Synopsis: Sarah agrees to help Reverend Thorne improve the church’s profile in the area. In response, Amaar recruits Nate to help do the same for the mosque.
Part 1:
Part 2:
Part 3:
Videos courtesy of Jiu’s Channel
What did you think of this episode? How does it compare to the previous episode? Are there any topics from the episode that you want to discuss?
Little Experiences ... 
This episode just didn’t make sense.
There are different dynamics at work when we talk about what Amaar and Thorne has to do to increase their respective flocks.
Thorne has to convince people living in an increasing secularized society to come back to a religion they have neglected (or perhaps even their parents had stopped going to before they were born). He really needs to “promote” his church. For him advertising could help him do so although given the increasing secularization of the society he is still fighting an uphill battle.
But Amaar has no need for such promotion for the dynamics for him are totally different. The increase in his congregation has solely to do with the number of Muslims in the Mercy population (and within driving distance) as when new Muslims move in they will find the Mosque. So for Amaar it is basically out of his control because it all depends on Canada’s lax immigration laws and how many of those “brown people” as Amaar put it moves to Mercy or close enough to Mercy to drive there to go to Mosque.
So for Amaar “promoting” the Mosque just won’t work. It’s not part of the dynamics for him like it is for Thorne.
By painting with such incredibly broad brush strokes, you’re ignoring two important things:
1. Not all Muslims, or people from Muslim families, cultures or backgrounds, are religious. There could very easily be disaffected members of Amaar’s flock just as there are of Thorne’s. Muslims are no more monolithic than Christians are.
2. Islam and Christianity are both proselytising religions. My best Muslim friend was born into a Lutheran family (possibly non-practising, certainly not closed-minded, as her parents are very accepting of her faith and her Muslim husband and beautiful baby daughter). Thorne and Amaar could easily poach from *each other’s* flocks — although Amaar probably wouldn’t, but remember that Thorne has already tried! The portion of the town of Mercy’s populace that is completely non-practising of any faith (likely a sizeable portion, even the majority) is also fair game to both of them.
In short. You’re talking out of a portion of your anatomy that is not generally discussed in polite conversation.
Islam and Christianity are both proselytizing religions.
That is indeed true. But in the West particularly in North America Islam is still considered a “brown” religion.
While Thorne may have some, not much, but perhaps some success “poaching from the other’s flocks ” Amaar would be far less successful (well not in this show but if we we use this as an analogy to Islam and Christianity within the entire society).
Islam and Christianity are both proselytizing religions.
That is indeed true. But in the West particularly in North America Islam is still considered a “brown” religion.
While Thorne may have some, not much, but perhaps some success “poaching from the other’s flocks ” Amaar would be far less successful (well not in this show but if we we use this as an analogy to Islam and Christianity within the entire society).
In the show there is only one White Muslim and she became a Muslim because it was her husband’s religion.
But that reflects reality. While I do know that there are some European’s who were born into the Islamic religion, we are talking about North Americans and you just don’t see many of them who either had no religion or were of a Christian religion converting to Islam.
Sure you have some “fringe” people do it but that’s about it.
And you have wives doing it for their already Muslim husbands like Sarah did and possibly your friend.
By the way, was she your friend before she was married? I would think it would be hard for a man to be a friend to a married woman especially in Islam but also in conservative Christianity.
This is the type of Muslim that I hate.
That doesn’t make me Islamophobic.
You know people talk about how we shouldn’t “profile” terrorists but at least in recent attacks the terrorists look pretty much like the stereotype. Now I am not saying we should use profiling alone because that would open up a hole to those who don’t fit the profile but we should focus our resources on those who do fit the profile.
Some Muslims don’t go to “the Little Mosque on the Prairie”.
Some go to more extreme mosques.
There are many good Muslims in North America.
But there are bad ones as well!
Not all Iman’s are Amaar!
Political Correctness gets people killed!
Not to demonize all Muslims but the other side would have us believe that such Muslims don’t exist!
I would just like to see some realistic balance on this issue.
Whoever is modding this blog, can you PLEASE delete/ban the trolls from constantly hijacking the comment section with anti-Muslim video links and vitriol?
I agree with AC. This is getting ridiculous. I also wanted to say, I really loved this episode. I think Little Mosque is getting its game back!
I agree as well.
I too think it was a pretty good episode. And I like their using Nate again – he’s a good character to throw into the mix.
I also agree that this should not turn into a forum about religion – it’s for a TV show, for God’s sake. (And I say this as someone who is neither Christian nor Muslim – just someone who likes the show.)
Many of you have heard about a Best Buy ad that that wished American Muslims a “Happy Eid al Adha.”
Muslims need to understand that this isn’t so much about Eid al Adha but about the double standard that exists today with Christian symbols and expressions being practically banned in our society but expressions of other faiths, particularly Islam being expressed.
We see it in the schools and now we see it in the shopping centers. There is a war on Christmas going on (while at the same time stories are cashing in on Christmas spending).
Last year in the UK a Muslim organization defended Christmas and said that expressions of Christianity during shouldn’t be banned in their country. This is quite appreciated and I hope they do the same this year.
Best Buy will wish American Muslims a “Happy Eid al Adha” but will not dare use the word “Merry Christmas” in their advertisement. I wish Christians would stick to their principles and boycott Best Buy.
And I would hope that Muslims realize that this isn’t necessarily an act against them but a defense of Christianity and a fight against the ever increasing war against Christmas in our society.
I meant to type
Last year in the UK a Muslim organization defended Christmas and said that expressions of Christmas during this time shouldn’t be banned in their country. This is quite appreciated and I hope they do the same this year.
Agreed.
In North America the battle isn’t so much the Christians and the Muslims. It is the Christians and the secularists with Muslims sometimes caught in the middle.
It is an unholy alliance indeed between the Leftists and many Muslims. Someday perhaps they will realize which side they should be on in this culture war.
TO WHOEVER HOSTS/MODERATES THIS BLOG:
The continued allowing of people like “Tim” and “Steve” to post their hateful crap unmoderated on this site is offensive in the extreme. In fact, I am starting to wonder if this site is in fact hosted by people like “Tim” and “Steve” in order to draw people in to watch and discuss the show and then have their minds poisoned by the hate speech in the comments section.
I am going to stop visiting this site altogether if these posts are not moderated and posters are not banned.
Why do you call what I post hateful?
I am not hateful towards most Muslims.
Yeah I am hateful towards a certain small segment of the Muslim population just like I am hateful towards the Mafia.
But I am not hateful towards all Muslims or even most Muslims. In fact I believe they are ultimately good for our society as they inject a degree of morality long needed in our society.
I do hate the word “hate speech” because it comes too close to regulating thought. Something out of the novel “1984”.
Who I am hateful towards are liberals, progressives, Leftists, Marxists or whatever they call themsevles today.
What, every 16 year old male makes the same mistake?
Sorry, I was an 16 year old male and I would never even consider doing that to a girl.
Look, saying a girl is pretty – not sexual harassment.
Sending a girl a porno- Yeah, pretty much everyone would say sexual harassment, in fact I believe it would have been a criminal offense even with the boys age. And it should be. Sounds like the kid was a real sicko and those type of people don’t change. They need to be locked up.
She should have let the boys in the Mosque know what was happening so they could come to her defense.
Again, odd to get so upset about something small, yet get the same amount or less upset about something that is really, really bad,
You were not raised like the boys today, with pornography EVERYWHERE.
No one ever said saying a girl is pretty is sexual harassment. People here have explained the opposite over and over.
And once AGAIN she was MORE upset about that, not less or the same. YOU just kept bringing it up and forcing it to an extreme. And you did that WHILE she was trying to have an honest, serious conversation with you about something else entirely.
Sorry, I was an 16 year old male and I would never even consider doing that to a girl.
Boys are raised different now. Why do you think he even thought it was okay? What gave him that idea? You can’t walk through a subway without an add with soft pornography. To the point where half the country’s feminists have become desperate enough to try to “reclaim” it instead, because stopping it has become impossible. You know what we call feminists like Nahida who want to make pornography illegal? Radical. We call them Radical Feminists. THEY are the extremists. That’s how ridiculous this has become. Now of course they proudly accept that term, but think about how outrageous that is. He lives in this culture where porn is considered “healthy” for men and promoted everywhere. Even women are brainwashed into buying into the idea that they can’t do anything to stop men from watching it.
And we all know Nahida is a woman who doesn’t accept that. And was very vocal – preachy – about not accepting it. And that was unacceptable to him. He thought she was being an illogical bitch, so he decided he’d show her who was right. I’m sure the fact he had a crush on her added an extra dimension. He was bitter that she was so ‘pure’. She’d laugh and find it funny and agree with him, he thought right? Well, it didn’t go down like that did it!
Nahida said he wasn’t trying to intimidate her or show dominance or whatever, but I agree with Olly when she said that there was a reason he did it to her instead of any other woman. If it was really just a joke he would have played it to a crowd of people or a man. The target wouldn’t have mattered. It was an attack on her spirituality, on her virtue, and on her innocence.
You know the truth? Nahida’s the selfless type. Even after being so pissed at him that she didn’t speak to him for sixth months, she forgave him… because he did it to HER. If he’d done that to one of her friends? Ooooh man, you bet she’d have reported his ass!!
The Golden Rule should apply as the opposite to people like Nahida. She needs to treat herself like she treats other people.
Actually Chris, I think that Nahida is pretty much a saint. And it scares me sometimes.
Every time I think she is normal she does something Saintly to remind me that she isn’t “your typical liberal”.
There are people out there like that. They are “too good for this world” and it worries me. I was really scared when I heard she was talking with “Occupied people” because they are really dangerous indeed.
Well, I don’t know, Steve. I mean, if Olly owes her marriage to Nahida, then of course she’s going to have a high opinion of her. Not saying it’s incorrect, just that it’s not totally objective.
I ran into him randomly today, while I was at a picnic for Memorial Day. Speak of the devil!
I was 16. I believed then (and still believe) that people are truly decent at the core. He was so sorry. He had cried. He was upset the whole time I wasn’t speaking to him. And I wasn’t going to tell any of my friends because I was so proud. Why should I speak of such things? And I wasn’t going to tell an adult, because to be perfectly honest, I had no idea it was sexual harassment. The definition of sexual harassment that I had understood at 16 was REPEATED attempts outside consent, and he’d only done it once. I had started calling myself a feminist long before then, but I wasn’t familiar enough with the ideology to recognize that this too is harassment, because the expanded definition includes behavior of an intimate nature outside an acceptable norm. But gosh, if I didn’t even know it was sexual harassment (only that it was terribly wrong), how could he have? Who defines the acceptable norm? Remember how Sarah (in the show) kissed that stranger? Sexual harassment. What if a man had done that to a woman? You don’t just kiss random people! What if that were against his religion, or his comfort zone? He was in a relationship, as shown; he would not have consented, and had not consented. I would be absolutely offended if a man I didn’t know tried to kiss me. And scared. I’d probably be more scared than offended. That is the root of a sexual harassment claim: intimidation. Intimidation, objectification, and dominance.
I was so terribly distressed when Lily disclosed to Steve what she had, because Steve also had not consented to hearing it. Lily explained that she is autistic and doesn’t always register social acceptability, but as I uncomfortably informed her (I don’t like telling other people about their disabilities as if I know better than them; I don’t have any disability, I can’t be arrogant enough to think I understand), it is not outside her ability to recognize this boundary. She is within a range on the autism spectrum that is very high functioning. I guess it was always improbable that Steve would be intimidated by that, because we’re on the Internet and, you know, I’ve got a 23 inch waist. Steve could probably send me falling back if he lightly shoved me. But to just assume that he wouldn’t be uncomfortable with it is so… inconsistent, inconsiderate, and ineffective. It simply isn’t done! It just isn’t… polite. Naturally I never meant anything disrespectfully—quite the opposite—but that is for Steve to interpret… now that he’s unwillingly aware, and that’s out of my control—if he says it’s disrespectful because it makes him uncomfortable, then it rightly is, and I would have to stop talking about it / involving him immediately if he minded, as I should, and as dictates both the feminist and religious ideologies I’ve chosen. No woman who truly respected a man would continue something intimate that made him uncomfortable, regardless of how respectful and affectionate she is in her own intentions. The outcome and his comfort is more important. (And of course I won’t pretend that my anxiety had nothing to do with his reaction outside of the harassment factor either, to be absolutely fair to Lily.)
Anyway, when I was 16 and less familiar with the concept and this guy was telling me over and over how sorry he was, and continued to exhibit intense regret as I refused to speak to him, I didn’t feel it was necessary to ruin his life exactly because he was so damn sorry. I don’t think it’s necessary to ever ruin anyone’s life, unless they’ve ruined someone else’s first. And he hadn’t ruined my life. Sure, I was pretty much damaged (it was hell trying to recover from that!) but my life wasn’t—isn’t—ruined: the harassment wasn’t continuous, and he hadn’t assaulted me. In short, he hadn’t scared me, or intimidated me. He’d only very rudely offended me. It was the same sort of thing with Limbaugh’s attack on Fluke. Allred said Limbaugh should be arrested, but that’s bullshit. Was it sexual harassment to tell Fluke to make pornographic videos and post them online? ABSOLUTELY. Telling a woman to make pornographic videos and to post them on the Internet so he could watch is sexual harassment. But his life shouldn’t be ruined because he didn’t ruin hers. She’s not traumatized, her character has not been defamed (unlike S.E. Cupp, who should definitely sue someone) and her career is not endangered. No reason to ruin Limbaugh’s life if hers isn’t.
And neither is mine. Sure, this guy disrespected me by not taking it seriously when I told him about my religious beliefs and feminist affiliations, but to be taken seriously by others is not a right. I’m not entitled to not being mocked. (1st amendment) Arguably, with his interference, he had infringed on my right to independently practice my religion, like giving me water and telling me it’s wine or a sandwich with (haraam) meat that he’s passing as (halaal) vegetarian, but it was not a continuous infringement.
Aside from the political and social justice aspect, on the subject of my own forgiveness, I didn’t regret pardoning him until I encountered him by chance today at the picnic. He asked how I’d been, told me I looked beautiful, and, just as I was about to leave, took the conversation on a walk down memory lane and made a passing comment about the practical jokes he used to play, “Those were good times. I don’t think I ever played any practical jokes on you though.”
I usually don’t bring things up after I’ve forgiven them. That is heartless. But… he didn’t remember? I laughed a little, uncomfortably, quietly, and said, “Well… there was that time five years ago you gave me a CD and told me it was Pygmalion and it turned out to be pornography.”
He wrinkled his brows. “What? I don’t think I did that.”
“But… but you did.” My heart felt exasperated. “I wouldn’t speak to you for months after that. You were devastated.”
Now I was devastated. How could he not remember? Was he pretending? Was he ashamed? I suppose it’s good that he’s ashamed and it means he’d never do it again, like I suspected, but can’t he own up to it? He couldn’t have forgotten! He had been so sorry… he couldn’t have forgotten feeling that kind of regret! Not any more than I could ever forget feeling such shock, or the excruciating process of silent recovery.
