Support NeoGAF

[nampad]

Dude, not female athletes. Female audience. Read the OP.

Thanks for the backseat modding. I was just skimming through it because I had other things to do. Also thought all male contests meant that females just can't compete in certain sports.

It actually doesn't change much of what I said. Without this, probably less people would be aware of the issue.

 

[Mimosa97]

I mean it's a tough decision. Morally they should have let her, but this could be used as a precedent for other cases and cause major controversy.

There's no controversy. Signs that support human rights shouldn't be viewed as political statements. We're talking about basic human rights.

What a bunch of fucking cowards. This woman is my hero.

 

[Ahasverus]

Heartbreaking. Fucking cowards.

 

[Madness]

Because of some posters in this thread mentioned it, going to see the movie Offsides. Absolutely blows my mind that women have to risk beatings, abuse, jail and even possibly death just to dress like men to view soccer matches or enter sporting events in stadiums. The fee tickets they give to women are often given to influential politicians wives or family members and are segregated from the men still. Think about it.

Makes it even crazier that an Iranian/Persian woman has to go to Brazil to view her countrymen play sports something she cannot do in her own country.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Out of curiosity, not that it excuses it, but is there anything in the "rules" for attendees that actually prohibits stuff like this?

 

[Madness]

Out of curiosity, not that it excuses it, but is there anything in the "rules" for attendees that actually prohibits stuff like this?

Yeah. It is big no no. They strongly discourage or ban political statements. Athletes can be fined as do olympic committees for these things and attendees are usually banned from venues or removed. See the third pic as the Brazilian military and Rio officials ask her to remove her front row sign. A lot of people try and unfurl flags during events that will be seen even if athletes aren't competing. After the London 2012 games said there would be no real remembrance for the murder of Israelis during the 72 Munich games a lot of people unfurled Israel flags during key moments of gymnastics or other events if cameras were watching and then would quickly hide them again so they didn't kicked out etc.

 

[subrock]

Not that I think that the message is bad but she had to know that they wouldn't allow that. She'll likely get a Streisand effect by being kicked out anyway. The olympics have just disgusted me this year and this only adds to it.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

One brazilian woman was forced to give up her signpost against what is called a coup by many brazilian. I think that any kind of political statement will be removed, regardless of the content. Basic Human right is a political issue, like being against death penalty in the US.

What is also remarkable about this woman, even if the original message is fine, is the use of the royalist iranian flag. I think it could be link with the Mujahidin of the People, a far left group who was banned and exterminated after the 79 revolution because of their intent to take over and the killing of various ministers of the new regime. They constantly do this kind of actions and use the flag, even if they participate in the '79 revolution. I don't think that most of the GAFers would like them, it's basically a cult around the figure of Maryam Rajavi and her husband.

 

[TheYanger]

Everyone in here saying 'it's not political it's human rights'...c'mon, it IS human rights, but it's also political, I don't think it does any good to pretend that it isn't. There's a lot of change that needs to happen over there, but I don't think the olympic committee is exactly the international body to take Iran to task. At the end of the day, 'no political statements' isn't some new thing they made up to sweep this under the rug, it's been their stance for a long time and this happens to fall under that umbrella. She got her message out, it was received well by supporters over there, that's about all we could ask for when it comes to the olympics.

If it's not obvious, I think the situation over there is abhorrent, I just don't agree with the posts that are asking for them to pretend it's not political - I don't want to see nonsense from the other side represented at the Olympics either, that door should just remain shut. It's not about placating Iran, it's about not having the Olympics turn into a gigantic mess of signs and protests and bullshit, to me at that point you're basically saying "Hey, I just don't want the Olympics to exist".

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Yeah. It is big no no. They strongly discourage or ban political statements. Athletes can be fined as do olympic committees for these things and attendees are usually banned from venues or removed. See the third pic as the Brazilian military and Rio officials ask her to remove her front row sign. A lot of people try and unfurl flags during events that will be seen even if athletes aren't competing. After the London 2012 games said there would be no real remembrance for the murder of Israelis during the 72 Munich games a lot of people unfurled Israel flags during key moments of gymnastics or other events if cameras were watching and then would quickly hide them again so they didn't kicked out etc.

