Tag Archives: tfr

Islam versus Feminism

/ No Comments on Islam versus Feminism

My professor told me that men and women have different purposes, so we can’t protest how men are more “free”. We can’t protest on how wives have to do what the husbands say as long as it’s right. My Mom also told me that if your husband says no, then you don’t do it. However, there are feminists that are rebelling against this, they say that it’s sexist, women rights, equality, etc. What do you think about this? And what do you think about feminism? Sorry if it’s hard to understand.

It is true that men and women have different evolutionary purposes. I describe this in detail in my two essays Man’s Masculine Role and Woman’s Feminine Role in Family and Civilization and Civilization versus Feminism.

There are many types of feminists. Some of them believe in equal rights for women and there is nothing wrong with this. Others believe in women’s moral superiority and think that all men are inherently worthless

“I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig.” —Andrea Dworkin

“All men are rapists and that’s all they are” —Marilyn French, advisor to Al Gore’s presidential campaign.

“In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them” —Dr. Mary Jo Bane, feminist and assistant professor of education at Wellesley College, and associate director of the school’s Center for Research on Woman.

“The most merciful thing a large family can to do one of its infant members is to kill it.” —Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, in “Women and the New Race,” p. 67.

“We are, as a sex, infinitely superior to men.” —Elizabeth Cady Stanton

These are feminism’s leaders and intellectuals. They have high-paying jobs as university professors and administrators, pundits and non-profit executives. These are not some crazy outsiders, they are at the center of feminism, and it is people like this who run most women’s studies departments at universities. It is for this reason that women taught at women’s studies departments generally have a visceral hatred toward men, believing that no evil done to them is too bad, and believing that a woman has zero moral responsibility toward men and society, because she is infinitely superior to all religious and societal values.

Feminism’s leaders are some of the most bloodthirsty and poisonous people on earth, utterly selfish and self-centered, having zero empathy toward 50% of humanity (males), and rejoicing at the thought of men suffering injustice and murder.

Since we Muslims follow a balanced religion that considers men and women equally worthy, we must naturally reject this type of feminism for the doctrine of hate that it is, and instead of considering these dangerously bloodthirsty women leaders of women (as some female Muslim intellectuals mistakenly think), we must consider them enemies of Islam and civilization, for what they want is to utterly destroy our values and ideals to replace them with their male-hating, marriage-hating, abortion-loving and homosexuality-promoting ideology.

As for women who believe in the equal worth of men and women and simply want to promote equal rights and opportunities for women, then there is nothing wrong with them, although it would be better if they did not call themselves feminists, because the above is what feminism’s leaders are like. They should create a new movement that stands against feminism, rejecting its doctrine of hate and replacing it with something that works for women’s rights without wanting to carry out genocide against half of the world’s population.

In Islam, a man has “a degree of authority” over women in his household, as I explain in my answer Patriarchy in the Quran. The woman should always have the right to divorce and to agencies that protect her against abuse, so that the man is prevented from abusing his authority. But the authority is there nonetheless, and it cannot be taken away without throwing away the Quran. This means that his wife cannot make significant decisions without his agreement. If she wants to, she is free to threaten divorce to get her way, but while she remains a wife to her husband, her husband has this authority over her.

A woman is not forced into marriage; she is the one who chooses what man deserves to be her husband. If she marries a man as cultured and intelligent as herself, then the question of authority may never come up, since the family functions comfortably, with both the man and the woman enslaved to the interests of the family, rather than their own personal interests. Neither of them seek power or privilege over the other; they both work for the same goal, the project in life.

So the man’s extra authority is something that only comes up if the woman wants to do something that goes against his wishes. In such a case, she can argue with him, she can ask for the support of her family and his family to convince him, and if the matter is important enough to her, she has the right to ask for divorce. So this authority is not absolute, like a short-sighted view would suggest; it is balanced by the woman’s right of divorce, and by the fact that in Islamic societies all women have universal income guaranteed by their male relatives, so that they are not reliant on their husbands in order to be fed, clothed and sheltered, if they leave the husband, the male relatives are required to do provide these for them.