“Oh come on, Nahida,” he laughed. “I think I would remember something like that!”
He was calling me a liar. I was shocked. “You confined in one of your friends,” I remembered suddenly. “You told him how upset you were about what you’d done and he approached me while I wasn’t speaking to you to request that I forgive you.” I told him which. “Call him,” I demanded. “Call him now.”
He raised an eyebrow, shrugged coolly, and retrieved his cellphone from his pocket to dial. He spoke to his friend.
His friend didn’t remember either.
“But… but—I,” I bit back frustration. The evening was falling. He couldn’t see my face.
“Well, do you still have the CD?” he asked warmly.
“No!” I gasped in disgusted amazement. “Why on earth would I keep something like that?”
I remember what I had done with the CD—directly after ejecting it angrily from my computer, taken it in my hands and broken it in into two shards, blinded in my own shock. Then tossed it.
Now it was gone. Of course, I hadn’t confined in any of my friends. I hadn’t told anyone. I thought I was being so kind and considerate not to talk about it. I thought I was being above it all, not wasting time on trivialities. That is what good people do, I told myself, and I want to be a good person. And now… as a result, there was no one, no one who could testify for me to remind him it happened.
I never imagined he would forget. Or pretend to forget. Whichever it is. Until now, I hadn’t been upset with him again since five years ago. Logically, this is unfair, if he truly forgot about something that is over and forgiven. Yet I’m upset again… what does that say about my mercy? I told him I forgave him and now I’m upset; how valuable is my word? Worthless. My word is absolutely worthless. Maybe his forgetting counts as a separate incident, so my distress is valid? Should this incident be considered an extension of the first? But the first is over. That is the meaning of forgiveness. But this couldn’t be a separate second either: alone, it has no offense. A simple memory lapse is not a crime. My agitation is a fault of my own—it is a demonstration of a flaw in my mercy.
I’d make a terrible religious leader. How can I start a mosque, command a congregation, if I can not stay true to my pronouncement of mercy? I wanted to cry. How am I different from those I criticize? Unsuitable, absolutely unsuitable.
“You’re still so beautiful,” he said, and I jerked suddenly out of my own thoughts at his voice. And then—AND THEN—he had the AUDACITY to ask if he could kiss me.
“Obviously no,” I stated sharply.
He laughed lightly. “I guess I haven’t earned that right.”
“Um. It’s not a right.”
Wtf? Who thinks kissing a woman is a right? Okay I know what he MEANT, but seriously, wtf? Even my hypothetical husband doesn’t have the right to kiss me. Of course I wouldn’t mind if my husband kissed me whenever he wanted, but it’s not a fucking right. This isn’t just a technical linguistic issue, it’s a matter of principle.
I walked away from him and came home. And I am typing this now. And I don’t know what to think of myself. I’ve broken my word, and withdrawn my mercy, which is against the nature of mercy itself. And I can’t even repent because I’m still upset about him forgetting, so it wouldn’t be genuine. I don’t deserve a congregation; I’m not fit for one. Nothing is more fundamental than staying faithful to a pronouncement of mercy.
Dear Olivia, I am so happy things are well again with your husband.
Btw, Nahida wasn’t actually here. She sent me that whole thing as an email, writing only to me (I was talking about the incident with her as I did here), and I asked her if I could put it here under her name. She said okay. She hasn’t seen any of the other comments.
So this is what she’s like, Chris. Now do you see?
“I thought I was being above it all, not wasting time on trivialities.”
I guess we have a different definition of trivialities. I wouldn’t have seen what that guy done as a triviality.
I would have seen it as a crime.
“I’d make a terrible religious leader…”
Only those who think they would make a terrible religious leader are actually deserving of BEING a religious leader.
I hope that Nahida does become a religious leader as the world really needs more of these types and less of the ones we currently have.
She really does shine out divine love wherever she goes. I met a few people like this in college (never male though perhaps is it just that I can’t recognize it in males) and yeah, they are kind of scary in just plain good they are. You really worry about what the world would do to them. And if you are not careful you feel so inferior to them it really can make you feel small and unworthy.
In one way it is great that Nahida can forgive males for making mistakes knowing that males are under pressure too and can sometimes act inappropriately. I know I have made a couple of mistakes under pressure.
But here’s the difference. Saying kissing is a “right” or asking to kiss someone is one thing. That’s a forgivable mistake. Sending a porno is an unforgivable mistake. It is a crime.
And I don’t buy the line “all males would do it”. Look, my time might have been before the web (just before) but still we had Playboy and stuff. I can’t even imagine doing that to a girl.
And yeah, I think it was terrible that he would forget this after being given this tremendous gift of being forgiven for the unforgivable. I guess the best light we could put on it is maybe it is just such an embarrassing, such a shameful act in his life that he literally had to blot it out of his memory because of the pain that memory causes. But still he should have approached it differently. He should have said, I don’t think it was me you are thinking about, but if I had ever hurt you in such a way I hope you can forgive me.
“Sure, I was pretty much damaged (it was hell trying to recover from that!) but my life wasn’t—isn’t—ruined: the harassment wasn’t continuous, and he hadn’t assaulted me. ”
Uh, yeah he assaulted you. Maybe not physically, but emotionally. He assaulted you with images. It would be just like he pulled down his pants and shook his…well I don’t want to get too graphic here, you get the idea.
I want to beat the crap out of this guy even now.
Look one of the reasons “they hate us” and they have a full right to hate us for is because we are very sexually perverse society. We all deal with this in our own ways of course. I really feel for those out there who try to maintain ethical standards despite this. In fact, I am hoping that Muslims might play a role in bringing our society back to a more moral standard. See I don’t totally hate Muslims.
Christians (I mean strong principled ones) often have it even harder than Muslims because the Left tends to give Muslims a pass as it being “part of their way” (and therefore should be respected) whereas they ridicule Christians as “pudes”.
One of the things that kind of bothered me about LMOTP is when the characters would mention different movies they have seen. Fatima in one episode said she liked the “Police Academy” series. Look, my way of dealing with our perverted society is somewhat to yeah cave and just go with it meaning I have seen some pretty bad movies in my day. And among those movies is the Police Academy series. I realize that part of the show was to show Muslims not as they should be but how they are and that means that they sometimes don’t behave as the best of Muslims, but still it disappointed me that she would watch and even enjoy such a perverted series of movies.
Again, I know it is hypocritical of expecting more from Fatima than from myself but still.
“I’ve got a 23 inch waist. Steve could probably send me falling back if he lightly shoved me…”
I am not that athletic myself. I bet you could take me.
Saints aren’t perfect. They are just more perfect than the rest of us.
And the “little sins” they do they make them out to be so bad and they dwell on them so much, while most of us would just chalk it up to “being human” and just move on.
Her very words in the post above proves to me why she should become a religious leader. In fact I see her among some of our greatest religious leaders and she is only 21. I hope she can find some kind of outlet (not politics) to explore this and I pray she finds some way to share herself with as many people as possible.
I just hope she keeps her head down this summer with all that is about to happen. The occupy people, don’t talk to them, don’t get anywhere near them. You can’t save these people. They are a force of evil. We are about to see violence that we haven’t seen in my lifetime. Perhaps worse even than the violence of the 1960s.
I am getting excited about Nahida leaving the University. It was really weighing her down with all it’s political leftist stuff. I think she is going to really blossom now.
There’s a reason, I just realized why you can’t call Nahida a Liberal, just like why Nahida could never become a Conservative.
Those are POLITICAL terms and Nahida is just so above politics.
Nahida needs to ensure that she doesn’t let politics drag her down. Her destiny isn’t to be a political warrior on one side or the other. It’s much grander than that.
I think it would be helpful for her though to try to seek out conservative perspectives on issues because of course its the liberal ones that get the most airing.
http://www.americanthinker.com
I am getting excited about Nahida leaving the University.
It’s been three years, not four. Nahida’s not leaving for another year. They just make them apply a year early.
Oh, that’s too bad.
Also I went on her blog today and read some of her stuff and it was terrible. Not all of it but some of it. I was asking myself “where’s the snowflake”?
I was specifically talking about her buying in this whole like “war against women” stuff. Why? Because some people believe that a child’s life should be protected there’s a “war on women”?
When she discusses politics she is at her worse. She needs to stay away from politics and focus on stuff above that.
I found the stuff about 9-11 kind of sad. I don’t know why she thought she couldn’t cry. I know we tried to treat our fellow Muslims as “one of us” in our community in the days following the attack. We even had a rally on their behalf that I attended.
I think we did pretty well given the overall shock to the system that 9-11 was. I believe there were about three fatal attacks on individuals in the days following 9-11 where they claimed they attacked because of 9-11. There has been more attacks on whites following Trayvone Williams then there were on Muslims in the days following 9-11 (and the one I remembered the most happened to a Sikh). All the attacks following 9-11, all three of them the ones who attacked were just individuals (as opposed to mobs) and all were arrested. All of them were crazy and had it not been 9-11 that set them off surely something else would have.
But the truth is there wasn’t in the general public a great hatred against Muslims in America, at least not at first. They are far more disliked now.
But it was also interesting on the blog where this one person wrote how he was in some Arab home in the Middle East and how they cheered when they saw the buildings come down. America definitely had its enemies and we still do. Being worried about that isn’t “Islamophobic” but instead Islamorealistic. It is hard to walk the balance between the two but I think we have done a pretty good job of doing just that.
Oh, by the way, here’s a good photo.
There is definitely a war on women.
But I am not talking about that with you. Unlike Nahida who would have the patience if she was here, I don’t.
No, it’s just another lie.
Not all women support killing babies.
No, some women support killing other women instead, complying in the further destruction of the lives of rape and incest victims, and shoving their politics into other women’s bodies via legislative rape, just like slaves fighting for the confederacy.
People who deny there is a war on women make me too angry to speak. I literally start seeing red.
The House GOP is blocking care for women who were raped in the military and that is lower than scum. Every Republican senator said ‘no’ to equal pay for women. The average American woman will be stiffed out of $431,360 during her working career and would be paid an additional annually $10,784 if she were a man. Conservatives modified the Violence Against Women Act to exclude Native American women, who are the one demographic more than any other to be abused by someone outside their race. There have been 1,100 laws introduced in only the past year to curb women’s reproductive rights. Bills have been introduced that would allow employers to interrogate women as to why they are using contraceptives, an unacceptable violation of privacy. According to HB 167 a woman who miscarries is a murderer, but Republicans have lied about the effects of the bill claiming it protects a woman and unborn children despite the dangerously vague language utilized. Jay Townsend said acid should be thrown on Democratic women who support the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (who wants to bring Sharia Law to the US again?), Fox News hosted a man who believes women should be prevented from voting and cannot control themselves in positions of power, and conservative men don’t believe voting is a right but a privilege and that women should only be allowed to vote when it benefits and privileges men at the severe disadvantage of women, and believe that things were all fine and dandy before women could vote, back when men could more smoothly employ their demands with their fists without legal consequence.
But there’s a war on boys, see, because fewer boys are doing well in school. This is because before feminism, male children were not required to do homework or pay attention in class. Homework and paying attention were invented in the 1970s to get boys in trouble. Duh. Feminism makes boys stupid.
Republicans hate women.
The fact that I came to the defense of S.E. Cupp was a courtesy, not a requirement of my ideology, and therefore not defending her would not have been hypocrisy. S.E. Cupp is not a woman. She is the patriarchy. Why the hell should I give a damn if the very system she actively supports does this kind of shit to her? This is what she wanted. THIS is the rape culture she supports. The only conservative women I owe my defense are the ones like Lisa Murkowski who aren’t disgusting liars about what their political affiliates are doing.
I’m going to say something that will prolly annoy you. But you wanted him… you know how many feminists would call you a traitor for that? I’m surprised you haven’t been confronted HERE.
I’m surprised I haven’t been confronted here too! But you’re right: that profoundly annoyed me that you brought this up. But unlike the irritating gossip here, I guess I can grudgingly admit it’s called for.
But this is why I would still defend S.E. Cupp. I mean, I would do it anyway, without reason, because what happened to her is beyond wrong and whether something is right or wrong is far more important than the politics she spews. And while I understand the sentiment of any feminist who thinks otherwise, I would tell her she’s being irrational, ineffective, and placing liberalism before feminism. And remind her that Fox News came to the defense of Hilary Clinton. Yeah, I know I said S.E. Cupp is patriarchy, but I was raging. She’s an agent of patriarchy. And an agent is different. An agent is a whole person, deserving of kindness and compassion and sympathy, and most importantly, of justice and mercy. And I don’t know what shit’s going on with her. Just like the feminists who would call me a traitor–all while having a fair case–don’t know what shit’s going on with me.
There were points in my conversations with Steve at which I thought, I cannot keep speaking to this man because I swear he is making me hate the Right. And I don’t want to hate anyone! I especially don’t want to harbor generalized hatred toward members of an entire ideology. That’s the #1 sign that you’ve failed as a decent human being. But you know what the problem was? Not that Steve was making me hate the Right, but that I was choosing to hate the Right instead of tunneling that energy into transferring my affection for Steve to not hating the Right. Steve is a representative of the Right as much as I am of the Left, and it says more about me if I allow the atrocity of his politics to outweigh the evidence that all Rightwingers aren’t evil douchebags than it says about him. I mean, sure, a quarter of my friends are conservatives and can easily fulfill the role of preventing me from hating the Right (with a lot less work on my part!). But they’re not Rush Limbaugh conservatives. They consider him an extremist. Steve incorrectly goes on and on about how I must be a snowflake and he’s lucky to have met me and all that other terrifying stuff that will inevitably disappoint him at the end of Time (or sooner), but I am the lucky one. That is the truth. Thanks to Steve I don’t automatically despise someone when they say they listen to Rush Limbaugh or watch Glenn Beck. It took a lot of hard work to make that happen instead of the other phenomenon (in which he makes me hate the Right because wtf he doesn’t even think Limbaugh is an extremist–how–I can’t even–) which further proves I am not a snowflake, but I think the outcome is worth it. My soul has been saved from the infection of hatred.
Wow. WOW. I didn’t think you could convince me you weren’t wrong to want him but you did.
Only a total snowflake could think like that.
Steve didn’t save your soul. You did.
I’m not! a snowflake! *has a panic attack*
Here is the most obvious proof: Steve said he touched me but evidently I haven’t melted (metaphorically) and therefore I obviously can’t be a snowflake. He was hoping that the world wouldn’t turn to ice, and it hasn’t! You can’t argue with logic, and neither can Steve.
Why isn’t Steve here? I thought he might have something to say about your political argument.
Because he is working.
And you’re not impatient or anything because according to feminism you’re not “entitled” to his time or kindness, like you always say. Are you happy, though? Don’t you think you’d get more benefits/entitlements without feminism? Just wondering.
That’s truly ridiculous.
No. That is a false sense of security. There is no benevolent patriarchy. And, most poignantly, who said feminism is about being happy?
Freedom is not comfortable.