That's what I sorta figured.

If they didn't allow the Munich rememberances, there's no way this would fly.

 

[Parham]

From what I can tell, the Shah really wasn't much better for the Iranian people. He was just more secular.

A significant number of Iranians, especially those who migrated to the West after 1979, like the Shah. I agree with your general sentiment that protestors traded one dictator for another that happens to be much worse. I'm both surprised and disappointed by the number of otherwise sane family members and Iranian friends who defend the Shah's oppressive policies and practices. I chalk a lot of it up to them having disproportionately benefited from his reign.

One brazilian woman was forced to give up her signpost against what is called a coup by many brazilian. I think that any kind of political statement will be removed, regardless of the content. Basic Human right is a political issue, like being against death penalty in the US.

What is also remarkable about this woman, even if the original message is fine, is the use of the royalist iranian flag. I think it could be link with the Mujahidin of the People, a far left group who was banned and exterminated after the 79 revolution because of their intent to take over and the killing of various ministers of the new regime. They constantly do this kind of actions and use the flag, even if they participate in the '79 revolution. I don't think that most of the GAFers would like them, it's basically a cult around the figure of Maryam Rajavi and her husband.

The Shir o Khorshid flag is more evocative of the Qajar and Pahlavi dynasty than the Mujahedin. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen anyone use that flag in context of the MEK, considering they took up arms against the Shah.

 

[joedan]

Egyptian refuses to shake hands with Israeli in judo competion: "Keep politics out of the Olympics!"
Iranian protests against treatment of Iranian women at olympics: "You go girl!"

Seems like people's opinion on whether 'politics' should be on display at the Olympic games isn't a matter of principle but a matter of what side of the politics they're on.

 

[Always-honest]

So sad to see women held back in so many countries.
All countries that i don't even want to visit because of it.
Disgusting how some really retardedly insecure sad men hold those countries hostage.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Egyptian refuses to shake hands with Israeli in judo competion: "Keep politics out of the Olympics!"
Iranian protests against treatment of Iranian women at olympics: "You go girl!"

Seems like people's opinion on whether 'politics' should be on display at the Olympic games isn't a matter of principle but a matter of what side of the politics they're on.

Ha, true. The human rights argument could be easily be leveled against Israelis as a reason for not wanting to engage them.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

The Shir o Khorshid flag is more evocative of the Qajar and Pahlavi dynasty than the Mujahedin. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen anyone use that flag in context of the MEK, considering they took up arms against the Shah.

They are constantly using it:

 

[Funky Papa]

What is Jordan like in terms of human rights?

Much worse than Iceland, heaps and bounds above Saudi Arabia.

It's far for ideal but at least they aren't hanging gay people from construction cranes or using eye for an eye as a tenet of their judicial system.

 

[TatteredHat]

The Olympics are trash and so is the Islamic Republic of Iran, poor woman.

 

[Parham]

They are constantly using it:

Interesting! Given that photo, I don't really think we can assume she identifies with a specific anti-Islamic Republic group. I've seen a lot of supporters of the Shah, as well as others who oppose the current regime, wave the flag proudly and, as you evidenced here, the Mujahedin do so as well. At the same time, I don't think these groups would be particularly fond of each other in almost any other context.

 

[G.ZZZ]

Egyptian refuses to shake hands with Israeli in judo competion: "Keep politics out of the Olympics!"
Iranian protests against treatment of Iranian women at olympics: "You go girl!"

Seems like people's opinion on whether 'politics' should be on display at the Olympic games isn't a matter of principle but a matter of what side of the politics they're on.

Pretty much. Typical "the west is the only thing that exist and matter" mindset.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

Interesting! Given that photo, I don't really think we can assume she identifies with a specific anti-Islamic Republic group. I've seen a lot of supporters of the Shah, as well as others who oppose the current regime, wave the flag proudly and, as you evidenced here, the Mujahedin do so as well. At the same time, I don't think these groups would be particularly fond of each other in almost any other context.

