the 2001 refugee crisis. I have had conversations and meetings with religious figures with a similar mindset as the Taliban and they have never been discriminatory about us setting up schools and teaching girls or heard disparaging comments about women on the ground.

See PM for the link.

Anyway, as always, a brilliant post.

I do agree that there are sensationalised stories coming out of Afghanistan which are used to make broader political points that are often untrue. I think you in turn are making broader points that don't really address the specific points I and others were making, though.

Just to bring it back to the original comment you pulled me up on, when I said those analogies are accurate representations of their views, I wasn't ascribing that to Islam or Afghans. I was ascribing it to people like that in the video. The Taliban are full of people like that. There are some members of the Taliban that don't have such harsh views, but those who do readily dehumanise women wield a lot of power in the Taliban, the fact they're uneducated (and reliant on a certain strand of religious teachings) explains it, but it doesn't excuse it, it shouldn't make us treat them any less harshly. Because the issue is much too big for that.

I'm absolutely with you in hoping that things like women's education are not harmed by the Taliban. I just don't agree with the basic assumption that they won't be. They banned all women's education the last time they were in power. They've already announced they will be segregating men's and women's higher education, and accepted that in areas where there aren't enough female teachers, these unfortunate women will just have to find "an alternative". Maybe you can argue that because they're uneducated they don't realise the value of education, despite the copious evidence of its vital role in personal development. But it's only the women that aren't entitled to it as a basic right. They are not equals and we should be blunt about that, IMO.

Your original question of...

Afghanistan and other similar cultures do not consider women to be second class citizens. They consider women to have different roles. Why would they consider their mothers, daughters, grandmothers as anything but their equals or even better?

...is a really powerful one. I think it's something you should wrestle with. I don't know why they would not consider them their equals, or even better. But they don't. The strange thing is that doesn't just apply to these people in the Taliban. Like you said it applied to 19th century England, and the world over. Somehow it came very easily to societies. On the face of it it's ridiculous, so you're inclined to dismiss the idea. Surely no-one could think another human is lesser to them, particularly based on a biological attribute. But they do. We shouldn't be afraid to label that.

Does it reflect something about a strain of Islamic teachings that underpins this active government, and similar? It does, and that's uncomfortable. It also reflected something about the social values inherent in many Western societies not long ago, and that they're still wrestling with in a different way now. To me it's uncomfortable that I was born into a society that decided it was legal for husbands to rape wives, and that I'm just a couple of generations descended from a society that thought women weren't entitled to some of the rights they considered most fundamental to society. They are my people in that loose sense, and it's our natural response to defend one's tribe, but they did some very bad things. We don't need to moralise about it, I understand the purpose of moral relativism, but we at the very least need to describe the reality. Second class citizens is a very accurate description.

Your foundation is heartwarming. Good work Sults!

 

[ooeat0meoo]

Waking up to some weird shit on CNN...

Apparently, the drone strike during the final day in Afghanistan was a total blunder. CNN reporting that it was possibly a SIV family with 7 children, 3 of which were toddlers. They're using terms like intel failure etc.

It's way too early for me to figure this all out, but WTF?! Was that video of the burning car that had what appeared to be rocket launcher tubes a total fake?

What a nightmare!!!

 

[2cents]

Waking up to some weird shit on CNN...

Apparently, the drone strike during the final day in Afghanistan was a total blunder. CNN reporting that it was possibly a SIV family with 7 children, 3 of which were toddlers. They're using terms like intel failure etc.

It's way too early for me to figure this all out, but WTF?! Was that video of the burning car that had what appeared to be rocket launcher tubes a total fake?

What a nightmare!!!

@milemuncher777 posted this detailed thread on it a few days ago:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[ooeat0meoo]

@milemuncher777 posted this detailed thread on it a few days ago:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This is completely insane!!!
Sorry I missed it. It's just hitting mainstream media now

Q: So, what was that row of tubes in the back of the car which was burning?
Does this imply that the US forces shot video of something completely fake?

This is crazy and someone needs to be held accountable


Read the thread... thanks 2cents

This is tragic. Still whoever made the the decision to obliterate this family should be held accountable.

 

[2cents]

This is completely insane!!!

I agree. I’d also speculate there have been dozens and dozens of similar incidents which have gone unreported under four Presidents over the last twenty years, in Afghanistan and beyond, that Washington has simply lied about.