Last week I was shopping for lipstick (because I don’t already have eleven shades of red) and I saw a pair of suede black pumps I thought were really gorgeous. Unfortunately they were $200. I walked around in them for a couple of minutes, and a man was who was watching me complimented how I looked in them and said they suited me. I laughed airily, “Too bad they’re $200.” And then he offered to pay for them.
$200. He just met me. I would never see him again.
It wouldn’t necessarily have been anti-feminist to accept. Ideally, men aren’t babies who need to be protected from their own expectations (in spite of how often they act like babies.) This man looked like he was in his late 30s: I’m sure he was perfectly capable of paying for something without expecting anything in return. (Was he? I don’t know.) But that autonomy, and freedom of choice, is as much a responsibility of men as it is of women. If he’s going to make the offer, he shouldn’t be expecting anything in return. So, it wouldn’t necessarily have been anti-feminist to accept in the sense of holding men accountable for their decisions.
But it sure as hell wouldn’t be great for women as a whole. And in that sense it would be anti-feminist. It would be taking advantage of a patriarchy that pretends to be benevolent.
And I’m not giving that up for a pair of shoes. (And obviously I didn’t accept for reasons outside of feminism… because that is kind of already wrong by itself.)
So yeah, I’m not entitled to his time, courtesy, or kindness. And I’ll swallow it down. Because freedom isn’t comfortable.
Haha you shoulda totally screwed him over!
LOL no.
I’m watching different versions of Anne of Green Gables (my best friend! it’s been so long since I’d read the book) and won’t be checking for a while.
Oh Gilbert Blythe you are such a thick-headed rascal.
“ecause most of the time, it comes from people who have never been racially profiled, stigmatized, discriminated against.”
Yeah, Six years previously the Oklahoma City Bombing took place and that was blamed on Rush Limbaugh and his listeners. SO NO, i know what it’s like to be stigmatized.
Liberals do it all the time.
Why? Because some people believe that a child’s life should be protected there’s a “war on women”?
You should write to her. Unless you already do? Oh wait, no. I remember you saying you won’t. Well, whatever you want, I guess.
But she’s better at explaining crap than anyone I know. Well maybe I know a few people who might be more eloquent, but they are much older than her. If you did write to her, she said something about having nothing to do for three months. So this would be an ideal time. She has been very responsive lately with the extra time. Summer.
Okay, Olly, I can KIND of see it. But I am a skeptic who will always be cynical. I believe that human beings are selfish creatures. We need to be selfish to survive, and there can be no act that isn’t selfish.
She’s a good person. But a saint? She might be good because it hurts her to be a bad person, but she’s a good person because it hurts HERSELF to be a bad person. Not other people.
Saints are the same way, though, I guess.
So I don’t really believe in saints.
Yeah, Saints aren’t perfect. They just are the best of us.
It is funny though, like I said today when I read the blog I found a couple of non-saintly posts by her. Especially the one attacking Republican women.
People are at their worse nature when they discuss politics. Including Nahida.
Well, like I said, Chris, it’s all in your definition of Saints.
Saints aren’t perfect. It’s not that they are always good. It is just they are more good than the rest of us.
It’s hard to explain unless you meet one.
It’s like a spark of God comes from them. An imperfect spark because they are indeed still human but a spark of the divine none the less.
It’s like with Amadeus Mozart although not really. With him his music was a spark of the divine, but his personality was profane.
When you come across such divinity there’s several responses you can have, not all good ones.
I don’t know if Nahida is going to like it because I am ironically going to use a Jewish term here, but like I said in the past I have come across people like Nahida and I even found a term for them (after making up my own term that actually in my own mythology works pretty well).
Here’s the term:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tzadikim_Nistarim
They say there’s only 36 of them at one time in the world and there has to be more because I have met two of them and then you county Nahida. But compared to the whole world it would still be a very small number.
Do I LITERALLY believe this? No, but it is a very good analogy. I like the part about THEY don’t know who they are. Because yeah, if Nahida thought she would make a great religious leader she would not be a great religious leader ironically because she wouldn’t be humble enough. But to her all her sins are magnified and what we would chalk up to “just being human” she feels so bad about herself for.
you count Nahida. So that would be three. Three of 36 all in one area. No there must be more but the point is that they are very rare (a few thousand in a world of 6 Billion is still a very small number).
It is kind of ironic. If Nahida thought she was, then she wouldn’t be.
So, yeah, Nahida would deny it. After all look how angry she is for getting upset about that pervert forgetting what he did to her.
Like I said I don’t really Literally believe all the mythology behind the Tzadikim Nistarim but I have met a few people who, if such a thing existed they would be part of it.
It’s more of a mythological framework for me. I found it years after finding another good symbolic analogy. Ironically from a pretty crappy old Tom Crews movie. I mean a very old Tom Crews movie.
And now we have snow flake. I guess that works too but not as good as the others. But if you try to touch a snowflake it will melt so I like the symbolism there.
I meant Tom Cruise of course.
Actually come to think of it, snowflake is a pretty good universal symbolism. I perfer my symbolism to be personal though, understood only by me.
But yeah, on the board here we should continue to use snowflake.
That is very interesting. I don’t believe that there are select people who are better than the rest of us… but it is comforting to think of. I mean, the existence of a God is comforting to think of but I don’t know if I believe that either.
To think, though, that Nahida was being sarcastic when she asked if you thought she was a snowflake.
To think, though, that Nahida was being sarcastic when she asked if you thought she was a snowflake.
What was it she said? Something like, “What do you think I’m made of, fluffy white clouds and special snowflakes?”
I think it was funnier than that, the way she said it. Can’t remember.
She said and the ‘specialest of special snowflakes.’
They return to their anonymity as soon as their task is accomplished, ‘concealing’ themselves once again in a Jewish community wherein they are relatively unknown.
I think I just got chills. Doesn’t Nahida sometimes mention that she’s introverted and wishes she could be outgoing with more people? She’s always alone.
That’s true. Nahida probably won’t become a famous religious leader, The other Uni I mean snowflakes I knew didn’t become famous but I am sure they have done great things within the individual lives they have touched.
To me that story about how she saved your marriage proves what Nahida is. I had strongly expected it earlier but your story confirmed it for me.
Again I see the number 36 as mostly symbolic. I couldn’t have personally met 2 and know of another of them if there were that few. But the number is pretty small indeed considering the total world population.
There are great things ahead for Nahida but that doesn’t mean she will become well known. But hopefully she will be where she is needed.
She might not become a famous religious leader but I hope she does become a religious leader. We need more religious leaders like her.
This is the part that really gives me chills.
For the sake of these 36 hidden saints, God preserves the world even if the rest of humanity has degenerated to the level of total barbarism.
It was exactly how my own symbolism (and mean like a decade or so before I even heard of the term Lamedvavnik or Tzadikim Nistarim) explained them. Without them the world would become a cold and dark place.
It was strange where I found enlightenment in college.
But yeah, they can be kind of dangerous. They don’t mean to be. It’s your reaction to them that can make them dangerous.
You should feel honored just to be around Nahida. It is an amazing gift. And of course she is in your life at the time you need her the most. Someday she will leave you but you will have your memory of her to carry you on. I don’t know if my experiences with them made me stronger but they did help me through a very difficult, a very scary time in my life.
The part that made me the most sad for her is this,
“The lamed-vavniks, scattered as they are throughout the Diaspora, have no acquaintance with one another.”
If that is true, she will never know anyone like her.
Yes, you are right.
I remember thinking that about them once as well. it made me sad that they would never have a friend like themselves.
“She’s always alone.”
They radiate such tremendous energy that it can sap them. And that is why you so often find them alone. One of the things you need to be cautious of is taking too much of their energy. When they give of themselves they give their all. They are not being selfish or rude when they need their alone time. Especially if you had been seeing them like every other weekend.
Also, since they are so special obviously they would find it hard to relate to us “ordinary people”. Mind you they don’t think like that. To them we aren’t ordinary nor they special. But yeah, that can make them be alone at times as it can make it hard for them to relate.
But from what I can tell it doesn’t make them any less likely to find close personal relationships. The ones I knew found them.
Olly, that is just an easy coincidence. Lots of people are introverted.
Although, it does say that as soon as they’re ‘discovered’ they conceal themselves. So it’s a little odd Nahida HAPPENED to disappear from this board right before we all started talking about it…
But that doesn’t mean any of it is true. Because those two traits are very common. Introvertedness and disappearance don’t mean anything. It’s too easily explained as coincidence because it’s not unusual.
or asking to kiss someone is one thing. That’s a forgivable mistake.
Steve, speaking as a WOMAN, I can tell you Nahida’s offense at his question was not because of the question itself. She was not offended he asked to kiss her. She was offended he asked to kiss her after she just reminded him of a terrible thing he did to her. And not to make her feel better, but to brush it aside.
It was probably very romantic for him to stand there with her in the dark, asking to kiss her. Of course, we can read Nahida’s thoughts, she wrote them for Olly. And we know Nahida couldn’t find it any LESS romantic.
You could say, then, well, yeah, but HE can’t read her thoughts. But he doesn’t need to. She JUST told him that he’d done this terrible, sick thing. And so it’s PREDICTABLE that she would be completely confused and lost when he doesn’t remember. The thing to do is NOT to ask to kiss a woman after she is talking about assault when you’re the one she’s saying did it to her.
So yeah, that’s why Nahida as a woman zoned in on his language when he called it a “right.” He was already acting very entitled. It was not an innocent slip of wording. It showed a mentality.
I wasn’t trying to justify that scumbag. I wish someone would kick his ass.
One thing I guess this shows is that Nahida doesn’t play the Muslim Card too much in her personal life, or if she does this guy is too much of an idiot to understand what it means to be a Muslim.
Kiss her? He isn’t even supposed to touch her!
Hmm…well im not 100% sure, but yeah I don’t think she plays that card often. She’s more quietly observant. Remember when I said I saw her on the Slutwalk? I knew Nahida from this forum, but not very well until I read her blog when she started it. This woman looked like her from pictures, but I was convinced it couldn’t have been her. I mean I know Nahida lives in California, but it’s a HUGE state. Then months later I saw her again, at a public garden party. There was some alcohol, but she wasn’t drinking, of course… or even socializing. She was just sitting on a bench near some flowers, her legs crossed, in a gorgeous white sun hat, reading a Kindle, and with one hand in the flowers. A man approached her and asked if he could bring her a drink, and I held my breath because of course now I would know if it was really her.
She refused the drink and I was really excited. But then as an explanation she didn’t say, “I’m Muslim.” She smiled politely and said “No thank you, I’m a teetotaler.”
I had to look that up. It’s just the word for people who don’t drink. Alcohol abstinence. Anyway, I ended up approaching her and asking. She looked alarmed at first (i said, “Are you the author of The Fatal Feminist?”) then I continued saying I admired her writing. She smiled shyly and thanked me, and asked, “But don’t tell anyone here, please. I’d rather very few people who know me in real life know that I write, or where, online.”
But yeah, she said ‘teetotaler.’ I guess because she doesn’t expect many people to know what it means to be Muslim. I myself usually have to explain in two steps. “I’m Muslim” and then “that means I don’t drink.” With teetotaler she got rid of a step.
But that guy did know she was Muslim.
What an honor it must feel like to kiss her…
Or even to ask permission.
The chances of that are actually not that low. It really is a small world. I’ve run into people I knew in states I didn’t even think they would be in. Especially if you run in the same circles she does (you were AT the slutwalk for a reason, right?) then yeah not surprising.
I’ve been made friends in other countries, and then found out they know each other. Okay that only happened once but it was still incredible. It just has to do with being in the same circles. There’s a whole theory on it, actually. Six Degrees of Separation.
And didn’t Nahida write once that she made an Israeli friend who she met on a plane back from France, and she never told her she was Muslim because the friend never asked? Even while the woman was criticizing Muslims. She didn’t ask Nahida’s religion, so Nahida never told her… I guess she’s the type to mention it only when it comes up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Degrees_of_Separation
“Six degrees of separation refers to the idea that everyone is on average approximately six steps away, by way of introduction, from any other person on Earth, so that a chain of, “a friend of a friend” statements can be made, on average, to connect any two people in six steps or fewer. “
Just for those who are confused, Mormons ARE NOT Christians!
Here’s why!
Mormons were the FIRST American Terrorists!
Her full name means “beautiful/elated queen of womankind”!! Wow.
In one way it is great that Nahida can forgive males for making mistakes knowing that males are under pressure too and can sometimes act inappropriately.
Who does this surprise, really?
Nahida can talk real tough when she criticizes men. One time, in a section about rape, a man asked her how he’s supposed to know if a woman is consenting to his every move when these things aren’t vocalized, and what if a woman accuses him of rape unfairly, and she told him to fuck off. That doesn’t mean she didn’t understand his question, or even that she isn’t sympathetic. She just has priorities, and defining consent for men making THEMSELVES the center of attention in rape conversations isn’t one of them. He chose the WRONG time and place to ask her, a rape thread for VICTIMS, and that made her suspicious of his motives. She even slut-shamed him a little. (“Only a man-slut would sleep with a woman he doesn’t even trust and need to ask that question.”) I’m not kidding, she actually said that. (And before someone like RTelier comes around crying, no, it’s not hypocritical.)
When she actually lives her life, how considerate she really is comes through. Feminists criticize men very harshly. It doesn’t mean they don’t UNDERSTAND men. You know she considers strangers asking for her number not okay? Because they harass women for their numbers, but not men. It’s only okay to cross-examine women for private information like men are entitled to it. That’s not how people meet, she says, and it turns women into targets for “intrusive public interrogation”. Those are actually her words. But that doesn’t mean she’d ever try to report someone for asking for her number. Just that it would piss her off. She tries to change the norm, but she doesn’t do it by going around and arresting people for behaving according TO the norm.
Nahida is going to meet Occupiers. She said she has to talk to them and find out what their ideologies are, because somehow she’s gotten the idea that there are Conservatives framing Liberals for violence and extremism? I wonder where she got THAT idea…
Terrific. I couldn’t convince her not to, she’s hellbent on knowing the truth of what’s happening and convinced she can’t trust anyone. But her city hasn’t had any violent events, so hopefully she should be fine talking to them. Going back and forth I finally got her to limit it to just one day.
The Occupiers are the same types of Leftist we saw (well I didn’t as I am not that old) rioting in the streets in the 1960s. Heck some of them (the old ones) are the SAME PEOPLE who was were rioting in the streets in the 1960s. They are not of the Right and Nahida should know better.
I will not feel guilty. If at this point Nahida couldn’t tell the difference between the Right and the Left then that is her problem.
Why didn’t she go out and see the tea partiers a few years back? I know why I didn’t (it had nothing to do about thinking them violent it had to do with me “being there doing that” in the 1990s and not getting anywhere). Then she would have seen the Right. Perhaps, and I only say perhaps she might, again might have seen one or two racists but I doubt it. She would have been surprised at how they didn’t meet what I would expect her preconceived notions of them were. When I was around them a bit in the 1990s I didn’t really see a racist in the bunch.