Yes it's true, but the Mujahedin are very active in these kind of mediatic action, and promoting secularism in Iran. It's pretty contradictory with the fact that it's originally an islamist group.

 

[LegendofJoe]

Persian women are beautiful. I will either be old or dead by the time that women in Iran are liberated from the shackles of religion. It sucks, it makes the world a more ugly place. But in the meantime I fully support women like this, they're doing God's work because no god that is truly just would condone women being treated as 2nd class citizens.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

Persian women are beautiful. I will either be old or dead by the time that women in Iran are liberated from the shackles of religion. It sucks, it makes the world a more ugly place. But in the meantime I fully support women like this, they're doing God's work because no god that is truly just would condone women being treated as 2nd class citizens.

Most of the clerics in Iran are against the official establishment and lot of them were killed or cannot go outside their house. A lot of them are against these kind of discriminatory rule, the most famous and most liberal is Ayatollah Sanaei . He live in Iran but from Iran you cannot access his website for obvious reason.

Even Ahmadinejad tried to lift the ban on stadium and the grand leader was like "nope."

 

[Royal_Phalanx]

Europe should encourage secular Iranians to emigrate and make it easier for them to do so. They should do the same for secular Turks.

 

[Beer Monkey]

Also, this story reminded me of that time when Turkey banned men from the stadiums

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...-men-and-letting-41000-women-in-for-free.html

See the film Mustang, one of the best of the year.

 

[Messofanego]

This reminds me of Mustang, but the other way around...

See the film Mustang, one of the best of the year.

Great minds

For anyone who's interested, there's a great movie called Offside by Jafar Panahi that is based on this issue. The story is, of course, fictional, but has a basis in reality.

Yup, was gonna bring this up.

Darya Safai, keep fighting the good fight.

 

[perfectchaos007]

The olympics has a zero tolerance policy for anything politics related. Honestly it's for the best, even if in this case the woman is fighting for a good cause.

 

[Messofanego]

"Olympics is no place for politics"

So why wasn't this beautiful gay marriage proposal between Brazil's rugby player Isadora Cerullo and her gf Marjorie Enya immediately stopped and kicked out by security?

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...-althete-to-get-marriage-proposal-at-olympics

 

[Rich!]

"Olympics is no place for politics"

So why wasn't this beautiful gay marriage proposal between Brazil's rugby player Isadora Cerullo and her gf Marjorie Enya immediately stopped and kicked out by security?

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...-althete-to-get-marriage-proposal-at-olympics

Because that isn't politics, it's an expression of human love. No country or government is involved.

 

[Piecake]

Violating human rights isn't a political view. The Olympics are run by cowards.

They are run by greedy fucks who don't give a shit about human rights, unity, and tolerance or any of those ideals that they claim they uphold.

Everyone should watch the Real Sports episode by Bryant Gumble on the Olympics. Fucking destroys them

 

[Messofanego]

Because that isn't politics, it's an expression of human love. No country or government is involved.

Gay marriage is still politics in most countries, just like women's rights are here. This is happening in Brazil, not Iran. Why adhere to their oppressive regime? By that, you are undoubtedly showing your political hand.

 

[Matt]

"Olympics is no place for politics"

So why wasn't this beautiful gay marriage proposal between Brazil's rugby player Isadora Cerullo and her gf Marjorie Enya immediately stopped and kicked out by security?

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...-althete-to-get-marriage-proposal-at-olympics

One was a message specifically aimed at the government of Iran, the other was a simple interaction between two people. Not really the same thing.

 

[walking fiend]

Sadly the majority of the muslim world is probably against her views, and a statement like hers is considered provocative and subversive. A western nation not removing her sign it would be probably be seen as a provocation of the west that can't respect the sovereignity of islamic states when they do things that are wanted by the majority but disliked by western people (like re-employing the death penalty or having penalties for apostasy and all that jazz), but don't do anything when minorities provocative views are expressed. Same thing as statues being covered and all that jazz. You can't reason with those kind of views. Just ignore them and wait for them to come around, else you just give ammunition to nationalism.

