Feminist Fantasy

[Nick_A]

FDP, your naivete would be humorous if its results weren't so tragic. How can you say Sharia law isn't in the United States. When people suffer honor killings in support of Sharia you deny it.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavli ... e-n2080252

An honor killing is typically carried out by a father against his daughter when he believes she has dishonored the family by somehow violating Shariah Law. Wives are also often the victims of honor killings. "Crimes" include dating non-Muslim men, wearing western clothing, going against the wishes of the men in the house and more.

Of course living in denial you insist there is no Sharia law in the United States.

Then you write:

You are indulging in a pathetic fantasy about Sharia, and within it you have a second layer of fantasy about acceptance of it, and within that fantasy you have a layer of perverted shit about women fantasising about being raped and seeking domination.

Even modern psychology is aware of rape fantasies. Yet as usual you deny anything more than two inches in front of your nose

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ps ... -fantasies

A recent analysis of 20 studies over the last 30 years indicates that between 31% and 57% of women have rape fantasies, and these fantasies are frequent or preferred in 9% to 17% of women. Considering that many people are ashamed to report rape fantasies, these stats are most likely lowball figures.

Talk about living in denial! FDP, you win first prize

[vegetariantaxidermy]

You made an idiot of yourself posting a satirical article as a factual one. Not much more to be said.

[Nick_A]

vege wrote

Y

ou made an idiot of yourself posting a satirical article as a factual one. Not much more to be said.

The article exaggerated but there is still a lot of truth in it as far as a Sharia influence.

http://www.truthandaction.org/dearborn- ... ria-law/2/

One only has to consider that when any of our rights as outlined by our Constitution and Bill of Rights is suspended in favor of Sharia law – that Sharia law is in effect to that degree.

This has happened and continues to be the case for Dearborn, Michigan. Let’s take a look at 3 instances…

First, take the case of Nabeel Qureshi and David Wood. They and 2 other evangelical Christians were arrested for “disorderly conduct” at Dearborn’s Arab festival in 2010 for simply passing out Christian literature on the sidewalk outside of the festival. As you can clearly see in the video they were hardly being ‘disorderly’, they were only exercising their freedom of speech and freedom of religion on an American street, and act protected by our Constitution.

But in Sharia law, it is forbidden for a non-Muslims to openly proclaim their beliefs to Muslims and Muslims can’t leave Islam under penalty of death. As Sharia law is the guiding force for Muslim behavior – we ultimately have the makings of conflict as Sharia law is not completely compatable with our Constitution.

If Sharia law commanded that Muslims respect the laws in whatever country they immigrated to, we would not have this conflict. But, quite to the contrary, Sharia law commands that Muslims not just rebel against, but actually kill ‘the infidels’. In this case, it commanded them to take control of the local community and the local police dept. in order to cease violation of Sharia by these ‘Christian infidels’.

These Christians tried passing out their literature and were quickly arrested, even having their camera illegally confiscated, by a dozen officers. In order to do exercise their rights, they were told they had to be many, many blocks away from the Arab festival.

This is clearly a violation of the Constitution in favor of Islamic Sharia law.

But this is small stuff compared to the support of the abuse of women by Sharia by other women for financial and political gain. Your silence indicates you support it. You should be ashamed.

[Hobbes' Choice]

They shouldn't exist at all in the UK.

it's a free country. Any club or other organisation can pronounce judgement on its members. As long as such judgements do not translate into unlawful actions, they have every right to exist.

'It is also understood that the all-male courts are rigged against women, fuelled by "a toxic mix of religious fundamentalism, culture and tight-knit communities" according to a book published last year.' It's not 'freedom' when the freedom of certain groups of people is being encroached on. When in Rome....A secular legal system is about equal rights for everyone. The only reason muslims would want to have their own 'sharia' courts is so that they can practise their own bigoted customs in a secular country.

I agree with what you say. But the fact is that Sharia courts have no legal force and it is the choice of any woman to reject Islam and adopt a secular life in the UK.
You do not have to be a member of the Women's Institute either, and as a man I am banned from that club; you do not have to be a member of the church of England or any other club. But membership involves following the rules decided by the members.
I hope women chose to leave Islam, but that is not for me to say, and I do not see how, in a democracy you can ban religions or other clubs and the rules they demand of their membership.