Before marriage, a woman is free to ask her husband to give her equal authority, and he is free to either agree or not agree, since marriage is by the agreement of both sides. The Islamic view is that the system of giving men more authority in the household than women is beneficial to both of them, by giving them happy and stable families. When it comes to traditional marriages, some short-sighted people focus on the one unhappy and abusive marriage they find and ignore the 9 happy and peaceful marriages around them, and use this one example to “prove” that there is something wrong with the Islamic system.

Regardless of the system, there will always be unhappy and abusive marriages. The Islamic system claims to lead to better marriages, families and societies on average; having a lower rate of unhappy and broken marriages and families. If in Western societies the rate of unhappy marriages is 20%, in an Islamic society it might be 5%. And while all major Western societies have below-replacement fertility rates (their societies are slowly but surely going extinct), conservative Islamic societies all have above-replacement fertility rates, meaning that they continue to thrive, even in developed societies like Malaysia.

Another sign of the healthfulness of the Islamic system is the low suicide rates in peaceful Islamic countries. The suicide rate of the United States is four times greater than that of Indonesia and Egypt, for example.

Patriarchy in the Quran

/ 2 Comments on Patriarchy in the Quran

Stick to posting Islamic art and quotes. Otherwise, go learn about the patriarchy and power imbalances before flaunting your misogyny everywhere. May Allah guide you.

Islam is a patriarchal religion, where men get a degree of authority over their women in their households, and with that authority comes the burden of having to provide financially for all of their female relatives, so that in a devout Muslim society no woman will ever have to work, though they can if they want to.

That authority is balanced by the fact that a woman can get a divorce any time she wants, and she is protected by all of her male relatives against any abuses by her husband, so that if her husband abuses his authority in any way, she can always leave him to find a better man. The Quran calls on men to fear God, to be kind, to be just, and to defend the weak (which includes the women and children among them) but it also gives them authority in their households.

So while in Islam we believe in the equal worth of men and women, and in equal opportunities for both, the fact that God has given men a rank over women in their households is in the Quran, and ignoring this and pretending it doesn’t exist is throwing part of the Quran away because it disagrees with your preconceived notions, because you think your inane feminist-inspired moralizing is better than God’s guidance.

The Quran, 2:85: “Is it that you believe in part of the Scripture, and disbelieve in part? What is the reward for those among you who do that but humiliation in this life? And on the Day of Resurrection, they will be assigned to the most severe torment. God is not unaware of what you do.”

The Quran, 2:228: “And women have rights similar to their obligations, according to what is fair. But men have a degree [of authority] over them. “

The Quran, 4:34: “Men are the protectors and maintainers of women [qawwamoon, literally “people of authority who watch over and maintain standards…”], as God has given some of them an advantage [in rank] over others, and because they spend out of their wealth.”

If you have a problem with a patriarchal society, you are in the wrong religion.

I encourage you to learn Arabic and read the Quran to discover the wonders of a society where men are not considered worthless and disposable like in the West, but where they are respected as figures of authority, and where a woman enjoys the peace of mind that comes with having multiple God-fearing men dedicated to her welfare, knowing that she could never, ever be homeless or wanting of food and income while a devout Muslim male relative remains to her, knowing that she can marry and divorce whoever she wants, start a business, or do whatever she wants with her life as long as it doesn’t go against God’s commandments, enjoying a peaceful life among men who like her and respect her and will not let anyone abuse her.

You are free to leave patriarchy, which means all sustainable civilized societies (all societies that have an above-replacement fertility rate, i.e. that are not on the path to extinction like Japan and Western Europe), to enjoy life among some Stone Age tribe where matriarchy is the order of the day, or in the ghettos and trailer parks of America where men belong to their mothers and do not know their fathers, where non-existent fathers make a patriarchy a practical impossibility, since patriarchy means rule of the fathers.