I mean, in a "western" country like the US, you have like what, 30% of the people outright supporting Donald Trump? I don't think people actually realize how regressive the average person in less socially evolved states is. Sad things all around.

WOW! How ignorant can you be?

Can you even pin point Iran on the map?

 

[platocplx]

The Olympics should allow for political statements. Let the world decide how they should take it. I hate that we use sports to distract us from human things rather than making it a bridge to being more human.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

WOW! How ignorant can you be?

Can you even pin point Iran on the map?

Almost every muslim country don't have any problem allowing women in soccer stadium but, hey, he know more about muslims than muslims themselves and we should be grateful that we can benefit from his expertise.
Even Saudi Arabia allow women to do so now, and have a national feminine team.

 

[Messofanego]

One was a message specifically aimed at the government of Iran, the other was a simple interaction between two people. Not really the same thing.

So what if it's aimed at Iran? How much is Iran bankrolling the Olympics that the Olympics in Brazil has to abide by Iranian politics? I'm pointing out the hypocrisy with what the Olympics allows, in terms of politics. Gay marriage is legal in Brazil since 2004. But if it wasn't, such a display would be banned because it'd be viewed as a political action. Everything is politics. Just that the Olympics cherry picks which politics it's cool with.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

"Olympics is no place for politics"

So why wasn't this beautiful gay marriage proposal between Brazil's rugby player Isadora Cerullo and her gf Marjorie Enya immediately stopped and kicked out by security?

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...-althete-to-get-marriage-proposal-at-olympics

Surely you can see the difference here for yourself.

 

[soco]

Sounds like more IOC bullshit. There was a Real Sports episode where they claimed athletes were banned from even using certain words during the games themselves on social media, let they be thrown out.

 

[Siegcram]

The IOC is a joke.

 

[BajiBoxer]

Hmm...yeah since they formed it in the 70's with overwhelming popular support...they do deserve it

Just like russians deserve Putin for supporting him overwhelmingly

Don't be stupid.

 

[G.ZZZ]

WOW! How ignorant can you be?

Can you even pin point Iran on the map?

As a volunteer worker i have worked with and helped a lot of Iranian students and postdocs that live here. They were all progressive and advanced in their views and no one of the women that i worked with ever used the veil (despite them telling me that they use it back in Iran), just to make an example. That said, those are middle class or even rich students from big cities that had the opportunity to come and study in europe.
I don't think you realize how backwards the majority of the population are, in any country on earth, and a lot of that is because of inescapable dynamics like the reality that morality tend to move faster than the average person can accept it. America has a good 30% that wholeheartedly support Trump, and it's one of the countries with the most advanced LGBT rights in the world. Most european nations have about half of the population that are against hosting refugees, for a variety of reasons, and a Great Britain majority just voted against EU itself and for isolationism. Rural area in Turkeys overwhelmingly voted for someone like Erdogan, which has aggressively regressive views on women and civil rights. And that's Turkey, which is probably the most culturally advanced muslim nation alongside Iran (i don't know near as many Turks as i do Iranian people though, but i have always loved the country and studied its history, sad that i won't be going there for a while with the current situation).

Assuming the point of view of middle class educated people in cities is representative of the majority of the opinions of a country is the same mistake leftist made in the last fifty years in Europe and the US and that made them progressively lose relevance, if not completely obliterated them politically and socially speaking. The majority of people is dumb and think with their guts, you have to consider them in any political discourse in democracies, because their votes count and they can make life terrible for minorities and women.

Almost every muslim country don't have any problem allowing women in soccer stadium but, hey, he know more about muslims than muslims themselves and we should be grateful that we can benefit from his expertise.
Even Saudi Arabia allow women to do so now, and have a national feminine team.

