I happened upon a few tweenage girls in Harvard Yard, closely supervised by some adults. The tweenagers were wearing full Islamic covering, with only faces and hands exposed. To this traditional outfit they had pulled over additional T-shirts reading “Well Behaved Women Rarely Make History”.
(The adult women were also fully covered, but not wearing add-on T-shirts.)
Was there a contradiction here? Being modestly covered would be considered “behaving well”, I think. A Harvard graduate friend said that there was no contradiction: “Muslim dress is superior. Men can’t objectify women so easily. She will be assessed more fairly on characteristics other than her appearance.”
To “be assessed more fairly on characteristics other than her appearance”, she could be wearing a T-shirt that simply reads E = m c^2.
By what logic will she “be assessed more fairly on characteristics other than her appearance”? If men can’t see what interests them most, they are likely to just summarily dismiss the person as not worth romantic engagement. That might be rational for a woman not interested in romantically engaging with men. But women who like men give themselves a fairer chance by giving men a reasonable sense of what they have to offer in areas that particularly interest men.
I’m guessing you haven’t parented a teenager.
The Arabian Nights, the Iliad of the Islamic world, starts as a tale of cuckolded princes and kings.
Burton’s translation is bawdy enough thst it had to be privately published.
“Know, then, O my brother,” rejoined Shah Zaman, “that when thou sentest thy Wazir with the invitation to place myself between thy hands, I made ready and marched out of my city; but presently I minded me having left behind me in the palace a string of jewels intended as a gift to thee. I returned for it alone and found my wife on my carpet-bed and in the arms of a hideous black cook. So I slew the twain and came to thee, yet my thoughts brooded over this business and I lost my bloom and became weak. But excuse me if I still refuse to tell thee what was the reason of my complexion returning.” Shahryar shook his head, marvelling with extreme marvel, and with the fire of wrath flaming up from his heart, he cried, “Indeed, the malice of woman is mighty!” Then he took refuge from them with Allah and said, “In very sooth, O my brother, thou hast escaped many an evil by putting thy wife to death,and right excusable were thy wrath and grief for such mishap which never yet befel crowned King like thee. By Allah, had the case been mine, I would not have been satisfied without slaying a thousand women and that way madness lies! But now praise be to Allah who hath tempered to thee thy tribulation, and needs must thou acquaint me with that which so suddenly restored to thee complexion and health, and explain to me what causeth this concealment.”
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/51252.epub.noimages
Mememe – yikes!
We want women in burga because they charge less. We want similar things of men, of course. And we do want slaves because they cost even less!
Some silly PR-aware economists in the 20th century claimed that slavery could not possibly be profitable in a modern society. Like, really? How about letting them starve for an idea: just ask Khmer Rouge. So I’ve heard otherwise, which is not to say that slavery is moral: Google is your friend.
Who wants more women in burqa? The same progressives who prefer more illegals. Vote for a slave-owner democrat for the Congress in 2018!