[Hobbes' Choice]

FDP, your naivete would be humorous if its results weren't so tragic. How can you say Sharia law isn't in the United States. When people suffer honor killings in support of Sharia you deny it.

IN the UK and in the USA, an "honour killing" is murder and those committing murder face the full punishment due under the laws of the land.

So Sharia or not ancient custom or not Islamic or not - it's just murder.

[Nick_A]

Hobbes wrote:

IN the UK and in the USA, an "honour killing" is murder and those committing murder face the full punishment due under the laws of the land.

Typical blind denier logic. It never dawns on you that the murdered may not appreciate being murdered and those supporting sharia will protect the murderers. I have no idea why people like you despise the murdered so much that you do not oppose abuse of women by sharia law and instead look the other way and pass the buck onto "laws?" You should be ashamed but your denial has even included your conscience. There but for the grace of God go I.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Hobbes wrote:

IN the UK and in the USA, an "honour killing" is murder and those committing murder face the full punishment due under the laws of the land.

Typical blind denier logic. It never dawns on you that the murdered may not appreciate being murdered and those supporting sharia will protect the murderers. I have no idea why people like you despise the murdered so much that you do not oppose abuse of women by sharia law and instead look the other way and pass the buck onto "laws?" You should be ashamed but your denial has even included your conscience. There but for the grace of God go I.

You are just making an idiot of yourself.
Yes, idiot it does occur that murder victims would probably have preferred to not have been murdered.
What is your excuse for abusing women? What is your excuse for abusing truth and decency? What is your excuse for the limited outlook on life?
I do not oppose the freedom you enjoy to spout your bollocks, as long as I have the freedom to call you on it.

The issue of "sharia" is an issue about all religion and the unfortunate right for it to persist in a democracy. I would urge all to abandon the slavery of religion. What's your excuse for the poison you spread on this Forum everyday?

[FlashDangerpants]

A recent analysis of 20 studies over the last 30 years indicates that between 31% and 57% of women have rape fantasies, and these fantasies are frequent or preferred in 9% to 17% of women. Considering that many people are ashamed to report rape fantasies, these stats are most likely lowball figures.

Talk about living in denial! FDP, you win first prize

You are a sad fucked up little man.

You will never find any study that says rape fantasies are used to enable political control, unless you read it on the Onion and are stupid enough to believe that as well. Whatever goes through your mind when you pound your sausage isn't used to control you is it? Why should a bit of harmless bean flicking result in a crazy murderous regime? It isn't very sane to make this sort of absurd leap.

Your fantasy about Sharia law taking hold in the USA is so bad that you read an obvious hoax and believed it true because it offered you wish fulfilment.

You are an oxygen thief.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

One thing that is becoming increasingly obvious is that feminist and progressive women in general secretly crave male dominance. They basically want two kinds of men; one who they boss around and the other who rule over them.

I couldn't understand why so many women look the other way on Muslim attempts to introduce Sharia law into America. Since it openly suppresses women. I can see why men like Obama would like it but why would women not fight it and oppose this advance of Islam into the United States which openly favors Sharia law and subservient women. Hillary even takes money from countries that openly abuse women as a matter of policy. Opposing it would just seem natural. Then it dawned on me that women secretly crave living under a strong man's dominance that Sharia law would provide. The trouble is that being subservient they will no longer have the weak men to dominate anymore. They won't even be let out of the house without supervision. So even though male dominance may appeal to feminist fantasies, once Sharia law sets in the reality may not be as appealing as the fantasy. The feminists may long for traditional American values but those days will be over. America will have become transformed.,

The proplem with labelling yourself as an 'ist' is that you automatically lock yourself in to taking responsibiliy for the actions of others. You also run into problems with your anti-woman tirade with the fact that many males identify themselves as 'feminists'. 'Logic and reason' is the way to go, and you clealy have that in short supply.

[Arising_uk]

...Sharia law supports the abuse of women by traditional American standards. ...

Do you know in some Islamic countries they beat the soles of males who make sexual advances to women in public(if they report them of course), outrageous! It is every American male's right to make sexual advances to a women on the street.

Traditional Americana standards indeedy.