You're still talking about fundamentally segregated nations. I suggest you also drop the pretense tipical of left-wing intellectualism that totally ignore the reality of population dynamics and the awfulness of the general public opinions. Accepting those realities and understanding why they exist is a better way to try and address the issues in it.

If you think that i'm saying what i do from a position of prejudice toward muslim or muslim nations, you couldn't be further away from the truth. I am not offended that you do though. It's common for people to be so conditioned from their immanent reality that they can't see the larger picture and can't address it properly.

 

[Matt]

So what if it's aimed at Iran? How much is Iran bankrolling the Olympics that the Olympics in Brazil has to abide by Iranian politics? I'm pointing out the hypocrisy with what the Olympics allows, in terms of politics. Gay marriage is legal in Brazil since 2004. But if it wasn't, such a display would be banned because it'd be viewed as a political action. Everything is politics. Just that the Olympics cherry picks which politics it's cool with.

Again, two people getting engaged is not an inherently political message. A sign that says "the government of Iran, change your policies" is ONLY a political message.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

You're still talking about fundamentally segregated nations. I suggest you also drop the pretense tipical of left-wing intellectualism that totally ignore the reality of population dynamics and the awfulness of the general public opinions. Accepting those realities and understanding why they exist is a better way to try and address the issues in it.

If you think that i'm saying what i do from a position of prejudice toward muslim or muslim nations, you couldn't be further away from the truth. I am not offended that you do though. It's common for people to be so conditioned from their immanent reality that they can't see the larger picture and can't address it properly.

Thanks you for your suggestion.

Sexual separation is not necessarily a prejudice against women and we can see these kind of things even in the West, with separate gym or women only cab or the like.

Nothing to do with actual prejudice like prohibiting women to attend football game or driving a car. We can like it or hate it, but it's would be more based on culturals idiosyncrasies or one worldview.

Being a muslim myself and having traveled in some muslims countries, i can say that to think that most of muslims would be scandalized by the idea that a woman attend to a football game is just dead wrong. A general indifference about the issue is what you are more likely to receive.

 

[Royal_Phalanx]

Knew a practicing Muslim who said that homophobes were a bunch of morons and needed education, for instance. I'm sure such progressive views are more common than people think in the middle and upper classes of the Middle East. All the Iranians I've met are very progressive and liberal. Same with all the Turks I've met. Problem is that the poor, rural people hate this sort of thing with a passion, which is why Erdogan gets so much support there. You can also see it in Europe and America, like in the UK where just under half of the people want the death penalty back, for example.

 

[rrvv]

I dont understand why people think that taking down a political sign = IOC SUPPORT WOMAN OPPRESSION! Unless you know, IOC start banning woman in competition.

Is first and foremost a sport event and not place for political debate/riot.

 

[G.ZZZ]

Thanks you for your suggestion.

Sexual separation is not necessarily a prejudice against women and we can see these kind of things even in the West, with separate gym or women only cab or the like.

Nothing to do with actual prejudice like prohibiting women to attend to football stadium.

Being a muslim myself and having traveled in some muslims countries, i can say that to think that most of muslims would be scandalized by the idea that a woman attend to a football game is just dead wrong. A general indifference about the issue is what you are more likely to receive.

I don't personally agree. Big cities ones? Sure. Actual majority? I wouldn't be so sure. The official numbers for people that support sharia in Tunisia is in the high 50%. Support for death penalty for Apostasy is around 30%. I never knew a single Tunisian dude that would even care about apostasy. Or think about it as a significant thing, really. I don't think that any of them were the kind that wanted sharia laws either, but that is such a vague statements that it's hard to actually say something about it.