But no, she chooses to visit the inheritors of the French Revolution. And I know history isn’t her major but I think I posted enough videos and others did as well showing that the French Revolution was indeed pretty violent. You had a lot of head chopping going on back then. And now you hear calls for the same thing.
Damn, you saw my own city attacked not once, but twice in little more than a decade (they also attacked the Port last fall) and it isn’t even summer yet, where they are really expected to get violent.
So, yeah, if this is payback against me, sorry I am not taking the bait. I gave Nahida, heck I gave all of you fair warning what these people were all about. I posted not only historical but current violence by these types of people. Remember “the battle of the Whole Foods”. So typical.
You know when I was your age I guess I kind of did feel invulnerable too. Perhaps it was because I was in a private University that could afford good (not perfect) security. But I remember stepping off campus once with friends only to be chased back by Townies who either misinterpreted what we were saying or didn’t care what we were saying and just wanted to kick our butts.
So, no I wasn’t invulnerable. I remember hearing about a shooting off campus (oh, but it was off campus so again I guess the magic of being on campus holds) one of the years I went there.
And I remember the shock in 2001 when I heard about great violence that actually happened ON campus. 2001 was a bad year, I guess not personally but just around my community and not only because of Sept 11th. It was just an year when evil seemed to take hold (lucky again not in my personal life or people I knew closely).
Got slightly off point but point is as much as I might have felt save back then (I did get into three minor traffic accidents, I wasn’t driving, I wasn’t really injured I guess that’s what you get when you are in a car with a young driver) I was deluding myself. Nahida is deluding herself. Young people die all the time!
But again, I will not take responsibility. I don’t know how I can warn you people more clearly. It’s going to be nothing like I have ever seen before. And if I haven’t seen it you all haven’t. I have warned you to keep your heads down this summer and I just can’t do any more than that.
Wtf. Shit. Shit shit shit. She says she’s going to talk SPECIFICALLY to the ones who are violent. To find out why and what the hell is going through their heads. And she won’t listen to anything I say!! The only person who can stop her is Steve.
She said after Steve wrote to that girl’s school trying to make her commit suicide and taking it to an extreme, even though he agreed the sign was inappropriate, there’s been “nothing but disquiet in my conscious… I have to know who they are, and if they’re pretending.”
She also told me not to tell you. “Don’t notify Steve, if you are speaking to him. I am afraid he will blame himself, and that is the last thing I want. Of course it is probable he will not feel bad, because the fact that he went as far as to insist, with the intention of destroying me, that if I’d never told him about the girl he wouldn’t have done tried what he did tells me he doesn’t care about what happens. But in the slight chance he might, I care too much about him to allow him to feel guilty for this. He is not responsible for the situations in which I place myself.
Oh, Olly, I was so looking forward to a quiet, lazy, restful summer. I was going to read half the library. But I must know if the Occupiers who are violent are pretending to be Occupiers, insincere, for the purpose of framing and discrediting the ideology of another, even if it is a part with which they agree. If Steve could do it, without remorse, who else? And either way maybe they will listen, and not act violently! People are better than that, I know it.”
I didn’t tell her that I wouldn’t tell you, she just assumed I wouldn’t. But FUCK THAT- you’re the only one who can stop her.
They are not my people.
My people are the ones who dress in military fatigues and talk about “when the revolution comes” and a lot about “prying it from cold dead fingers” and then they go home and stock up on powered milk.
Okay, that doesn’t describe all of them, but just a small part of them, but they have never, ever been violent. Just pathetic. Hello, it wasn’t that kind of revolution and you missed it while you were building your bomb shelter.
I think though I am describing an older generation that might not be AS prevalent now. The newer generation is smarter and more aggressive in the sense of doing investigative reporting, sneaking in cameras and stuff, but again have never turned violent. Not Yet (and I don’t think it would be productive for them to turn violent now, nor do I think they have in them).
I wished she would have thought to do this to the same extent in 2009 to see if the Press was lying about who these Tea Partiers were (they were lying about them). Again she is being selective in who she is “giving the benefit of the doubt to”.
I wish I could know what I could say to make Nahida STOP! Does she really want to die just to make me feel sad? Come on, you know that rapes were going on at occupy and that was during last fall! What. you want to get raped just to make me “feel guilty”?
Okay, this is hypocritical. She is willing to do this with the Occupy but not with the tea partiers? We know that there were Leftists that would go to tea party events just to make them look bad. But Nahida never took an interest then. But she takes an interest now when we have the most violent mob SINCE the French Revolution!
Ollie, what can I say? What can I do? Nahida isn’t going to believe me. She isn’t going to take my experience, heck this isn’t about experience because I am YOUNG enough to believe that you can make up a lot for experience by finding out about history and during the fall there were many, many videos here about the Weather Underground, about what they were saying in their meetings, about their plans about their acts – Damn on 9-11-2001 there was even an article about Ayers (coincidence I know, but wow what a coincidence) where he said he wished he was MORE VIOLENT. Well now is his chance.
These people want to kill cops, they want to cut off heads, and they have done a petty good job at ALREADY causing MILLIONS of damages. And they are quite literally JUST WARMING UP. WE HAVEN’T SEEN ANYTHING YET!
So, if Nahida wants to get in the middle of that instead of keeping her head down like I am warning all of you I really don’t know what I can do.
“And either way maybe they will listen, and not act violently! People are better than that, I know it.”
I am still looking for the video where the protester was meekly saying “you are better than this” while black bloc totally trashes the place. Perhaps it was a different incident or another time in this incident. Granted I didn’t watch the whole video here.
By the way Black Bloc did something similar in Seattle with windows of bank buildings and also a Federal Courthouse.
If you think Black Bloc is of the right, then you are insane.
One question, yeah I get how later on they were shouting “peaceful protest” but before that when that one protestor tackled that Black Bloc guy wasn’t the crowd shouting “leave him alone” (let him go on and vandalize) so yeah you were kind of getting mixed messages from the crowd there.
In Seattle you had this known “super hero” (one of the lamest urban trends I have ever seen, this whole real life “super hero” thing) and he was trying to defend the courthouse against Black Bloc and half of the chat group I was on at that time criticized him for taking “the wrong side”.
Some of the protestors there Naively thought they could control the violence there (or at least had to appear as attempting to). Obviously they haven’t studied the history of Leftist protests in America (1999 Battle in Seattle a perfect but not an only example).
Some of the crowd might have had a problem of what was happening, but whoever produced this video is proud of it.
Yeah, Nahida good luck talking to these people. Look I have a better idea why don’t you find where something equivalent to this happened at a Tea party rally!
Here you can kind of hear where they mention “super hero”. This is the attack on one of at least two Federal Courthouses we have in Seattle.
By the way, the hypocrisy of the News media in this is so obvious. With the tea party the press went out of their way to try to find cases of inappropriate signs and behavior and really they couldn’t find any,
Here they went out of the way trying to minimize the behavior of Occupy. Oh, it’s just a few they say. The Press are Scum. But despite the media’s initial support of Occupy you can tell that they even are getting fed up by them.
Thanks for making me very angry again. Angry about the hypocrisy, angry about the violence, just angry.
So, Nahida thinks black bloc are conservatives in disguise? I thought they were undercover police that is doing this so they would later have an excuse to act violently against the protestors because we all know how they love to do that.
I have an idea, instead of trying to engage Occupy, Nahida should try to learn who Police officers really are. She should go to the police public relations department and see if they have what they call “citizen academies”. Citizen acadamies are basically a PR thing the please does where they have a class where they bring in actual police officers who talk about their jobs, It is really interesting. They actually allow you to ride alone with them on a actual patrol too (as long as you clear a background check which merely means you don’t have a criminal record; its not a deep background check).
It would really help Nahida to see that these cops are not the evil people the Left makes them out to be. No they aren’t perfect and that’s the mistake our side can make, but there’s reasons behind why they act the way they do.
I don’t know exactly where Nahida lives but just as an example I have placed a link to the FBI’s Citizen Academy program. But like I said many local city police departments have ones too. I guess I would recommend her going to a city police Citizen academy first because it is the city police that is most on the front lines when it comes to occupy.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/partnerships_and_outreach/community_outreach/citizens_academies
PR thing the please
I meant PR thing the Police…
But not only the Police. My local 911 center had one too. And we saw the FBI has one. And anyone can sign up for one. Anyone. Well of course unless you have a criminal record.
She can do that this summer instead. But no, in her own hypocrisy she only gives Occupy the benefit of the doubt. Not cops, and not tea partiers.
In her New York Times column this past weekend, Maureen Dowd quotes Barack Obama’s boss at his 1980s community organizing job in Chicago, one Jerry Kellman.
Dowd, however, failed to note that in his book, “Dreams From My Father,” Obama disguised Kellman’s name by using a so-called composite character, a fictional “Marty Kaufman,” to depict his former boss.
Perhaps Kellman’s name may have been masked because, it turns out, he is an Alinskyite who may have served as the link that introduced Obama to Weatherman terrorist Bill Ayers.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/another-alinskyite-emerges-from-obamas-past/
This is a really good movie.
Okay, part of me doesn’t want Nahida to watch this movie but another part of me feels that she needs to know what Obama is all about.
In 1969 Weather Underground founders Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn (who were to become Pres. Obama’s personal friends and associates for many years) put Charles Manson on the cover of their occasional newspaper, “Fire”. At what was billed as a “War Council” in Flint Michigan that same year, Ayers and his comrades took to greeting each other with “the fork” – three fingers pointed upwards, in honor of Manson. (Google Dohrn’s Flint conference quote on Manson – and Sharon Tate, who was 8 1/2 months pregnant at the time.) In 1972 Ayers dedicated the WU’s manifesto, “Prairie Fire”, to his cultural and political heroes — a list which included Sen. Robert Kennedy’s assassin, Sirhan Sirhan.
Throughout their career as terrorist bombers, Ayers and Dohrn were constantly trying to break the Left free of its “bourgeois” commitment to any standard of justice or decency. By adopting Charles Manson as their own, by praising Manson as a hero of the counterculture, they hoped to smash the Left’s “bourgeois” ties to civilization and thus spark similar acts of horrific “revolutionary” violence against innocent people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernardine_Dohrn
(Yeah, I know I am committing the sin of using wikipedia, but in this case I think we can take their word for it. If you want me to look for a better source let me know. What is posted is common knowledge it seems)
Dohrn was criticized for comments she made about the murders of actress Sharon Tate and retail store owners Leno and Rosemary LaBianca by the Charles Manson clan. In a speech during the December 1969 “War Council” meeting organized by the Weathermen, attended by about 400 people in Flint, Michigan, Dohrn said, “First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, then they even shoved a fork into the pig Tate’s stomach! Wild!” In greeting each other, delegates to the war council often spread their fingers to signify the fork.
These are the people you are dealing with when you are dealing with Occupy. These are the types of people you are dealing with when you are dealing with the Obama Administration (they also seem to have some kind of Mao fetish). I am not using campaign rhetoric when I say that Obama is very, very evil.
On August 8, 1969, Tate was two weeks from giving birth. She entertained two friends, actresses Joanna Pettet and Barbara Lewis, for lunch at her home, confiding in them her disappointment at Polanski’s delay in returning from London. In the afternoon Polanski telephoned her. Her younger sister Debra also called to ask if she and their sister Patti could spend the night with her, but Sharon declined. In the evening she went to her favorite restaurant, El Coyote, with Sebring, Frykowski and Folger, returning about 10:30 p.m.
During the night, they were murdered by members of Charles Manson’s “family” and their bodies discovered the following morning by Tate’s housekeeper, Winifred Chapman. Police arrived at the scene to find the body of a young man, later identified as Steven Parent, shot to death in his car, which was in the driveway. Inside the house, the bodies of Tate and Sebring were found in the living room; a long rope tied around each of their necks connected them. On the front lawn lay the bodies of Frykowski and Folger. All of the victims, except Parent, had been stabbed numerous times. The coroner’s report for Tate noted that she had been stabbed sixteen times, and that “five of the wounds were in and of themselves fatal.”
Police took the only survivor at the address, the caretaker William Garretson, for questioning. Garretson lived in the guest house which was located on the property, but a short distance from the house, and not immediately visible. As the first suspect, he was questioned and submitted to a polygraph test. He said that Parent had visited him at approximately 11:30 p.m. and left after a few minutes. Garretson said he had no involvement in the murders and did not know anything that could help the investigation. Police accepted his explanation and he was allowed to leave.
Polanski was informed of the murders and returned to Los Angeles where police, unable to determine a motive, questioned him about his wife and friends. On Wednesday, August 13, Tate was interred in the Holy Cross Cemetery, Culver City, California, with her son, Paul Richard Polanski (named posthumously for Polanski’s and Tate’s fathers), in her arms. Sebring’s funeral took place later the same day; the funerals were scheduled several hours apart to allow mutual friends to attend both.
Life magazine devoted a lengthy article to the murders and featured photographs of the crime scenes. Polanski was interviewed for the article and allowed himself to be photographed in the living room where Tate and Sebring had died, Tate’s dried blood clearly visible on the floor in front of him. Widely criticized for his actions, he argued that he wanted to know who was responsible and was willing to shock the magazine’s readers in the hope that someone would come forward with information.
Curiosity about the victims led to the re-release of Tate’s films, achieving greater popularity than they had in their initial runs. Some newspapers began to speculate on the motives for the murders. Some of the published photographs of Tate were allegedly taken at a Satanic ritual, but were later proven to have been production photographs from Eye of the Devil. Friends spoke out against the portrayal of Tate by some elements of the media. Mia Farrow said she was as “sweet and pure a human being as I have ever known”, while Patty Duke remembered her as “a gentle, gentle creature. I was crazy about her, and I don’t know anyone who wasn’t”. Polanski berated a crowd of journalists at a press conference, saying that many times they had written that Tate “was beautiful. Maybe the most beautiful woman in the world. But did you ever write how good she was?” Peter Evans later quoted the actor Laurence Harvey, who commented on Polanski immediately after the murders, “This could destroy Roman. Marriage vows mean nothing to him but few men have adored a woman as much as he adored Sharon.”
Polanski later admitted that in the months following the murders he suspected various friends and associates, and his paranoia subsided only when the killers were arrested. Newspapers claimed that many Hollywood stars were moving out of the city, while others were reported to have installed security systems in their homes. Writer Dominick Dunne later recalled the tension:
“The shock waves that went through the town were beyond anything I had ever seen before. People were convinced that the rich and famous of the community were in peril. Children were sent out of town. Guards were hired. Steve McQueen packed a gun when he went to Jay Sebring’s funeral.”
Nahida HAS talked to the Tea Party. She just NEVER TOLD YOU.
Because WHY would she tell you, Steve? She doesn’t TALK about politics unless someone brings it up first. And you NEVER asked her. But she engages with conservatives ALL THE TIME.
I wish I could know what I could say to make Nahida STOP! Does she really want to die just to make me feel sad? Come on, you know that rapes were going on at occupy and that was during last fall! What. you want to get raped just to make me “feel guilty”?