 

[Zlatattack]

Anyone who wants to get a real perspective on what a shitshow Afghanistan was in terms of a lack of understanding of the culture, politics and intelligence failures really needs to read this twitter thread. It's got extracts of an excellent book by Anand Gopal. It's mind boggling how poorly the US and NATO understood Afghanistan.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1436298382927036420.html

 

[Wednesday at Stoke]

I agree. I’d also speculate there have been dozens and dozens of similar incidents which have gone unreported under four Presidents over the last twenty years, in Afghanistan and beyond, that Washington has simply lied about.

We don't even acknowledge the horrific abuses like My Lai massacre for which there is a good enough recorded evidence.

 

[Raoul]

Anyone who wants to get a real perspective on what a shitshow Afghanistan was in terms of a lack of understanding of the culture, politics and intelligence failures really needs to read this twitter thread. It's got extracts of an excellent book by Anand Gopal. It's mind boggling how poorly the US and NATO understood Afghanistan.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1436298382927036420.html

Very interesting. I actually dealt with Sherzai on numerous occasions at his rather opulent Governor’s mansion in Nangarhar. He was basically a corrupt Afghan version of Jabba the Hut with incredible sway over life in that part of Afghanistan, which included the highly lucrative tax scheme he used at Torkham gate to line his pockets with.

 

[2mufc0]

@milemuncher777 posted this detailed thread on it a few days ago:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

@Agent Red i think a while back you mentioned starting air strikes as some sort of solution but this is the sort of thing that happens quite regularly with them.

 

[Zlatattack]

Very interesting. I actually dealt with Sherzai on numerous occasions at his rather opulent Governor’s mansion in Nangarhar. He was basically a corrupt Afghan version of Jabba the Hut with incredible sway over life in that part of Afghanistan, which included the highly lucrative tax scheme he used at Torkham gate to line his pockets with.

You've got to tell us some stories. You must have some crackers.

 

[hasanejaz88]

@milemuncher777 posted this detailed thread on it a few days ago:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

"Why do they hate us?"

"They hate us for our freedom"

 

[Agent Red]

@Agent Red i think a while back you mentioned starting air strikes as some sort of solution but this is the sort of thing that happens quite regularly with them.

I didn’t argue for them. I made reference to some people saying aerial support should have stayed as a way of supporting the Afghan govt. before it fell (and I think it was actual aircraft being suggested rather than drones in particular). I think it was you pointed out the civilian causality risk and I admitted I didn’t know enough about it to have a view on whether any air support should remain or not. Clearly this case is tragic and not unusual with the use of drones.

 

[fishfingers15]

I would be interested to see any links Imran khan has said what you claim. I have definitely heard religiously inclined scholars say such things. I do know a number of Indian politicians have blamed girls for wearing "immodest" for being raped.

From what I know of you, you have come across as a well meaning individual, so I'm going to let your defensive post about Imran Khan and pointing out Indian politicians slide. Whether it's Narendra Modi or Yogi Adityanath or Imran Khan, idiots are idiots and suggestions of immodestly dressed women causing rape needs to be severely condemned. If it were any other poster, I would probably say "what a tone deaf post'. Based on your replies, maybe I should say that from now on.

The suffering is so obvious you'd be deluded not to recognize or acknowledge the issue. Basically, it would be stating the obvious. Doesn't need to be said.

I personally know what is happening on the ground with these women and girls. I am involved with a small NGO. We run schools for mostly displaced Afghan kids and feed for over 1000 kids on a daily basis. These young kids are so desperate for food and education they walk 6/7miles every morning and go back home in scorching sun or snow in winter in mountainous areas. I personally spend time working at those schools. Unfortunately, the COVID situation has stopped us from going since 2019.

If you need to know anything further please PM.

We all do what we can on things that are close to our hearts. Some do, some don't. It's not a criteria for having a strong opinion. If you know what's happening on the ground, you definitely know it's not all exaggeration by western press. Great work on your philanthropic activities.

From what I've read in this thread, you've been defensive of how Taliban treat the women, the motivation of posters attacking Taliban rule and believing the exaggerated stories in the press, actual treatment of women by religion etc. It doesn't square well with a rational human being and I would say it's a terrible view to ascribe to, in spite of your philanthropic activities. It seems there is just no empathy for any human. There are probably millions of Afghan women who want to wear the burqa. Let them do as they please. There are also other women who want to work. What right do you or anybody else have to take away their dignity whether in the name of religion or any other cause? I'm not crusading for the LGBTQ population or the need of these people to engage in PDA, this is basic women's right of work. If they are never allowed to win bread and lead their life, women will always be at the mercy of men.

