Hard talk?! Lol....I get it.

.

I already know the pornography industry preys on young women with esteem and or money issues who often don't consider the life long ramifications. Khalifa, however, knew she was asking for extra trouble by wearing a hijab in a porno, and should have known religious zealots wouldn't be amused. I'm not excusing those who threatened her, just pointing out that she should have known portraying a devout Muslim woman in that way is almost as intentionally provocative as doing pornography in black face. She didn't say "no" because she didn't want to end her career, not because she was forced or coerced. She knew it wasn't smart before she did it.

I'm glad she at least says she accepts 100% of the responsibility, as she said, it was totally her choice. Sadly, the rest of what she said was assigning the responsibility to others and playing dumb. What 21 year old thinks making professional pornography is going to stay secret, especially the kind she made? She now wants to force actors (or maybe just actresses) to have any contract approved by a lawyer before signing, with a 3 day cooling off period? Good luck. If they only make $1000 per shoot, how are they supposed to pay an attorney $1000 to review their contracts?

I don't see any evidence of that. Sure it definitely does happen, but it's equally ignorant to say that this kid is miserable simply because .... what? she's got a dress (and maybe a hijab... can't tell from the crappy low res video ) and is standing beside an older man?

I have a few French friends, and as I see it there's quite a fundamental cultural difference at play here. I'll do my best to explain it, although I don't fully understand it myself.

There's a very fundamental French principle of equality that's considered as sacred as American freedom of speech. It means that when you're French, you're French, and explicitly not a member of a sub-culture. I heard about this when they banned wearing a hijab (I think) in schools: the children are French first, and must comply by French norms above others.

The French government have fought very hard to fight the foundation of religious and ethnic sub-cultures within France. This is obviously very different to the American approach of embracing your heritage and, just as Freedom of Speech has unwanted side-effects, so does this. The players are French, not African. Their cultural past was indeed wiped when they became French (at birth or otherwise). Yes, they're of African descent, but that's considered very different to being African.

Now, it's fair enough to argue the the American approach is better, but I think it's important to understand that this is not the French approach. There is a fundamental cultural difference there, and without understanding that, you're going to miss the point of their argument.

I wonder if we have VSers wearing hijabs on VS.

I don't personally have an issue with hijabs,niqabs, or burkas. I do object to women being forced to wear them in countries that practice Sharia or if the husband is forcing them to.

I do think that for identification purposes, you should at least be able to see the face. This would be on an official document proving identity (license,passport) and, if detained, the law enforcement official should be allowed to match the identification. This would really only apply to the burka/niqab, since those obscure the face heavily.

I think the crux is the sense of right and wrong. A victim in Europe has the authorities on her side, whereas a victim in extremely conservative societies has the authorities against her side. (Not just in Islam - there's a lot of slut-shaming that goes on in super churchy crowds).

I'm not sure of the specific distribution of circumstances either. I haven't heard of any European rapes perpetrated specifically as an attack/punishment for perceived improper/unacceptable dress or social norms.
I think people in the west look at the motivations differently. Not sure if the varying motivations/circumstances make much (if any) difference to the victims - although at least one circumstance is a tad safer (eg. such as, what do you do if someone runs by and rips off your hijab - in one society, you could get raped and sent to jail if someone sees you like that... in the other society, nothing.).

Regarding the video, the guy is telling it how it is... but without any sense of scope. Yeah, these things happened. But, there are millions of immigrants, it's not as if all of them participated. It also omits rape and mistreatment that anti-immigrant natives have done to immigrants (which, likewise, it's not as if all anti-immigrant natives participated).
This is all an exercise in branding. You might as well say that white people are thieves because a white guy robbed a 7-11, or all gun owners are dangerous because a dude shot up a place.

-scheherazade

Knowledge and personal choices don't work the way you want them to, Doug. People hear things and then it processes as logical or illogical -- and beyond that it is not intrinsically associated with action, let alone revolutionizing the world. (I love you, man.)

Action may occur, but that is associated with predetermined tendencies in an individual's mind. I see life as being like stuck in a mandelbrot set (except even more fucked with chaos and shit): You want to get over to one cluster, but you're quickly swept up in the pattern of c, c² + c, (c²+c)² + c, ((c² + c)² +c)² + c, (((c² + c)² + c)² + c. You want to be rational but it is not easily accomplished; perhaps even a complete impossibility. Your truth is only truly applicable to your location in the set and you will never be able to reach the other areas of the set to deliver the truth.

Similar to any fractal, visualized or unvisualized complex mathematical set, there is truth, but the truth that serves one series of nodes (people, regions, cultures, education levels), does not consistently serve or do justice for another node, even if it is the truth. Your truth may be met with hostility or confusion.