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_ ... ted_States

[Hobbes' Choice]

Hobbes wrote:

Typical blind denier logic. It never dawns on you that the murdered may not appreciate being murdered and those supporting sharia will protect the murderers. I have no idea why people like you despise the murdered so much that you do not oppose abuse of women by sharia law ....

Nick A, is a sick puppy. This is the pr1ck who opens up his thread with this filth "One thing that is becoming increasingly obvious is that feminist and progressive women in general secretly crave male dominance. They basically want two kinds of men; one who they boss around and the other who rule over them"
- then accuses me of no caring about women.

This is exactly the anti-feminist rhetoric that kept the police away from my home when I was a kid, where the daily abuse of my mother was occasioned by the police declaring the situation; "Just another Domestic".

Well fuck Nickodemus and the wrecked, wheezing half-dead donkey he rode in on. It's religious wankers like him the promote hatred and domination of women.
Things have thankfully changed somewhat in the UK since the 1970s, but rest assured that weak minded men Like Nick are ready to start the cycle of abuse all over again.
Feminism is a triumph of human reason, they fight a fight that has to be repeated with each new generation.

[Nick_A]

Hobbes wrote: Nick A, is a sick puppy.

This is the pr1ck who opens up his thread with this filth "One thing that is becoming increasingly obvious is that feminist and progressive women in general secretly crave male dominance. They basically want two kinds of men; one who they boss around and the other who rule over them"
- then accuses me of no caring about women.

Hobbes and the rest of the deniers here can make meaningless rants with the best of them. It is their way of avoiding the question. Why is it that these women who claim to be political activists and feminists support the abuse of women by sharia law through their silence? One explanation is that some women want to be abused so are more tolerant of it. An additional explanation is that some women would sell out their own mothers for a buck and some political fame. Do these deniers have another explanation for the silence directed at abused women caused by Sharia? If so I am yet to read it. All I've read is meaningless ranting normal for the denier's mentality. Those who care about this abuse will rise against it. Those who don't will further the deafening silence as expressed on this thread.

[Arising_uk]

Hobbes and the rest of the deniers here can make meaningless rants with the best of them. It is their way of avoiding the question. Why is it that these women who claim to be political activists and feminists support the abuse of women by sharia law through their silence? ...

Who? As all over the place feminist movements are opposing such things.

You mean your prospective PotUS? If so it'd be a stupid candidate who focused on other countries affairs in such a manner, not least because the American voter gives two tosses about the rest of the world they can barely find it on a map.

One explanation is that some women want to be abused so are more tolerant of it. ...

That's just your wet dream, sounds like you'd love to be a fundamentalist Muslim.

An additional explanation is that some women would sell out their own mothers for a buck and some political fame. ...

Do you level this at male politicians? Why do you put women on a pedestal, mother issues?

Do these deniers have another explanation for the silence directed at abused women caused by Sharia? If so I am yet to read it. All I've read is meaningless ranting normal for the denier's mentality. Those who care about this abuse will rise against it. Those who don't will further the deafening silence as expressed on this thread.

So what are you doing or have you done to rise against it?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Hobbes wrote: Nick A, is a sick puppy.

This is the pr1ck who opens up his thread with this filth "One thing that is becoming increasingly obvious is that feminist and progressive women in general secretly crave male dominance. They basically want two kinds of men; one who they boss around and the other who rule over them"
- then accuses me of no caring about women.

Hobbes and the rest of the deniers here can make meaningless rants with the best of them. It is their way of avoiding the question. Why is it that these women who claim to be political activists and feminists support the abuse of women by sharia law through their silence? One explanation is that some women want to be abused so are more tolerant of it. An additional explanation is that some women would sell out their own mothers for a buck and some political fame. Do these deniers have another explanation for the silence directed at abused women caused by Sharia? If so I am yet to read it. All I've read is meaningless ranting normal for the denier's mentality. Those who care about this abuse will rise against it. Those who don't will further the deafening silence as expressed on this thread.

You don't even bother to read the responses so get stuffed you misogynistic little kristian prik.

[Nick_A]

vege wrote:

You don't even bother to read the responses so get stuffed you misogynistic little kristian prik

.

I haven't read a response. I've only read rants. You are the misogynistic little prik because you don't even have the character to oppose the abuse of women by Sharia. How much more misogynist can one be?