LGBT have been in the open and thriving much more in parts of Pakistan, Bangladesh, and particularly India than here in the UK. It is only over the last few years there has been a focus on LGBT over here in the UK. I admit there would be your typical religious groups who would be against these people which is no different to any other country.

Please link me to any of my posts that say women have equal status. I have been persistent in saying as genders we are different and have different roles but no gender is superior to the other. I have always learnt in my religious studies men and women are helpers and partners to each other. Never ever heard or read any gender being superior over the other. If anything, the mother is has been afforded the most respect in Islam.

As an Indian, I don't know if I should laugh or cry at this post. How in God's name have the LGBT population thriving in India than in the UK? Pakistan and Bangladesh actively coerce and vilify other faiths. Lynching based on supposed cow slaughter is a thing in India. If you parroting this weird, outright lie that LGBT populations are better off in the sub continent than in the UK, perhaps you are part of the problem.

It doesn't matter what Islam say or does. It matters how the people who interpret and enforce it on millions do. Christianity is a religion of love and forgiveness, but it has an absolute problem with abortion, treatment of LGBTQ and slavery in the earlier centuries. We only go so far in saying the second commandment in Bible encompasses all if Bible thumping Republicans make rules that make abortion harder for people to get based on religious belief. We can't all sing Kumbaya for it.

I have likely made an error in describing "different" I should have made it more clear and say physically and emotionally different.

My basic view of women and men comes from an understanding of my religion. We men and women share complementing or differing functions. Humanity has been created in a pair and we cannot be complete without the other. I often say to women they are selling themselves short when asking for equality. Women are often better at many tasks than men and men better at certain other tasks. It's not a competition. I'm not even sure why there is even a debate about who's better.

You often say to women they are selling themselves short asking for equality? I mean you must get a hell of a high mansplaining things to a woman on her sufferings. A woman when asking for equality is protesting for all the things that she hasn't been afforded by a society ruled by men out of ignorance and dogma for centuries.

Wiki

"In the Indian subcontinent, Hijra[n 1] are eunuchs, intersex people, asexual or transgender people.[1][2] Also known as Aravani, Aruvani, Jogappa,[3] the hijra community in India prefer to call themselves Kinnar or Kinner, referring to the mythological beings that excel at song and dance. In Pakistan, they are also called Khawaja Sira, the equivalent of transgender in the Urdu language.[4]

Hijras are officially recognized as third gender in the Indian subcontinent,[5][6][7] being considered neither completely male nor female. Hijras have a recorded history in the Indian subcontinent since antiquity, as suggested by the Kama Sutra.

Many live in well-defined and organised all-hijra communities, led by a guru.[8] These communities have consisted over generations."

I'm not sure where to start with the rest of your post.

Perhaps you should give your head a big wobble if you think Aravanis and Eunuchs are living in wonderland in the sub continent. What an idiotic take. It's like Narendra Modi claiming plastic surgery was part of the pre historic India because Ganesh had the head of an elephant.

 

[The Firestarter]

Waking up to some weird shit on CNN...

Apparently, the drone strike during the final day in Afghanistan was a total blunder. CNN reporting that it was possibly a SIV family with 7 children, 3 of which were toddlers. They're using terms like intel failure etc.

It's way too early for me to figure this all out, but WTF?! Was that video of the burning car that had what appeared to be rocket launcher tubes a total fake?

What a nightmare!!!

You are conflating two things. The rocket launcher tubes were in a vehicle that launched attacks against the airport , and got torched by the terrorists afterwards. It was a separate event.

 

[2mufc0]

I didn’t argue for them. I made reference to some people saying aerial support should have stayed as a way of supporting the Afghan govt. before it fell (and I think it was actual aircraft being suggested rather than drones in particular). I think it was you pointed out the civilian causality risk and I admitted I didn’t know enough about it to have a view on whether any air support should remain or not. Clearly this case is tragic and not unusual with the use of drones.

Fair enough, I just thought it was a relevant example of how things often go wrong with depending on drone/air strikes and the point I made a while back.

 

[Agent Red]

Fair enough, I just thought it was a relevant example of how things often I wrong with depending on drone/air strikes and the point I made a while back.

Yes, you’re right it is.

 

[Dr. StrangeHate]

This is disgusting. What fecking right do they have to still fly drones over the place and bomb potential civilians?

I am going to guess Biden is going after the Nobel Piece prize. Obama got it for 430 drone strikes in Pakistan.

 

[Foxbatt]

Isn't there a Transgender Act in Pakistan to protect their rights?