She’s not doing it to make you feel sad… where did you get that idea, when she doesn’t even know I’m telling you?
You CAN make her stop. Just tell her you didn’t actually send that email. I don’t care, LIE TO HER, just make her stop. Or tell her that you’re sorry, you didn’t actually want some girl to commit suicide. That it was really just rhetoric. You know how easily she accepts apologies, especially from you.
Okay, to both. I really didn’t send any emails or encourage any emails to be sent against that girl. It wasn’t really worth my time. I was just showing Nahida the effects of blowing stuff out of proportion. In the past people have had their lives destroyed because of Leftist over reaction.
Would I want that girl to commit suicide? Well again, I was just showing what could have happened. I don’t know of any cases where people have committed suicide but I think that person who was falsely accused of setting off the Atlanta Olympic bomb comes the closest. Yeah, he did win a lawsuit from the news media but even that didn’t clear his reputation. People always remember the headline never the retraction (in the few cases where retractions are given). He didn’t live too much after his court victory. It was obvious that the pressures of the whole thing caused his health to deteriorate to a point it never recovered.
“I wished she would have thought to do this to the same extent in 2009 to see if the Press was lying about who these Tea Partiers were (they were lying about them). Again she is being selective in who she is “giving the benefit of the doubt to”.
Uh, yeah, interesting story. Nahida wrote TONS of emails to people who supported the Tea Party. I remember asking how she knew anyone… It was easy because I think some of the ones initially supporting them were her friends. That kind of surprised me. Anyway, she was okay with them in the beginning. She would always think it was super gross when people referred to them as Teabaggers. And then she said something about them all deteriorating into racist and Islamophobic bullshit. Her Conservative friends actually agreed they weren’t really that hopeful about them anymore, and that their agenda went from real points to rallying nonsense, but I don’t know if they agreed with the point she made of them being racist. I don’t remember what happened exactly, but she wasn’t angry from the START. Just later. It was pretty similiar to her reaction to Occupy, actually, where she didn’t care at first and didn’t think they were nuts and might have points and then she was alarmed…
But she’s not going to try and save the Tea Party, because that wouldn’t be her responsibility.
The movement was NEVER Racist.
Was it Isamophobic? Yeah, probably by Nahida’s definition. We don’t want to see Sharia law replace the constitution.
It’s kind of like what Nahida said to that Chinese student. To those who want Sharia Law, well there are plenty of Islamic countries they can move to where it is practiced.
I’m pretty sure Nahida was referring to the Monkey God thing.
Which, yeah, is ASBOLUTELY islamophobic.
Nahida doesn’t just call things Islamophobic when they don’t want Shariah law.
MOON God. They say that Allah was really an ancient moon God.
Look it’s only a small fraction, but for many Christians they believe so much in that their faith is the only true one that they insult all the others.
They really believe that those who aren’t Christians are going to Hell. Again this is only a fraction of them, but indeed they do exist.
Dude, didn’t they say this “I owe an apology to millions of Hindus who worship Lord Hanuman, an actual Monkey God. Hanuman is worshiped as a symbol of perseverance, strength, and devotion … Those are hardly the traits of whatever the Hell (literally) it is that terrorists worship.”
Again, they claim that Allah is a Moon God. They claim that the name Allah comes from a pagan Moon worshiping cult.
Not polite I know. Sorry. Like I said they believe that there’s only one way to heaven and that is through the belief in Christ as our Lord and Savior.
Not all the tea partiers mind you. Just the strong Christian ones.
Again, they claim that Allah is a Moon God.
Again, no. Farah’s quote is from Tea Party Express leader Mark Williams.
AND I–along with Jewish women–have to protect my religious right to an abortion from freaks like this.
Protecting our religious right to an abortion FROM the “religious” Right.
Which I have just posted!:
As you all must have heard by now, Michigan state representative Lisa Brown was censored and barred from speaking during a debate on an abortion bill because she had the audacity to utter the word “vagina”—at which point all the Republican men in the room gasped and clutched their pearls in horror, despite the fact that they’re legislatively raping yours with unnecessary highly intrusive transvaginal probes.
“What she said was offensive,” said Rep. Mike Callton, R-Nashville. “It was so offensive, I don’t even want to say it in front of women. I would not say that in mixed company.”
Oh spare me, you cunt. (What the hell is “mixed company”? Is this the 1800s?) I’m not a delicate fucking flower. I thought women were supposed to be the ones who talk too much? God, men canNOT shut up about things that don’t concern them.
Brown was not the only woman silenced, and it was obviously not her utterance of the female genitalia that sentenced her to an infringement on her first amendment rights. As the Detroit News reports, “Byrum, D-Onondaga, caused a disturbance on the House floor Wednesday when she wasn’t allowed to introduce an amendment to the abortion regulations bill banning men from getting a vasectomy unless the sterilization procedure was necessary to save a man’s life.” Conservative men are deliberately silencing any woman who opposes them, for the same reasons they are against women’s suffrage—preserving their blasphemous privilege. They don’t want you to debate the issue; these pricks, who are in favor of small government, want to tell you what to do with your body, and what they want to do with it is to penetrate as deeply as possible regardless of how loudly and clearly you scream for them to stop. But don’t you dare try to suggest the same policing and intrusion of autonomy for them and demand proof of life-threatening conditions for a vasectomy! They will push their hands over your mouth.
While Lisa Brown’s words, “I have not asked you to adopt and adhere to my religious beliefs. Why are you asking me to adopt yours? And finally, Mr. Speaker, I’m flattered that you’re all interested in my vagina, but ‘no’ means ‘no.’” are currently what is receiving the most attention, I’d like to direct it back to her primary point:
“Judaism believes that therapeutic abortions, namely abortions performed to preserve the life of the mother, are not only permissible, but mandatory. The stage of pregnancy does not matter. Wherever there is a question of the life of the mother or that of the unborn child, Jewish law rules in favor of preserving the life of the mother. The status of the fetus as human life does not equal that of the mother.”
Indeed, Judaism—as well as Islam—has legalized abortion in cases in which the mother’s life is in danger, and in cases of rape. In Islam abortions are also allowed in the first 120 days of the pregnancy, before a soul is Given to the fetus. Additionally, much like the attitudes of the Aztec toward women who died in childsbirth as warriors who have died in battle (and those who survived honored as victorious warriors), Medieval Judaism viewed the fetus, had it been implanted by a rapist, as a pursuer that seeks to destroy the woman’s life as an enemy against her on a battlefield.
But despite the fact that in early periods of its existence even the Roman Catholic Church allowed abortion in specific cases, even something as obviously permissible as birth control has come into question. Because birth control, you see, interferes with God’s plan for woman, which in Christianity evidently was to suffer in delivery forever because Eve took the apple. Any innovation to impinge on this pain or to ameliorate it—such as birth control—is blasphemy. Adam’s punishment, however, which was to toil physically and tend the Earth, has had no such issue obstructing it from alleviation off the shoulders of man through advancements in labor.
But advancements in birth? Hell no.
Aside from this hypocrisy, how much longer are the same people who most often cry about forcing religious organizations to cover something that is against their beliefs–the “religious” Right–going to infringe on your religious freedom?
P.S. VAGINA VAGINA VAGINA VAGINA VAGINA VAGINA VAGINA VAGINA VAGINA
i am BEYOND angry right now.
Btw, Olly, NOT sure I’m comfortable with you encouraging Steve to lie to her. Even if it is to save her. Heh.
Um. THIS is not her responsibility either, Farah. She just thinks it is because Steve was constantly acing like SHE did something wrong whenever there was violence. But those people breaking windows? They aren’t like her! They don’t believe in what she believes. They don’t care about God, they don’t care about women, they don’t care about peace. But now she thinks they are like her, that they believe what she believes, and she can just talk to them and they’ll stop.
So yeah, I am TOTALLY fine with Steve lying to her about how sorry he is that he tried to get a girl to kill herself. Because THAT is going to stop her. It is going to make her realize Steve is more like her than the people who are breaking windows.
She would be content with it. Believe me, I’ve been WRITING to her, and I can READ BENEATH THE LINES. Of course she doesn’t come out and say these things, but I KNOW that will stop her. Steve constantly acted like she was like them, as violent and hateful, and now she believes it and she’s trying to change it. At the same time, she’s paranoid and thinks the violent ones must be from somewhere else, because she can NEVER imagine herself doing things like that. And Steve tried to get that girl to kill herself.
Steve, I’m serious, she ADORES you.
I was lying that night. I didn’t email the University at all or encouraged others do do so. Not that I couldn’t have, I just didn’t bothered. Sign was stupid, yeah. Sign was inappropriate, yeah, but it shouldn’t have made national/international news. It should have remained a local/University controversy.
It’s like what I said about the whole thing about the “Mercy Mosque Burning”. Yeah, Mercy is a small town in the middle of nowhere in Canada, but I wasn’t joking when I stated that incident would have become National/International news. It’s the world we live in today (that is if it was a real place and that had really happened).
Well, I’M not fine with him lying. Olly, I was going to say Nahida would never forgive you, but then I realized that’s probably not true.
She’ll be fine. She’s a smart woman. And they wouldn’t hurt a snowflake. Would would hurt a snowflake?
Oh yes, they would hurt a snowflake.
But see a snowflake wouldn’t be doing this. This is why I am beginning to think you are playing me here.
Like I said, I knew several snowflakes in college and they may have been many things but the one thing they aren’t is this – they aren’t stupid.
While others were going on talking about how it it is such a great show of faith to leave one’s car locked it was a snowflake who said what a dumb idea that was (that wasn’t her exact words, I wish I could remember what they were because I remember that they were cute).
So, no, snowflakes aren’t your pie in the sky unrealistic idealists. They are grounded in reality. They might see good in all people but that doesn’t blind them to the evil.
And besides when you think of Nahida and what she has been through. I mean what was the most poignant moment of my youth. What was my “where were you when you heard Kennedy died”, moment of my youth? The Challenger Disaster? Or perhaps it was the Iranian Hostage situation? That would probably match up better with her. For Nahida it was seeing a plane full of people plow into a building. It was listening to a plop, plop, plop like a hard rain only to realize that these are people who have jumped to their deaths knowing it was either that or being burned alive.
So she comes from less innocent times than I. She would never say “we are better than that” because she has known from a very early age that we aren’t.
So, yeah, you are playing me here aren’t you. Nahida knows to “tie her camel” as the saying goes.
You and your conspiracies.
She stopped that fast BECAUSE she’s not blind to evil.
To be honest I don’t think she was talking about Occupiers when she said that “we are better than that.” I think she was thinking about YOU.
That’s why she accepted it, believed it so easily. She usually questions when I tell her what happened here.
“While others were going on talking about how it it is such a great show of faith to leave one’s car locked it was a snowflake who said what a dumb idea that was…”
UNLOCKED I MEAN.
You know trust in God. God will provide.
The showflake said something to the effect that it was stupid. Of course you should lock your door.
THIS JUST HAPPENED ON THE PHONE:
“Hold on I’m thirsty, I need a drink.”
“Nahida, totally random, but Steve said he was lying that night when he wanted that girl to kill himself–”
I hear her spit out the water. “WHAT!”
“Yeah. And so–”
She interrupts me. “He’s SUCH AN ASSHOLE!!” (I can hear her typing something.)
“Nahida, what are you doing?”
“Canceling some plans, dammit!! I’m not fucking wasting my summer when he wasn’t even serious. WHAT A PRICK!”
I told you.
Good. Now she can contact her local Police Department to see if they have a “Citizen Academy” class she can attend. It’s usually just a couple of hours once a week for like six weeks or so.
Uh. What if she sees this?
Steve, I’m serious, she ADORES you.
Nah, she adores the man in her head.
Won’t matter if she sees it anymore. Steve wasn’t lying.
Besides, I’m too happy to care.
She wasn’t going believing they would listen to her, that they weren’t really dangerous. Like Steve said, she is too smart for that. She was going believing that if Steve could do something like that, then there was a chance they weren’t really who they said they were. She even sounded more depressed than suspicious. Really sad and slow, like she was heartbroken. You saw how fast she accepted that he was lying. If the real reason was to talk them out of it, that wouldn’t have stopped her. And it makes sense, because her whole deal is that she doesn’t care what ideology people are from. Just whether they’re good or bad.
Occupy – VERY BAD PEOPLE.
Who says I couldn’t do something like that.
I just didn’t bother to.
I had other things on my plate that night.
Who says I couldn’t do something like that.
Yeah well, I ain’t telling her that…
SHHHH.
People are better than that, I know it.
I have to agree with Olly. In her quote/letter thing this sentence seems detached from the rest. I mean, it FITS as a train of thought, but if there are really “undertones” and the REASON she was going was because of you writing to that girl, she was probably thinking of you.
I can confirm this, because she just said this on the phone, “I can’t BELIEVE I was moping around for no reason, thinking now I had to go find out myself. How pathetic. Olly, I KNEW he was lying. A part of me always knew. He’s too good for that. Why would he lie about something so cruel? What a douchecanoe. But, I will take that over him actually doing it! I kind of feel terrible for doubting him. Maybe I should have just asked him, instead of coming up with some elaborate plan to uncover a sort scheme. But I couldn’t ask him. Oh Olly, sometimes I think pride is my greatest sin. And I’ve done so many things wrong, but it’s always pride that results in stupidity. I was so hurt he could do something like that, I simply couldn’t think.”
See that in bold? Yeah.
I told her “Steve said snowflakes don’t do stupid things.”
She said, “Well it’s a good thing I’m not a snowflake then. He’s wonderful. I hope he goes to Heaven! I will pray for it.”
“You have no idea how gigantic of a snowflake he thinks you are.”
“He’s wrong, Olly, he has to be. I can’t possibly be what he thinks I am. Why, I can’t even imagine… or begin to process the thought… I hope he doesn’t really believe it! I would hate to deceive him, because it sounded like something that was very special to him.”
And she thinks pride is her “greatest sin.”
“Well it’s a good thing I’m not a snowflake then.”
If she said she was then of course she wouldn’t be because she wouldn’t be modest. Like I said such people take such small sins of theirs and magnify it in their minds whereas we would just chuck it up to “we are just human” and move on.
Snowflakes of course never see themselves as snowflakes because they see all the sin within themselves. Which of course is far, far less sin then the rest of us have but to them it’s enormous.
If someone believes herself to be a snowflake then practically by definition she can’t be.
To that girl’s university, I mean.
What. The hell. Is going on.
Oh no. Uuuooh no. Oh, Steve. No.
(Olivia, wth? I’ll deal with you later.)
