124
Iranian in UK flees to Israel after pulling off headscarves
(www.middleeastmonitor.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2024
124 points (91.3% liked)
World News
39032 readers
2215 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
You can hide behind whatever rule you'd like. I've been more civil in my replies than your remarks call for. And it's pretty clear in my unedited comments for everyone to see. Knock yourself out with whatever rule you need to hide behind, in order to avoid having an honest look at your own beliefs and biases.
As I suggested at the beginning, what you are looking for is not a discussion, it's a person to berate. All you do is keep proving it.
However, I will indulge you:
I could point you to multiple different posts I have made where I have shown that it is clear that multiple ethnicities of people in different parts of the world are Muslims and they practice Islam in different ways.
Those posts were in response to two misogynists claiming that Muslim women who did not wear headscarves were either sinners or not Muslims.
One of them also said Iranians are Arabs.
And yet rather than attack them for their misogyny and one of them for saying something that really is racist, you attack me for daring to suggest that maybe an Iranian woman is a Muslim because we don't know what she claims her religion is right now.
Just amazing.
I'd stick around and wait for your criticisms of their posts, but you've latched on to hating me and once you're on that hate teat, I know how hard it is to let go.
I don't 'hate' you, you're just a commenter on Lemmy. I pointed out the obvious bigotry in your assumption of the woman being Muslim because she's Iranian, despite the article making it clear she was harassing Muslim women. And you have done absolutely zero to dispell that conclusion. Assuming that my criticism is 'hate' just makes it clear that you're unwilling to examine your own ideas from a critical perspective. Criticizing the civility of my comments reinforces the same conclusion. I've been very matter of fact, criticizing the substance of what you've written. I haven't made any personal attacks as far as I can see. But you just keep doing the holier than thou thing.
Pointing to other bigoted comments doesn't change the bigotry in your assumption, it just points to even more bigoted assumptions. Yeah, yours is more nuanced, but a more nuanced bigotry doesn't mean it's not bigotry.
Again, you assumed an Iranian woman is Muslim despite the article making it clear she was being bigoted against other muslim women. Ask yourself why you made that assumption if not because in your view, Iranian=muslim.
I assumed nothing. What I said was this:
Lying about what I said in order to continue to berate me is not a good way to go about doing things and I do not advise you either lie or call me a bigot again unless you wish to take a long break from this community. Rule 5 in the sidebar is very clear:
You are engaging with neither good faith nor respect. And you will have one more opportunity to do so.
Incidentally, I literally talked about Iranian Armenian Christians in another comment, making your lie an extremely silly one.
You literally wrote there's no reason to believe she's not a muslim herself. It's still up there in your comment. If that's not assuming then what is?
You do whatever you need to do. Again, it's clear what I wrote and I stand by it. There's nothing uncivil about what I wrote, that's clear to all who read it. I don't need one more opportunity, if you consider criticism and questioning of your ideas disrespectful, that's your prerogative. So stop trying to threaten me into silence and do whatever you need to do in order to avoid examining your own biases.
True. It's assuming you can't know someone's religion unless they let you know what it is.
Unlike you, I do not define people for them. I let them define themselves.
You have no problem declaring this woman isn't a Muslim even though she's never told you her religion. I wonder if you feel the same way about people and their gender? Would declare about someone whose gender you didn't know what their gender was based on a news article?
I sure wouldn't.
And again, I notice you haven't said anything to the misogynists including the racist who does think Iranians are Muslims. And Arabs.
I do like how you accused me of believing all Iranians are Muslims and when I point out that I was talking about Armenian Christians from Iran, you pretended you never made that accusation. So it's very amusing that you say you stand by such a silly lie.
I do appreciate your returning to civility, however. Thank you.
You assumed she was muslim because she's Iranian, I assumed she wasn't because she was being bigoted against muslim women., which was the point of the article What you did is the equivalent of assuming Ayaan Hirsi Ali is Muslim because she's Somali, ignoring that she's made it her brand to vilify Islam.
Regarding the ridiculous comparison to gender: gender isn't connected to nationality, which is the point we were discussing. Furthermore, I think most people would consider it reasonable to assume a person attacking trans people for being trans isn't trans themselves. That you have trouble making this connection is the issue I have been criticizing all along.
Regarding what I comment on other people's comments or don't, you're just reaching and it's getting sad. It's none of your business at all what I comment on, and no amount of nagging on your end has an impact on that decision. Either respond and defend your position or don't. Beyond that is none of your business.
I did not change my tone in any of the comments I wrote, and it's obvious to the people reading the exchange. It's funny that you call it "returning to civility", but whatever helps you cope I guess.
Nope, I literally did not assume she was Muslim. That is a lie. One of many lies you have told about me.
I have given you many opportunities and have been very lenient, but you are done here for the next week.