One example I can think of in real life is the inconsistency between the western civilization node and the eastern civilization node, wherein we have learned through logic and historical context, that the rights of one people should extend to all people, men and women; yet for some, religious belief is so ingrained within the human brain, it creates a node where they see their restricted freedom as a freedom itself -- I speak of the hijab. This is where truth fractals and the pattern of determinism is becomes more readily apparent. Women in hijabs find it difficult to excercise in a standard hijab, so someone, in an effort to promote healthy lives in Muslim communities, invented a sports hijab -- like the sports bra of the Middle East. Those within the node wherein Islam is true, see this as empowering; while those outside that node, see only restriction to women's rights: confusion. Regardless of how logical you may state it from outside the pattern, it will not serve as truth in the way it serves you in your own ever evolving, shifting node.

The way that I see it is, we live in a biological nightmare where freedom is only an illusion. You'll run around like a wind up toy until you're dead. Everything that is and will be is a series of things fucking with other things; exploding in rage, or taking it solemnly up the ass. But but but -- no, sorry, that's why you don't give a fuck. You found the secret of life -- the true enlightenment that harmony is disorder and that free will is a lie. Enjoy it because it is and ever will be.

Your video, Ann Coulter: Muslim Women Should be Imprisoned For Hijab!, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 2 Badge!

I can't remember the last time I saw images from London without Hijabs and blacks. London is at least 30% nonwhite, but you wouldn't know it from this clip or from pictures of the cleanup.
>> ^peggedbea:

>> ^Pprt:
It's so... white. Are we sure this is London?

also, who in the FUCK upvoted this comment?!?!?! jesus christ.

At first I was all like "damn, why's she talking to Oxford students like they're kids?"

And then it zoomed out and I was like "damn, so many hijab-covered girls!"

edit: Seriously though, seeing underage girls in hijabs (or any of these) makes me cringe.

>> ^hpqp:

>> ^Yogi:
>> ^hpqp:
>> ^Yogi:
I like the idea of governments in the 2000's deciding people can no longer have a culture. Good for them...hey next maybe you should ban any sort of national identity.

Yeah, it's like how in Spain the great latino-macho culture is being suppressed by stricter you-can't-beat-up-your-wife laws...

That kinda proves my point...just because a woman wears a burka doesn't mean it's not their choice or that they're getting beaten every night. Last I checked not too many Spainish women wear burkas.
There's a lot of misinformation and reactionary BS going around these days. I say you let them do what they want unless they're hurting someone...forcing society into a dress code is stupid.

...or how to miss the satirical point entirely.
There are some elements of a people's/religion's "culture" that we should be eagerly trying to be rid of. While I agree that this is above all a populist legislation, especially when it is by far not the worst religion has to "offer" in the west (e.g. why are there no laws banning circumcision on minors?), it does not hamper a muslim woman's capacity of showing her religious affiliation: nothing prevents her from wearing a hijab.
As for all the apologists in the room, can you think of any reason why a woman would want to be covered from head to toe in sacloth? Now can you think of a reason that does not have to do with:
a) hiding a hideous difformity, or
b) submitting to the (patriarchal) rule of bronze-age customs?


See that's the point...we meddle and we don't have a right to says River Tam. I bet you don't go to other countries and tell the natives what they're doing wrong, this is the same it's ethnocentric and just plain wrong. The government shouldn't be telling people how to dress, they should fuck off.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^hpqp:
>> ^Yogi:
I like the idea of governments in the 2000's deciding people can no longer have a culture. Good for them...hey next maybe you should ban any sort of national identity.

Yeah, it's like how in Spain the great latino-macho culture is being suppressed by stricter you-can't-beat-up-your-wife laws...

That kinda proves my point...just because a woman wears a burka doesn't mean it's not their choice or that they're getting beaten every night. Last I checked not too many Spainish women wear burkas.
There's a lot of misinformation and reactionary BS going around these days. I say you let them do what they want unless they're hurting someone...forcing society into a dress code is stupid.


...or how to miss the satirical point entirely.

There are some elements of a people's/religion's "culture" that we should be eagerly trying to be rid of. While I agree that this is above all a populist legislation, especially when it is by far not the worst religion has to "offer" in the west (e.g. why are there no laws banning circumcision on minors?), it does not hamper a muslim woman's capacity of showing her religious affiliation: nothing prevents her from wearing a hijab.

As for all the apologists in the room, can you think of any reason why a woman would want to be covered from head to toe in sacloth? Now can you think of a reason that does not have to do with:

a) hiding a hideous difformity, or
b) submitting to the (patriarchal) rule of bronze-age customs?

I looked all over the sift and found nothing about Nidal Hassan, the treasonous Ft. Hood vermin. While premeditated murder is fine for the left, I guess loud, harsh language is simply too much for sensitive, politically-correct ears.

Once again, CAIR is playing liberals like a kanoon.

Sure, there were a few yahoos in every group; there are currently 100,000 in Wisconsin.

Those poor women in hijabs are in far more in danger of being "honor" killed by their fathers and brothers than by these protestors.

http://thereligionofpeace.com/

sharia law is for slaves and fools.