Steve, I am not being modest. I am being truthful. You must recognize this, because you’ve harbored such sincere belief in yourself that “snowflakes” exist—and I believe in them too! (adopted from Shi’a Islam)—but the last thing I want is for you to be disappointed, or devastated, when you’ve misplaced who one of them is. That would break my heart. I don’t know if it would break yours, but I’m guessing you wouldn’t be thrilled about being deceived. And I don’t want to deceive you regarding something that is obviously so very precious to you. So please understand that this isn’t humility. I’m the LEAST humble person… ever. (Just ask the people who advise me to wear looser clothes!) But I know the Truth. (And isn’t that arrogant of me, to believe I know the Truth?) And the Truth is I’m not that good, Steve, I just want to be. That is the difference. I want so badly to feel sincere selflessness. I burn for it; it’s an ardent longing that haunts me almost constantly. It wakes me at night and finds me absorbed in the desire to be as beautiful and good as Eternity. I can be terrifying in my chase of utopian ideals of love and justice. But only in the chase, Steve. Because I am neither terrifyingly loving nor just. I disagree with what Chris said, about every act being a selfish one, because I believe that there are people who don’t even think about how something bad would hurt themselves before refraining from it to hurt others. They simply aren’t capable of thinking bad things. Bad things don’t occur to them.
But I’m not one of them.
I only strive to satisfy a vision I’ve built myself. A vision of myself. I’m obsessed with the idea of being good. But I’m not actually good. That is the difference. I could say that I wish I were a snowflake… but I’m afraid that even that might not be true! Imagine the enormity of such a thing, of being so very dangerous, because of how people could react to you. As long as you existed, there will always be conflict, because there are people who want… to see goodness destroyed. That power, I’m not pure enough to be responsible with it! How would someone as terribly unworthy as me, who only wants to be good, handle such a thing? I’m not what you think I am. You may even be projecting; we all are, with the subjectifiation of our respective experiences, nothing is ever really what we imagine it to be. People don’t exist in the way we think they do. Sometimes, but often not. You know, I’m always paranoid when I encounter someone terrible that I’M actually the terrible person and they are merely responding to it. I think you just think I’m good because you are.
One day everything—all this … superficial goodness–I’ve tried so hard to build will cave, and it will confirm my own suspicions about myself. That I’m not really good, it’s just something I want desperately. I want it so desperately, so urgently, that it makes me want to cry even now. And when all I’ve built with attempts caves, it will finally be such a relief.
P.S. Olivia, you don’t need to hide from me that he noted he didn’t say he couldn’t. What matters is that he could, but didn’t. That he wouldn’t. And that is remarkable. That is real goodness, and real power. And that is why he is so good, see, because I… I couldn’t.
I want so badly to feel sincere selflessness. I burn for it; it’s an ardent longing that haunts me almost constantly. It wakes me at night and finds me absorbed in the desire to be as beautiful and good as Eternity. I can be terrifying in my chase of utopian ideals of love and justice. But only in the chase, Steve. Because I am neither terrifyingly loving nor just.
Wow. This comment is the most beautiful thing I’ve read in a very long time.
“Wow. This comment is the most beautiful thing I’ve read in a very long time.”
Excuse me, that wasn’t supposed to be in italics.
Yes, this is really the way they think.
Modesty would be the wrong word for it.
You know if Nahida really believed me, I honestly think that would make her evil.
Oh Steve, what have I done. I’ve impersonated some sort of perfect holy thing; even if unintentionally, your beliefs are such an intimate part of your soul that I cannot possibly not have wronged you in this deception, or inflicted some sort of harm. Especially you. You seem so unhappy and upset with the state of things, and the existence of …”snowflakes” (if I’d known my utter sarcasm would stick I’d have picked something way more badass)… must be a source of some comfort for you. It is often those who are seemingly cruel and cold in their approach that are welled to the brim with feeling and sincerity and the purest of faith. I was so moved reading about part of your beliefs; I had always wondered what they are. And here I… am false. False comfort. Impersonating the most radiant of them. What have I done! It feels so wrong.
You’ve been incredibly angry with me before. About things so vital and intrinsic to your being that you can’t possibly reconcile and have refused to reconcile. I’m everything you’re against–everything. So how did I even get here, with you mistaking me for something like this? This is absurd; the furthest from what I would have ever expected. I don’t understand. But I am telling you I’m a counterfeit. And I know for certain because something you said above that that provoked a slight tinge of such an appalling unnecessary unwarranted emotion within me I cannot name it for shame (so you’ll have to trust me). No snowflake would feel like that!
It’s astonishing how being thought of something like this by someone can hurt so very deeply. Why can’t I be flattered like a normal person? Ugh, there is something wrong with me, I swear it. I’m always over the top. Always. I can’t control how fluidly, alarmingly, over-flowingly passionate I am, especially at this hour. I shouldn’t even be writing to you because it’s past eight and for some reason that’s when writers are insane with emotion. Insane. This will be very embarrassing and incoherent in the morning. I wonder if this is how people feel after they drink? I will never know. I wonder how writers feel after they drink. Gosh, how frightening to think of this heightened!
When you discover the truth about me on Judgment Day I pray God will ease your distress–and, selfishly, your resentment of me–with all the fulfillments of your heart’s desires, so that you are too overcome with happiness to harbor any negative emotion that would displease and adulterate your joy.
Astagfirullah. Astagfirullah, Astagfirullah, God have mercy! How lost this world would be without mercy. I should not have told Olivia–I should have recognized at once her arrangement of priorities! Well I won’t go anymore, Steve; there’s no need since you were lying, and besides I would never want to hurt you, I promise. Perhaps Olivia’s indiscretion was God’s will to prevent it; still I wish it had been prevented by me not being ridiculous in the first place instead of you informed of my ridiculousness. I left my damn car unlocked. Astagfirullah, save us all! Protect the Real Snowflakes. And everyone else. The rest of us! The rest of us who are not snowflakes, ordinary, who would perish without mercy. I am so tired now… how strange. Usually I don’t feel sleepy this early… This means, I suspect, that this will be the most nonsensical comment… Good night. And salaam. Peace.
peace peace peace
Steve, I’m fine. You are still wrong about me. But I have not come apart; please don’t worry. I just don’t want you to be devastated when the truth comes out, as it always will by virtue of its nature.
I didn’t leave my actual car literally unlocked… that was just something I grabbed as an analogy for something else since you mentioned it (meaning to describe doing something stupid). Of course I don’t expect God to protect my car. God protects cars with locks.
Yeah, after I wrote that I thought no, she meant it as an analogy.
Nahida, I was checking your twitter and found this picture of you:
http://twitter.com/NahidaSN/status/208681107288367105
Wearing the hat I saw you in! I thought it was so pretty, and I remembered you said you felt a little bad that everyone from CA on TV is shown with blonde hair and blues eyes.
Did you know that during the Islamic Empire, dark eyes were the standard? Those with light eyes would dye their eyebrows and hair to fit it! Steve, you probably can’t tell either, because you too have been raised with the blue-eye standard, but if Nahida had been born in a different century and a different time, she would have been considered a thing of beauty.
Her eyes are half closed in that picture, but I can tell you they are very big. And you see how DARK her irises are compared to the whites of her eyes? (Which again you can’t tell in the photo but her eyes are very bright.) That contrast is said to be a mark of great beauty. Poets sang songs about women who looked like her. In fact, the beings that exist in heaven in the Quran, called the hur al’ayn, that’s what their name means. Dark eyes (with the whites very bright.)
A different time, Nahida. But still.
“Nahida had been born in a different century and a different time, she would have been considered a thing of beauty.”
UH, I don’t know what “time” you think you are living in but Americans have a much broader criteria for beauty than you think we all do.
By the way, it’s obviously not part of the definition of snowflake. It’s not a requirement. I guess it is just a coincidence on my part. Although a friend of mine once said he didn’t find one of my snowflakes was that attractive (I didn’t tell him I thought she was a snowflake of course, he wouldn’t have understood what I meant). You would think I would be offended but no, I was quite the opposite. I was excited he would think that for several reasons.
Anyway, back to Nahida, uh, no, don’t take it the wrong way. but she is very attractive, here now at our time in our society. That’s just a fact. She is considered a thing of beauty. But as Nahida would be first to point out – SHE IS NOT A THING. That’s the problem. Too often women have been treated as things – as objects to be owned. That is something it seems that we as a society haven’t fully grown out of. And that makes me wonder if that is something hardwired within us. Something we just CAN’T outgrow as a species. And if it is what should our response to that be?
I apologize – of course she isn’t a thing. It’s just a phrase.
And I wasn’t pointing it out as a requirement. Just complementing her. I disagree that American definition of beauty is broad, though. Why are so many women practically killing themselves to fit it? Besides, beauty is subjective, so I wasn’t sure if you saw it in her because everyone has their own opinion.
I have some work to do today but I will try to write a more complete apology in the upcoming days. I work up today and the sun still rose (although where I live it is hard to tell) but I still can’t believe I would break snowflake rule #1. It’s kind of like “Fight Club” right? (number one rule of fight club – you don’t talk about fight club) You can never “touch” a snowflake. I knew it I should have realized that revealing the identity of a snowflake is symbolically equivalent to “touching” one.
I think it was because I was losing faith in them. It was something I believed in college but I wasn’t really believing in them any more. But because you reacted exactly like a snowflake would to this confirms my belief. It was a cruel price for you to pay and that is why I am so, so sorry.
I meant to type Woke up. Gosh I wish you could go back and correct mistakes on these things. Yeah, the sun rose, I don’t see any ice on the roads, but I know I have cased you intense pain, and that was unforgivable.
I don’t want to go all Salieri with you.
A more complete apology?! Gosh, I’m not even sure what you’re apologizing for, because I’m not a snowflake. My horror doesn’t come from you telling me or breaking that rule Steve, it comes from you believing it when it simply isn’t true, because it’s something so close to your heart and I can’t fathom impersonating one of them. You can’t see it but I’m the one who has wronged you and deceived you. You mustn’t apologize.
Farah, well I never… made that connection… that I looked like that… but I did know the standard was different, yes. Unfortunately the people you described with blue eyes who dyed their hair and eyebrows were slaves. Slavery, the most REPULSIVE aspect of an otherwise great empire. That, and few other things.
You must recognize the different between being humble and telling the truth.
Do snowflakes really melt exactly when you touch them? I have never touched a snowflake. I saw snowflakes falling once, when I was on a plane to Asia, and they stuck to the window of the plane. I remember touching the glass and being so amazed that they were so small yet so intricate. Tiny. That surprised me; when we cut out paper snowflakes in class they were much larger. In my mind that was how they looked.
It has never snowed where I live. The worst we’ve endured is hale.
“Do snowflakes really melt exactly when you touch them?” Well, that depends on how cold the weather is. It depends on how warm your hands are. If you are using gloves then no, perhaps it won’t met when they land and can stay solid for quite a while.
Remember “snowflake” is your analogy. It’s not the one I used in college. In the one used the NO “TOUCH” rule was critical. Just feel honored to be allowed in their presence because that in itself is a rare gift indeed. Of course “touch” has to be seen in a larger more symbolic sense than just physical content. It gets hard sometimes to determine what exactly qualifies as “touch” .
I feel Salieri “touched” here.
Remember though Mozzart isn’t really a Snowflake in the traditional way.
He even kind of says it himself in the movie.
He said something like “I am profane but my music is divine”. This was actually the second movie I saw that revealed them to me. There was one scene where It just popped together and made sense. The whole movie was about “touching a snowflake”.
I like this movie because it explains it in less of a fairy tale way unlike the first movie I saw about them. This is the effect they can have. But since Mozart isn’t a typical snowflake it is hard to recognize what he is at first. But then that one scene just basically comes out and says – yeah, Mozart was one of them as well (at least in the context of the story). That two movies described the thing so perfectly, using the same symbolism I just found profound (and the first movie wasn’t even a particularly good movie).
Actually Farah, the fact that the Qur’an describes the hur al-‘ayn as having very dark eyes that are bright always sort of… bothered me. If it were a hadith (the words of mortals and not God) and its validity was questionable, it would be different. There are some hadith that state the beings of Paradise wear green clothing and smell of the sweetest perfume. Now that is just absurd; how would any human know that before death?
But the Qur’an itself describes one thing about their physical appearance: that they are dark-eyed. I tell myself that this doesn’t mean they can’t have green eyes or blue eyes or grey or violet… those colors would just have to be dark, since ‘dark’ isn’t a color. But I must admit that’s not good enough. It doesn’t satisfy me with the standard it sets, to say that dark eyes are Heavenly as if light eyes can’t be beautiful. Of course the latter is not the suggestion–the Qur’an might just be stating a fact… but we can’t pretend it doesn’t have an affect on people. As history has shown, it has!
I guess I am just not comfortable with the idea that Divinity would have a hierarchy of beauty–have both light and dark eyes on Earth but dark eyes as a trait of Heavenly beings. Of course again that isn’t the suggestion, that there’s any hierarchy… I can’t help but feel it is in some sort of ghostly way; I am probably limited by my mortal understanding: we are conditioned to think of things hierarchically.
“…”snowflakes” (if I’d known my utter sarcasm would stick I’d have picked something way more badass)… ”
Mind was a little more badass. I am sorry that I can’t tell you what it was but it is just way too personal to me. And for the most part it seemed to have fit throughout time although there are misconceptions about them. A guy even wrote a song about them and although I just love the song I think the guy misinterpreted why they were behaving like they were.
And of course, the song was wrong in that in the end they did somehow survive. I don’t know how, but they did. at least a remnant. I know because I have seen them.
It’s me. Steve. Gosh, now I have that song going on in my head.
Yes, I was posting as Susan. The point I was going to make was if you want to understand America, you need to understand the song “American Pie”.
Also. Do people here know who Sharon Tate is?
But… if you were Susan… you’ve been here during… oh never mind, I can’t figure out your shenanigans.
I don’t know who Sharon Tate is, but I just Googled her. What lovely cheekbones!
Now that I think of it, “hur al-ayn” literally translates to “bright of eye.” It was the Arab culture with its pre-existing beauty standards that interpreted it as a contrast between black irises and bright whites, or as the ‘bright’ referring to the whites. But ‘bright of eye’ can mean anything really. Doesn’t even have to be physical. Depending on the culture… Athena was called the “grey-eyed goddess” but it meant to signify her wisdom.
Actually hur means beautiful, not bright. But your interpretation is still correct.
I have always thought that the “legitimization” of the 1960s radical by the media, by academia has been a great atrocity. And now seeing it accumulate into what is now going on in the White House, no this is a battle that started (and perhaps was lost) before I was even born.
I so wished you would have understood that before supporting Obama.
It is important because you need to know what one of Obama’s Friends/Allies said about her murder. She LOVED IT! She thought it was great.
Remind you the whole American Pie thing was before my time, but it is exactly what I have been fighting all my life.
Even when I was young I knew that History isn’t just a series of isolated events but this long story that we are just getting into the middle of. So, I did read about what occurred before, and how it effects what is going on now.
And besides the Baby Boomers were just so full of themselves for like the first 15 years of my life it was Woodstock this, Woodstock that, I mean they went on and on – it was a damn rock concert nothing else (okay I know symbolically it was more than that but damn).
Obama just represents pure evil in this world. Just like Clinton did before him. There’s nothing “new” about Occupy.
By the way, Nahida you are a lit major, right?