Religious autorities still hold significant power and sway over public's opinion in many countries and governements all over the worlds have often compromised with them or tried to avoid conflicts with them as much as possible to mantain stability.
To cite a recent case for Iran, while its president was on a visit here in Italy, we covered all the classical statues depicting the nude human body to avoid any possible animosity between the political leaders and the top religious authorities that could have attacked him if he were to be seen alongside said statues (especially since, as far as my understanding go, the current leader is a fair bit more progressive than its predecessors and as such not as liked by the religious authorities). Would most Iranians have cared? They probably wouldn't , but this doesn't deny that said religious authorities still hold a signifcant sway over the general populace's opinion.
Speaking about SA, it's impossible not to talk about the Salafist derive of the country after the attack on the holy Mecca by Juhayaman and what was essentially trading civil rights to placate civil unrests from the population. Cinemas were closed, the veil became mandatory again, etc... and it worked.
Turkey is another case that right now is descending into religious nationalism and may pass significant regressive legislation regarding women and civil rights. And Erdogan still retain , for now, the majority of the population's support. How much of that is fabricated or real is another question, i guess.


In short, i'm never giving the benefit of doubts to those things. That's how disasters happen to be honest.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

I don't personally agree. Big cities ones? Sure. Actual majority? I wouldn't be so sure. The official numbers for people that support sharia in Tunisia is in the high 50%. Support for death penalty for Apostasy is around 30%. I never knew a single Tunisian dude that would even care about apostasy. Or think about it as a significant thing, really. I don't think that any of them were the kind that wanted sharia laws either, but that is such a vague statements that it's hard to actually say something about it.

Religious autorities still hold significant power and sway over public's opinion in many countries and governements all over the worlds have often compromised with them or tried to avoid conflicts with them as much as possible to mantain stability.
To cite a recent case for Iran, while its president was on a visit here in Italy, we covered all the classical statues depicting the nude human body to avoid any possible animosity between the political leaders and the top religious authorities that could have attacked him if he were to be seen alongside said statues (especially since, as far as my understanding go, the current leader is a fair bit more progressive than its predecessors and as such not as liked by the religious authorities). Would most Iranians have cared? They probably wouldn't , but this doesn't deny that said religious authorities still hold a signifcant sway over the general populace's opinion.
Speaking about SA, it's impossible not to talk about the Salafist derive of the country after the attack on the holy Mecca by Juhayaman and what was essentially trading civil rights to placate civil unrests from the population. Cinemas were closed, the veil became mandatory again, etc... and it worked.
Turkey is another case that right now is descending into religious nationalism and may pass significant regressive legislation regarding women and civil rights. And Erdogan still retain , for now, the majority of the population's support. How much of that is fabricated or real is another question, i guess.


In short, i'm never giving the benefit of doubts to those things. That's how disasters happen to be honest.

Saudi Arabia was funded by the salafist movement, so it doesn't make sense to speak about a salafi derive. Their funding movement killed tens of thousands of muslims deemed by them as heretical.

Supporting Shari'a law don't have anything to do with prohibiting women to enter in stadium. If you go in same US state and ask "do you think the Bible should be the primary source of law", you will get equivalent number.

Because what muslims understand by "shari'a law" is significantly different from how westerner understand it. For many people, it mean the end of the corruption and justice.

Ottoman Empire was ruled by shari'a law and here it's what an English woman would get from her travel in the 18th century:

“As to women, as many, if not more than men, are to be seen in the streets [i.e. going about their daily activities, etc] […] I think I never saw a country where women may enjoy so much liberty, and free from all reproach, as in Turkey […] The Turks in their conduct towards our sex are an example to all other nations; […] and I repeat it, sir, I think no women have so much liberty, safe from apprehension, as the Turkish – and I think them in their manner of living, capable of being the happiest creatures breathing.”

– Lady Elizabeth Craven, A Journey Through the Crimea to Constantinople, 1789

Source

The issue about apostasy is also very difficult to grasp, even if i don't deny that there are some group which is pushing it. And when you have international preacher who is telling you all day long that the apostate must be killed in Islam and believing otherwise is apostasy, it's pretty difficult to go against that.Also it's associated with other ideas that make the ruler as an apostate if he is not applying the shari'a law.
Anyway it could be easily ruled out from a shari'a perspective and many scholars did.