 

[Gehrman]

Isn't there a Transgender Act in Pakistan to protect their rights?

Can check it all out here. But yeah. TBH I believe I read that in countries like Iran sex change is legal because so homosexuals can no longer be considered homosexual.

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

I think one thing is law and other things is culture though. I've been twatted a few times in liberal Denmark in the nightlife for "looking gay".

 

[fishfingers15]

Isn't there a Transgender Act in Pakistan to protect their rights?

It is a secular India and parts of India are great. Doesn't mean a lot tbh

 

[Sultan]

From what I know of you, you have come across as a well meaning individual, so I'm going to let your defensive post about Imran Khan and pointing out Indian politicians slide. Whether it's Narendra Modi or Yogi Adityanath or Imran Khan, idiots are idiots and suggestions of immodestly dressed women causing rape needs to be severely condemned. If it were any other poster, I would probably say "what a tone deaf post'. Based on your replies, maybe I should say that from now on.

Stop turning this on me and show me any evidence of Imran suggesting clothing is the problem. My thoughts were Imran being educated in the UK would be unusual.

We all do what we can on things that are close to our hearts. Some do, some don't. It's not a criteria for having a strong opinion. If you know what's happening on the ground, you definitely know it's not all exaggeration by western press. Great work on your philanthropic activities.

A lot of it is an exaggeration. Not all, and I have never claimed such.

From what I've read in this thread, you've been defensive of how Taliban treat the women, the motivation of posters attacking Taliban rule and believing the exaggerated stories in the press, actual treatment of women by religion etc. It doesn't square well with a rational human being and I would say it's a terrible view to ascribe to, in spite of your philanthropic activities.

Show me one post where I have claimed the defended the treatment of women by the Taliban.

It seems there is just no empathy for any human. There are probably millions of Afghan women who want to wear the burqa. Let them do as they please. There are also other women who want to work. What right do you or anybody else have to take away their dignity whether in the name of religion or any other cause? I'm not crusading for the LGBTQ population or the need of these people to engage in PDA, this is basic women's right of work. If they are never allowed to win bread and lead their life, women will always be at the mercy of men.

I only have right over my family. They all work. If the Taliban have the authority over women and they decide what to wear in the public, I don't have the power to change the rules. Their country, their laws.

As an Indian, I don't know if I should laugh or cry at this post. How in God's name have the LGBT population thriving in India than in the UK? Pakistan and Bangladesh actively coerce and vilify other faiths. Lynching based on supposed cow slaughter is a thing in India. If you parroting this weird, outright lie that LGBT populations are better off in the sub continent than in the UK, perhaps you are part of the problem.

It doesn't matter what Islam say or does. It matters how the people who interpret and enforce it on millions do. Christianity is a religion of love and forgiveness, but it has an absolute problem with abortion, treatment of LGBTQ and slavery in the earlier centuries. We only go so far in saying the second commandment in Bible encompasses all if Bible thumping Republicans make rules that make abortion harder for people to get based on religious belief. We can't all sing Kumbaya for it.

You often say to women they are selling themselves short asking for equality? I mean you must get a hell of a high mansplaining things to a woman on her sufferings. A woman when asking for equality is protesting for all the things that she hasn't been afforded by a society ruled by men out of ignorance and dogma for centuries.
Perhaps you should give your head a big wobble if you think Aravanis and Eunuchs are living in wonderland in the sub continent. What an idiotic take. It's like Narendra Modi claiming plastic surgery was part of the pre historic India because Ganesh had the head of an elephant.

They are thriving well in the part of the country I visit and in parts of Pakistan and India, which I visit regularly.

Stop imagining what's in my mind. Prove what I've said by pointing me towards any of my posts.

 

[fishfingers15]

It's surreal to having provide a link about what imran Khan said about women to a person who claims subcontinent is better than the western world for LGBT population because of his anecdotal experience. I live in the subcontinent. I shall search and provide a link in a short while

 

[Gehrman]

I’m quite interested to learn more about the introduction of this garb into Afghanistan. I’ve never set foot inside the country but in all my reading on it and encounters with Afghans elsewhere it’s not something I’ve ever come across. Actually the only place I’ve ever encountered women dressed like this was in Aleppo in pre-war Syria, and then only very few. It seems a measure even beyond the burqa (obviously very common among Afghan women) and niqab (seen more among Arab Salafis).

She looks like a Sith lord or Nazgul to be honest.

I'm a bit out of touch with this thread. Is it politically incorrect to shit on the Taliban now?