I have often thought that in many ways Bill Clinton was like Tom Buchanan in “The Great Gatsby”.
I can’t stand The Great Gatsby. Yes, yes, I know it is supposed to be an American classic, but God, I think the author had some serious issues with women. I guess that’s sort of the point (one of many) but it still makes my skin crawl and wonder if a world of difference would have been made had it been written in Daisy’s perspective. (I can recognize that it’s a masterpiece but mostly I detested spending time with the characters. Sort of like The Inferno. Dante is such a jackass, but his work is brilliant.) I was reading an article about Palestinian children reading that book, and a little boy was aghast at how it was describing its female characters as shallow and vacuous and concluded it was a terrible book for displaying and encouraging such a thing. I was sad to see that he misinterpreted the objective: not to encourage, but to warn and criticize. “The only good character in the book,” the young boy had noted, “is that poor man whose wife cheated on him. He just does his job in the shop.”
But Clinton? Really, Steve, I know he couldn’t keep it in his pants but he wasn’t evil. How do you know Obama is friends with Dohrn? I promise you not all liberals are friends with each other. That was a terrible thing for her to say. She claimed she was joking, according to Wiki, but it’s hard to believe that was true when not a single person in the audience thought it was rhetoric. Even if it were true I would never tolerate such a “joke.” I listened to her introduced in the video after reading that section on Wiki and my heart sank because of all the labels she applies to herself; they almost are the same as mine. But I can never imagine any decent women’s rights activist saying that about a woman who was stabbed to death. How could it even cross her mind? Every feminist I know, including myself, would be horrified and disgusted. What an evil thing to say. Gosh I am feeling like I do when people who call themselves Muslim commit honor killings!
Surely, you can see though, that many of these things are absolutely ridiculous? I mean, Obama’s logo looks like that because his name begins with an ‘O’ and it’s employing the American flag as a symbol; it happens to look like the sun. It’s got nothing to do with borrowing Maoism from the East and applying it to the West. In fact, that reminds me of Muslims who believe that Coca Cola is a conspiracy against Muslims because the way it’s designed in intense cursive its mirror image reads “No Muhammad, No Mecca” in Arabic. (I can read it. It actually does look like that.) Gimme a break. I have no doubt that Coca Cola as a massive company has committed great evils, but scheming against Muslims isn’t one of their plans.
Steve, I have never been nearly as invested in politics as you. Olly told me you said somewhere (though I don’t see it here?) that I began using terms after university that “non-academic” people don’t use. But I’ve always used them, Steve. You just happened to hear it after I started university, because I don’t talk about it… (in fact, university is not the place I learned them) I’m guessing you were referring to the term “ableism” but you didn’t seem to have a problem when Sarah Palin was telling people not to call her son the R word. She didn’t call it ableism, of course, but that’s what it is. I don’t use the R word, but to be honest I haven’t entirely eliminated hurtful words from my vocabulary. Once, in a feminist thread about the Catholic Church reviving the practice of exorcisms, and one of the women there was expressing concern that the Church was preventing mentally handicapped people from real medical treatment. I became very defensive of religion (I wasn’t yet distinguishing the difference between criticizing it as an institution and criticizing the religion itself… I trusted myself to do it, but not other people) and when she reacted very angrily to my defenses and accused me of making it about something else, I dismissively told her she was “spazzing out.”
I could feel the shock at my words vibrate through the board.
And for good reason. Here we were discussing the possibility of abusing people with schizophrenia and epilepsy and other disabilities, holding them against their will, brainwashing them to the point of malnutrition, telling them they are possessed by demons, until finally they die… all very ableist practices… and what did I do? I told this woman she was just “spazzing out.” Spazzing out is an ableist term–it is SPECIFICALLY derived from incontrollable physical movements. Fits and jerks. The kind of fits and jerks that are the symptoms of those being accused of harboring demons.
I could not have possibly been more insensitive. It was unbelievably cruel.
To be absolutely truthful, while I had been very careful about ableism in the past, I hadn’t realized “spazzing out” was ableist / would have the affect that it did. I should have made the connection–should have asked myself where the hell that phrase came from, because it is not obscure one. I would have realized if I’d paused for just one minute before typing it. But I didn’t think.
I apologized, and then I explained that mentally ill people in other communities that consider what is actually schizophrenia to be a type of possession fair better than most people with schizophrenia in the Western world. This is because they consider possession to be something that is not the patient’s fault, and they keep the schizophrenic person in their family instead of institutionalizing them and use family networks to help care for that person when he or she is sick. Sometimes our medical approach here has devastating effects, because hospitalization can often destroy these networks of care when all the patients need is to function at the highest capacity. So the people who don’t believe in things like God and demons in the forum were calling schizophrenic or epileptic people “batshit insane” who needed medical help …meanwhile, someone religious like me would believe patients when they say they are SEEING THINGS and to comfort them and take them seriously and not coldly dismiss them like something’s wrong with them. So which approach is truly ableist? Of course medicine is VITAL. But to rob them of a network of people who truly care of them and deny them the opportunity to practice the functions they have is equally devastating to their recovery.
The people in the forum reacted to this with great suspicion, as they very well should. They were questioning my sincerity after my little defensive outburst. I would have done the same. Was I genuine, or did I just know how to argue to win their favor, like a sick politician? But gradually they brushed it aside as just a mistake and believed I truly did care. As I also would have eventually done.
Steve, the very first conversation I ever had with you–I mean ever–involved me telling you that I’ve sometimes been referred to as a “grammar Nazi” and that it never offended me. You said something along the lines of, “Well it should offend you.” You have an exhausting habit, I’ve noticed, of telling me what should or shouldn’t offend me, and to what degree. But that time, you were right. I never used that term myself, but hearing it didn’t offend me. I guess because it was always partly affectionate? And of course that makes it even more disturbing. I was 15, a little self-absorbed, nothing really offended me. And then, two years ago, I heard it again, and it struck a discomfort deep within me, without me even thinking about why it did. I didn’t have to think about it; by then I didn’t just KNOW it was wrong, I fully understood it. It had come so easily with familiarizing myself with the feminist ideology that it was simply obvious. Would someone tell that to / around a Jewish person? And then I remembered our conversation.
How many times have I been forgiven! I am certain I must have made a thousand mistakes like this. Spazzing out, grammar Nazi, what else? And everyone pointed it out–from both ends of the spectrum–but neither end attempted to take it to an extreme. What you were claiming is what happens, with the girl who made the sign, has simply not been my experience with the Left. They even make fun of themselves about how ridiculously critical they get about (sometimes) minor things:
http://isthisfeminist.tumblr.com/
My new favorite tumblr. It makes fun of the policing that feminists engage in on forums. “This woman is giving you a thumbs up. IS THIS FEMINIST?
TRIGGER WARNING. The “thumbs up” is the most phallocentric gesture imaginable. You are literally telling someone that a good job is the equivalent of growing a penis. In this case, two penises.
(…) PROBLEMATIC.”
It’s hilarious, because feminists actually cross-examine things to this level. The greatest satire site EVER.
Or, my favorite: “This woman is drinking alone. IS THIS FEMINIST?
“Despair is potentially feminist.”
It’s true. Despair is potentially feminist.
And so when you took it to that level, Steve, it was absolutely absurd. And I don’t see why you had to do it, because I’ve very very aware of when the line is crossed, and where this gets destructive.
You were defending the Catholic Church? That’s not even your religion… why get defensive?
I detest the Catholic Church.
Except for the nunnery, which is the only respectable part left of the Catholic Church.
I was defending the practice of exorcism.
Right, because the practice exists in Islam.
You see this. I was right, every act is selfish.
So, Nahida… the nunnery, eh?
(Don’t really have anything to say, just hoping you’re still here.)
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/05/03/obama-steals-maos-slogan
Nahida, I have a question that may be very inappropriate. If it makes you uncomfortable please accept my sincerest apologies, a million times, and don’t answer it.
But this has been something I never understood. And with the incident here it confused me AGAIN. Maybe it is because you are a woman… But how can you fantasize about someone when you don’t know what he looks like? How does that work, in the brain? I mean, the definition of fantasy is pretty much images right? Did you just make up an appearance or what?
It’s not because I’m a woman, Chris, it’s because men have forgotten how to do it.
Really, though, aside from that, I’m sure you would hypothesize that I made up a lot of things. Weren’t you the one who said I adore ‘the man in [my] head’? Seeing that it’s directed solely my way, I don’t think that’s very fair! I mean, I don’t see any of you convincing Steve I’m not a snowflake and that he made up my snowflakery. Help me out here.
But of course I’ve wondered what he looks like. Specifically I’ve wondered what color his eyes are. And how his hands feel, and his mouth. And other much more totally inappropriate things. But I don’t need to know. I don’t need appearance, and I don’t need sensation. There was enough here to set me on fire.
I wish I could explain how that works in the brain. Your brain cannot hold an image for more than a second. This is a fact. Have you tried to hold an image for a long time? It changes where you don’t concentrate. You have to try very hard to actively maintain it. It’s easier to imagine movies than still images! You don’t dream in detail either; things like color, you add later. You simply don’t visualize the parts that aren’t important. If it’s very important that something is a specific color in your dream, that detail is present because you are actively creating it, but everything else may be black and white. And daydreams are the same.
Yeah, but I don’t daydream in black and white. Unless you meant details aren’t fully formed, and color is just an example.
And I did tell Steve you weren’t a saint. So I’m good on that.
Hey, he said he uses different names. How do you even know his name is Steve?
Well fuck, I hope so.
How do you know I’m really a 21-year-old woman living in California?
I don’t. But you have a blog. And pictures. I guess you can get pictures from Google… but of the same woman?
I guess you could be a 40 year old man living in Manhattan.
Maybe I am. Maybe I’m a seven-year-old cat living in Chicago. Maybe I’m a fucking starfish.
Well fuck me if I care.
^THAT was supposed to be below.
You mean fuck you if you DON’T care. ;]
So it was only wrong to ask it if it only made Nahida feel uncomfortable?
Well, I was getting inside Nahida’s head. But yeah, if it makes you uncomfortable I wouldn’t ask either.
That was TERRIBLE of me. I won’t say anything about it again. I’m sorry.
Wait, was he talking to me or you?
Me. Rhetorically I’m in the third person, but why would he ask you?
I’m really sorry. I thought of it, quickly in passing but I didn’t know how to express it.* Though obviously a simple “ask Steve” would have sufficed. I’m been messing up atrociously all week.
*And that’s my CAREER, wtf.
In fact, reading my own comment, that part was totally unnecessary.
*head desk*
Steve, are you offended?
Please answer, I’m frightened you’re angry.
And I’m just going to go now and stop talking here okay? I don’t suspect I’m very good for your blood pressure…
Maybe this will finally convince him you’re not a snowflake.
Really, though, I’m pretty sure he was talking to me…
Actually Nahida I was referring to Chris. Chris was the one to bring up the subject.
Sorry, if I worded it too awkwardly. I was just getting up.
Yeah, I am angry. Not at you Nahida. I kind of feel like God is mocking me.
But then I have to realize that as Chris said it’s not really about me but instead about “the man in your mind”. You wouldn’t give me the time of day (okay you probably would with you being a snowflake and all but not in the sense I mean and of course it would depend if somehow we became acquainted and all)
I think when she said “Why would he ask you” she was talking about her ideology and holding her accountable. That’s probably why she assumed you were asking her.
Yeah, sorry man. Shoulda asked you. But are you sure that’s what would happen? She’s a liberal. I kinda think you’re the one who wouldn’t give her the time of day… I don’t know you, but that’s your whole deal right?
We probably wouldn’t even know each other. But if somehow I was honored enough to get to be her acquaintance, hopefully it would be in a non political context so while I might know her political leanings it would be her personal interactions with people that would impress me about her.
But you are probably right, Chris. Again, it all depends on the context of how I got to know her, that is if I got to know her at all.
Hey, maybe that’s what God is telling you…
I mean, remember when you said Mozart is one of them because of the music he wrote? Well it’s probably Nahida’s writing. So you wouldn’t even think that about her, that she’s a “snowflake”, cause you’d never know. You’d just see a liberal. You wouldn’t talk to her, so she’d never explain/write about it.
One thing you have to realize Chris, that although she gets pretty political here and on her own board (well you are supposed to aren’t you), I may be wrong but I get a feeling that in her own personal life she doesn’t go around shoving her politics in people’s faces. I don’t think if she was in my dorm or however I met her she and I would be talking politics.
What? I’m amazed. Why on Earth wouldn’t I give you the time of day?
He’s probably talking about his looks.
You women are shallow. =P kidding kidding
I don’t know if Mozart was in real life. It was in the context of the movie I was talking about. The movie was about “touching a snowflake”. But even within the context of the movie he was a “Strange Snowflake” because the divinity didn’t radiate from his personality, or how he treated people or stuff like that, but solely from the Music.
He said himself “I may be profane but my music is divine”.
It was like God was speaking from it. Salieri had the “gift” of recognizing that (okay it was more like a curse) and it drove him insane.
Looks, Maturity, that kind of stuff. I was still basically a kid in college fearful of how I was going to survive when thrown into “the real world” of adulthood.
Regarding looks, we all like to think we are above it, but we aren’t. Is it cultural? Is it genetical (yeah made up a word)? Or is it some mixture of both. Is it something we as a society/species can ever “outgrow” or will it always remain part of us?
Why maturity? Aren’t you older than her?
I gotta agree with Steve, here, Nahida. You’re a great person, but I wouldn’t know if you were above looks.
I was taking about had I met her in College.
And, am I older than her? Chronologically yes. But come on she was 21 when she was 16. I think it is fair to say she is older than me in that sense.
I didn’t fantasize about a kid in college. I fantasized about a man who I believe is two decades older than me. I didn’t change your age. There was nothing I changed. I suppose one can make the claim there were things I added, but there wasn’t anything I changed.
Chris, I am 100% serious when I say I can’t tell when people are unattractive. I can tell when women are extremely attractive, because I have been conditioned, but I can’t tell when men are attractive. And I can’t tell if either men or women are unattractive. I have never met someone I have actively thought was unattractive.
Well that’s just because you’re a nice person.
A snowflake.
Steve had told me before that I am a hateful person, a couple of times. I never thought I would wish to hear him say it again. It would be far closer to the truth than what he believes now. At least that is within my capacity! I know I can probably be hateful. And hypocritical. Pride is my greatest sin, and hypocrisy is the sin I fear the most. It is a trap within itself, because I often criticize people for the very act of being hypocritical, so by doing that it is a sin within the frame of a sin. A while ago I had gotten into an argument with another Islamic feminist… who believes women can not lead men in congregation! Regardless of the proof I offered that women can be the imams of men, she always nitpicked and found a way to reject it. We were at each other’s throats. This to me was an irreconcilable difference. I grew so impatient with her and decided I could not bear continue. (There was also something terribly violent she said about another woman that shook me so much.) Then earlier last week I remembered something I had bitterly written months ago about how Muslim men are often far crueler to the Muslim women who challenge them than to those who are openly hostile toward Islam, and that shows how faithful they are! Yet here I was, unable to offer patience to my own sister in my faith while I have tolerated hearing much worse from others. (Even the violent bit.) That makes me the worst kind of person: a hypocrite. I wrote to her and said I was sorry for my duplicity, and that even though we disagree to please know I will defend her right to voice her opinion, for always. She has not replied. She must doubt my sincerity. Or has decided she cannot forgive me. I’m so sorry. But this is proof you see: a good person could never be a hypocrite. Or selfish. I want to be loved. Even though I don’t give enough. I don’t think most people are loved as much as they deserve. And I waste all I have, spending time alone instead of with other people. I guess I don’t really believe love can be wasted, but the effects of love can be wasted. And I only turn what I have into the daydreaming in my own mind.