As in Turkey, since the AKP is in power women have actually more right since they can choose what they are wearing when they go to university. The declarations of Erdogan are not law binding in Turkey and many AKP member, especially women, wrote against it.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Saudi Arabia was funded by the salafist movement, so it doesn't make sense to speak about a salafi derive. Their funding movement killed tens of thousands of muslims deemed by them as heretical.

Supporting Shari'a law don't have anything to do with prohibiting women to enter in stadium. If you go in same US state and ask "do you think the Bible should be the primary source of law", you will get equivalent number.

Because what muslims understand by "shari'a law" is significantly different from how westerner understand it. For many people, it mean the end of the corruption and justice.

Ottoman Empire was ruled by shari'a law and here it's what an English woman would get from her travel in the 18th century:

“As to women, as many, if not more than men, are to be seen in the streets [i.e. going about their daily activities, etc] […] I think I never saw a country where women may enjoy so much liberty, and free from all reproach, as in Turkey […] The Turks in their conduct towards our sex are an example to all other nations; […] and I repeat it, sir, I think no women have so much liberty, safe from apprehension, as the Turkish – and I think them in their manner of living, capable of being the happiest creatures breathing.”

– Lady Elizabeth Craven, A Journey Through the Crimea to Constantinople, 1789

Source

The issue about apostasy is also very difficult to grasp, even if i don't deny that there are some group which is pushing it. Because it's associated with other ideas that make the ruler as an apostate if he is not applying the shari'a law.
Anyway it could be easily ruled out from a shari'a perspective and many scholars did.

Yeah, Ottoman Turkey sure was a model of peace and tolerance.

Tons of "justice" going around.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

Yeah, Ottoman Turkey sure was a model of peace and tolerance.

There is a consensus among historians to say that it's the best place to be in Europe if you are a religious minority in the 15th-19th century.
Anyone who actually have visited Istanbul know that you have literally churches everywhere, and many of them were built in the Ottoman era. You can go everywhere in Ottoman controlled part of the world and see that the religious places were preserved.
The actual massacre-inducing homogenization of the muslims nation-state came after, with arab and turk nationalism.

 

[Madness]

Egyptian refuses to shake hands with Israeli in judo competion: "Keep politics out of the Olympics!"
Iranian protests against treatment of Iranian women at olympics: "You go girl!"

Seems like people's opinion on whether 'politics' should be on display at the Olympic games isn't a matter of principle but a matter of what side of the politics they're on.

Ha, true. The human rights argument could be easily be leveled against Israelis as a reason for not wanting to engage them.

Pretty much. Typical "the west is the only thing that exist and matter" mindset.

Except the woman was removed from the venue and the sign came down. The Egyptian was an athlete competing and didn't show sportsmanship. Also, there is a giant difference between a woman who is not allowed to enter a stadium holding a sign at a volleyball game asking to allow women to watch games in stadiums versus an Egypyian athlete literally refusing to shake the hand of a Jew because he is from Israel. Both events are political and both events were discussed.

Not every thread needs 'whataboutism'.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

There is a consensus among historians to say that it's the best place to be in Europe if you are a religious minority in the 15th-19th century.
Anyone who actually have visited Istanbul know that you have literally churches everywhere, and many of them were built in the Ottoman era. You can go everywhere in Ottoman controlled part of the world and see that the religious places were preserved.
The actual massacre-inducing homogenization of the muslims nation-state came after, with arab and turk nationalism.

Yeah, Ottoman Turkey was a great place. The 320 years of oppression that people like the Greeks faced were just lovely. Having to pay tribute of a child? Oooh that was great. Churches were left standing, but new ones were rarely built so there would be enough room for mosques. That was awesome too. And all the churches confiscated and converted into mosques. That was neat. Of course there were all the Muslim apostates to Christianity who were put to death as well. Great stuff there. Heavy taxation on the Christian population reducing most of us to subsistence farmers? Loved that part.

And the Armenian women, yeah shari'a sure got them justice! Three centuries of oppression topped off by the genocide of three separate groups. Damn, I wish I lived there.

Maybe it was the best shithole in a continent of shitholes, but let's drop the lionizing of the damn place.