 

The coming end of White Americans…or not

Every other week a new batch of articles seem to appear in the media gleefully mentioning yet another statistic that shows why white people, you know, those bad, bad people who invented things like human rights and women’s equality, will soon disappear from the face of the earth.

One thing most projections fail to take into account is demographic segments. If a minority of a population has very low fertility, they can bring the entire population’s apparent fertility below replacement levels, so that demographers may blindly assume that the entire population is dwindling. But the reality can be the opposite; after a decade or two of population decrease, as the low-fertility minority dwindles, high-fertility segments of the population pick up the slack and fertility goes above replacement again.

Using politically-segmented demographic data from the General Social Survey (provided by the Audacious Epigone), I charted the change in the population of white people in the United States across the coming few generations, taking account of fertility rates, death rates and generational shifts in political leaning (using Gallup data). The surprising finding is that [trigger warning] white people aren’t disappearing, they are actually increasing.

[Link to the spreadsheet whence the data comes: Google Spreadsheets | Microsoft Excel]

Assumptions that went into my model:

  • 25% of the population is made up of fertile females.
  • The length of a generation is 28 years.
  • The fertile period of a woman’s life is 28 years (ages 16 to 44, for example). The usual assumption is 15-49. However, since the birth rate of above-45 women is negligible (less than 1%), and since teenage births are decreasing, a tighter range of 16 to 44 suggested by the 28-year fertile period is a reasonable assumption.
  • The death rate will continue to be 8.2 deaths per 1000 population.
  • 21% of offspring will move one step left on the political spectrum, 7% will move one step right, and the 72% remainder will follow in their parents’ footsteps (as suggested by the Gallup poll linked above).

Next up is the projected populations of the various political segments of the white population:

Here is the same data presented as a table:

Year Total White Population Extremely Liberal Liberal Slightly Liberal Moderate Slightly Conservative Conservative Extremely Conservative
2015 197.7 4.9 25.1 22.3 78.9 30.8 28.3 7.3
2043 229.9 7.0 26.9 29.5 87.2 37.4 32.6 9.4
2071 267.2 9.3 29.1 37.4 96.7 44.9 37.7 12.0
2099 310.2 11.8 32.0 46.0 107.7 53.6 43.8 15.2
2127 360.0 14.8 35.5 55.6 120.3 63.7 51.0 19.2
2155 417.7 18.1 39.7 66.3 134.8 75.3 59.6 24.0

The same data, presented as percentages:

Year Total Population Extremely Liberal Liberal Slightly Liberal Moderate Slightly Conservative Conservative Extremely Conservative
2015 197.7 2.50% 12.70% 11.30% 39.90% 15.60% 14.30% 3.70%
2043 229.9 3.04% 11.68% 12.84% 37.92% 16.26% 14.16% 4.10%
2071 267.2 3.47% 10.91% 13.99% 36.21% 16.82% 14.10% 4.51%
2099 310.2 3.81% 10.31% 14.84% 34.73% 17.29% 14.11% 4.91%
2127 360.0 4.10% 9.85% 15.45% 33.43% 17.68% 14.16% 5.33%
2155 417.7 4.33% 9.50% 15.87% 32.28% 18.02% 14.27% 5.75%

Below is the data aggregated by leaning (conservative, liberal or moderate). The green line shows the conservative advantage, the number by which conservatives outnumber liberals:

Here is the same data presented as a table:

Year Moderates Liberals Conservatives Conservative Advantage
2015 78.9 52.4 66.4 14.0
2043 87.2 63.4 79.4 16.0
2071 96.7 75.8 94.7 18.9
2099 107.7 89.9 112.6 22.8
2127 120.3 105.8 133.8 28.0
2155 134.8 124.0 158.8 34.8

If these numbers show one thing, it is that it is going to get increasingly harder for liberals to win elections as the number of conservatives grows. Liberals will have to continue importing benefits-dependent voters from poor countries to defeat the continuous increase in conservative voters.

My own feeling is that the white population will stay below 200 million until the 2030’s due to the increasing number of baby boomers dying, from then on things will follow the pattern suggested by the numbers above.