Mother Theresa was a snowflake. She didn’t sit around, fearful she would be hurt.
Well, I don’t know if she was a snowflake or not. I suspect she was, but great works doesn’t alone determine whether one is a snowflake. In fact most snowflakes don’t do “great works” in the sense of numbers of people effected and fame. You really have to kind of be around that person to see if “divinity radiates out from them” or to even really understand what that means. In Nahida’s case it was her conversations, but more importantly the experience of her friends who come here here on the board here and give their descriptions of how she has effected them that clinched it for me.
But assuming she was, how do you know she didn’t sit around, fearful she would be hurt? She might have been very afraid. What distinguished her was she went ahead and did it anyway.
Actually I heard that she struggled with her faith a lot, which to me indicates she was ‘for real” as if she didn’t struggle then her faith would have been superficial indeed.
I don’t know if you remember this (or if this falls under “before your time”) but she died the same week as Princess Diana, which marked a great contrast between the two. Diana was basically a media creation while Mother Theresa was the genuine article.
You know what, Nahida, that’s EASY to say, but I for one know what Steve is talking about. Women like YOU don’t give a second glance!!
Women like WHAT?
Oh God, PLEASE don’t tell me this is turning into one of those conversations…
No kidding. I hear feminists hate those conversations.
Indeed! RTelier, I suppose YOU’VE looked over every conventionally unattractive woman walking your way? Not just her super hot best friends? I suppose you actually noticed that the girl you’ve been bitching to about being rejected by said super hot friends is head over heels in love with you? I suppose YOU think you’re a FANTASTICALLY NICE GUY who opens doors and pulls out chairs and who DOESN’T start acting offended that (only hot) women aren’t sleeping with you as though you’re entitled to something in return? I suppose when YOU say “women like YOU don’t give a second glance” you really mean all women who are women, because you wouldn’t be so ARROGANT as to mean ONLY attractive women. Because why should ANY woman who rates less than an 8.5 on your sick misogynistic scale count as a woman? You know, women don’t rate men on scales like they’re grocery shopping for vegetables. Women don’t edit your essays, help you study for biology exams, pick you up when your car breaks down, and then act indignant when you smack them behind the shoulder like a bro — “WASSUP” — and they realize they’ve been friendzoned. Because WOMEN ARE NOT ENTITLED ASSHATS.
Can you imagine if women acted like men? “What do you MEAN he doesn’t want to go out with me? I totally listened to all his incessant whining… what’s that you say? Not every man wants to fuck me? There’s this thing called being friends that’s totally normal? Well OBVIOUSLY you are heartless bastards who hate women!”
Well you ARE being heartless. Steve just told you you wouldn’t give him the time of day, and this is your reaction?
No. This is not my reaction to Steve. This is my reaction to you.
Because I don’t know if you’re aware, but I don’t know who the HELL you are. I do know, however, that you’re entitled enough of a jackass to springboard off of a conversation in which Steve expresses his discontent and make it about you. And you wonder why “women like [ME]” don’t give you a second glance? Maybe because they’re feminists, and you’re a total douchecanoe! I would advise you to recognize to whom you are speaking before you make sweeping generalizations about the devastating crimes of women against mankind and expecting a clear expression of sympathy.
Of course when we do, we’re sluts. ‘Slut’ is the word men use to shame women for exercising our right to say ‘yes.’ And “women like YOU don’t give a second glance” is shaming for exercising our right to say ‘no.’
I assure you I would have handled anything Steve wanted to say fine without you deciding to shove yourself in as a self-appointed representative of all men everywhere against “women like me.”
Oh man. You just got feministed.
Or metaphorically slapped across the face by an attractive women. Sounded like a mixture of the two.
You wouldn’t give him a second glance in real life, the same reason you won’t give him a second glance here.
Remember what made you stop? He said you should be raped. And you can’t recover from that, can you? Sure, you can easily forgive him. But you can’t recover from how much that hurt. While you were wetting your panties over him, that’s what he wanted to happen to you.
Sure, man in your mind is different from the one here. But you’re still traumatized.
Best thing that ever happened.
Fuck you, RTelier. Seriously, fuck you.
Woah, man. BELOW THE BELT.
You are taking my comments out of context. I never said Nahida should be raped. Well technically I did but it was more about betrayal. I said I wished that Nahida would be raped by an up and coming Liberal politician only to be thrown under the bus when she rushes to her feminist allies for support.
I regret making those comments and although I directed those comments at Nahida looking back I think they were really meant for “other feminists”. They were meant for the feminists I have seen who defended people like Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton and specifically the feminists who threw Juanita Broaddrick under the bus.
Again, I regret making those comments but they were focused on the betrayal, not the rape. Perhaps you see that as a small distinction. Perhaps it is but still those comments weren’t as you are trying to make them out to be.
In an odd way I said what I said in order to “protect Nahida” if she went in to politics. Just because these Leftist politicians claim to support “womens rights” and respect for women case after case shows them to be the worst offenders.
I never wanted Nahida to forget that if she was like working for some campaign and the candidate offered her a ride home or if she was like staying late with him, what could happen. And she shouldn’t expect the friends she might have made during the campaign to come to her defense. What a bunch of hypocritical scum.
I wanted Nahida never to be taken in by these men, ever!
Again, I regret those statements.
I regret those statements, but if indeed in the back of my mind that was my intent then it came from a place of concern that I don’t regret.
Looks effect all of us, not only women. In fact you are more likely to see a hot woman with a relatively unattractive man than the other way around. I would say of the two genders women seem better able to break out of this and date someone “beneath their league”.
And yeah, who says a hot woman OWES you a second glance. Who says a woman owes you anything.
Men don’t know. About any kind of pain. Except when they learn to make it a weapon.
You want to exploit this into something larger, RTelier? You want some global commentary about how men have it SO. HARD. because attractive women won’t see them? That in a world where women KILL themselves starving their waists and bleaching their skin and dying their hair and cutting off anything that sags or hangs on 77 cents to your dollar men are the ones oppressed by the rash judgments of women?
Remember I fell first.
Okay, I really don’t like getting into these things, but RTelier you see what Nahida said in the first paragraph? That is why feminists come across as insane. Of course, no one will look at what YOU said first. They will look at what SHE said, seemingly about all men.
He will remember, Nahida. But he will remember it differently.
I have something to say about Gloria Steinem.
I love Gloria Steinem. Except for how transphobic she evidently was (haven’t checked if she was still), I love Gloria Steinem. I love the things she writes, I love the things she says, and I love her fashion sense. I think she’s so pretty. I even understand–yes!–the one grope rule. I disagree with it violently, but I understand why she did it.
But she should not have made that opinion public. That was incredibly, unforgivably irresponsible of her. She is a public figure. She’s practically the matriarch of feminism.
If I were a public figure, would I recount the story of how a guy tricked me into seeing pornography and I let it slide? Would I say something “he can fool you ONCE but the second time it’s harassment.” Hell no. Not even if MRAs like RTelier were going on and on about what a militant feminist bitch I am. Let them talk; I am not throwing my sisters under the bus with that criteria of acceptability. I understand, on a personal level, how men are conditioned. And how they can make terrible mistakes. Apparently so does Gloria Steinem. But unlike her I am not making that shit public. That sends the message that it is okay. And it is definitely not okay. Gloria Steinem was not the victim of being groped… that rule was never her private decision to make. She took the private decision of someone else, and she made it political. With her responsibility as a public figure, she set a low standard, that would have otherwise been only for herself, for ALL WOMEN. And that is absolutely unacceptable.
Wow. Thank you for that, Nahida. I mean for that perspective. I never thought of it like that. I always just thought Gloria Steinem was a huge hypocrite. I didn’t hate or love her, just thought she was being hypocritical. I guess what really happened is that I didn’t understand.
Well, now you know Steve was never uncomfortable. He just didn’t want to know about some gorgeous young woman he couldn’t even have thinking things like that about him.
That’s why he felt God was mocking him. Here is this very attractive 21 year old woman who is also smart, funny, and sophisticated. Too bad you’re not 2 decades younger anymore, and she’s in California, and Muslim, so you can’t even have her. And LOL she’s a liberal.
I never understood men who describe me as ‘sophisticated’ like it’s the best thing ever.
Sophistication is just high-class conformity.
I am very uncomfortable for the reasons you just gave.
Are you mocking me too?
Course not. Just guessing what you’re thinking. Because I bet Nahida’s confused. And because she’s a feminist she thinks it’s sexual harassment to ask.
And because she’s a feminist she thinks it’s sexual harassment to ask.
LAWL. No, see Steve, THAT is how someone sounds when he’s mocking you. Shut up, Chris.
But yes, I am confused. I did expect a negative reaction, Steve, but I expected it to be intense disapproval or even disgust… I don’t understand this reaction. It sounds like depression but that can’t possibly be right.
You say I wouldn’t give you the time of day, but you wouldn’t want me. You’re not friends with liberals. You can’t be friends with someone who is “bringing about the evil that you are against.” Those are your words. That’s what you think of me.
Nahida, you don’t get it. You can have whoever you want. You get how how a man feels when he reads
Specifically I’ve wondered what color his eyes are. And how his hands feel, and his mouth. And other much more totally inappropriate things.
THIS sentence.
Chris I could kick you in the balls, I swear. Shut up for a minute. And stop shoving the things he said make him uncomfortable back in his face.
Nahida, let me give you some advice that you are too modest to realize. This isn’t true for all women, but it’s DEFINITELY true for you.
Don’t EVER let a man know you want him, unless you are one hundred percent attainable. The news WILL depress him.
But why would it depress him? Chris, I don’t know what to say. That’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard.
Of course, it doesn’t matter why. He wouldn’t owe me any explanation. It only matters what the outcome is. But there’s a difference between applying that to encounters and giving a universal blanket statement as advice.
I suppose it wouldn’t make a difference in my life whether I did or didn’t heed that advice; I don’t want many men. I’ve only had 2 crushes my entire life.
I’ve only had 2 crushes my entire life.
Okay, seriously? You’re making it worse.
Go away, woman. Come back in a few hours to see if he’s written anything. But until then, STOP TALKING.
…Fine. I’ll feminist rage at you for speaking to me like that later.
So anyway. Nahida, I hear you’re graduating in Spring 2013 with your BA. Must be exciting!
Oh, not really. But thank you! I’ll be returning for my MFA, which is another needless degree, but a BA in literature is useless without a graduate degree and I don’t have the money to go straight for a PhD. So a Master’s level it is! Naturally I considered an MA but realized by the time I graduate I will have spent four years writing about other people’s writing. I don’t think I can stand two more! As enlightening as it is, metaliterary work is not what I’m meant for. I’m not too thrilled about pursuing an MFA–I don’t need a degree to write. But like I said, I can’t stop at a BA with literature. There’s another reason I’m not thrilled (other than the fact that it feels so superficial that I’m paying just for time to write): I don’t feel content here. There is something about it that is absolutely unsatisfying.
I always made high grades effortlessly, but I’ve noticed that I fair better when I don’t attend classes for a while. This is not just true for English; when I was a sophomore in high school, I caught chickenpox and was out for a week. When I returned to math class, we were still on the same chapter but a different lesson, and I knew all the answers even though no one else seemed to… the instructor was amazed, because I had been absent. And I had been too sick to even open my textbooks while I was away.
I’m deathly afraid that this speaks volumes about how disastrous our education system is. If a student can stay in bed for a week and never open her textbook, and still perform even better upon her return than she does when she attends class… what does that say?! To be honest I didn’t learn to write because I went to school. I learned to write because I read incessantly on my own. And the first time I took a women’s studies course at my university (that is my minor) my professor wrote in the margins of an essay, “This is remarkably insightful! Are you sure you’ve never taken a women’s studies class before?” I’m afraid it might have been exactly because I’d never taken a women’s studies class before!
It is a hard thing to admit; I love school so much.
I’m in the UK, hon! I think you’re just a little genius.
You got those late. You were out only for a week? They usually take two weeks, don’t they?
Gosh, I’m so sorry for assuming!
Yes, they do. I was sick for two weeks, but out for one. Strangely I didn’t show any outward symptoms for the first week. I felt terrible, knew there was a viruses going around the school, but there were no spots, so I had no idea what was wrong with me. It wasn’t until the Saturday in between when I stepped out of the shower wrapped in a towel, and happened to look over my shoulder at the mirror behind me, that I noticed a trail of spots down the back of my shoulder. I had attended class with the virus for a week!
I’m glad you recovered fully! They’re more dangerous the older you get. Everyone in my family, including myself, had them young.
My sister lives in the UK.
Nahida, have you been clubbing? I always went in my 20s.
No. My friends go all the time. I feel like I should go to a club just once (before they stop letting me in!) to see what it’s like. But I have a feeling I wouldn’t like it very much. It seems so crowded… I don’t mind the darkness or the music (if they’re songs that aren’t degrading, which I suspect is also unlikely) or the dancing–but I’m not a fan of crowds. Or of explaining things, like why I’m not drinking… or eating. When I was in France, vegetarian wasn’t served at any restaurant, and I felt like I was causing so much trouble when I asked for a dish without meat. The waiters would glance at each other perplexedly, like the request was preposterous. Then they’d look back at me and ask inquisitively, “Mais… vous mangez le poisson, non?” (“But you eat fish, right?”) If I could I would have just separated the meat from the rest myself, but it was often cut into pieces; besides, cooking it in the same steam renders the whole thing haraam. What a hassle it was for the waiters! I would have just eaten at the hotel but I was expected to go with everyone else, and it seemed to cause even more of a disturbance when I went and didn’t eat! Who knew sitting quietly and staring into space would bother so many people? I felt as though I was ruining everyone’s fun; I don’t know they kept insisting I come with them everywhere. Wandering the streets of Paris alone or with two or three friends seemed more appropriate; I was out of the way. Speaking of which, two of my friends and I were returning to our hotel in the evening and inadvertently saw a man pissing in an open doorway and laughing deliriously.
…Anyway. (Major sidetrack.) I suppose I’ll go clubbing sometime. It’s too bad really, because I really like dressing up to go clubbing. But not actually clubbing, probably.
Speaking of which, two of my friends and I were returning to our hotel in the evening and inadvertently saw a man pissing in an open doorway and laughing deliriously.
Yepp! Sounds like France!
Damnit, woman, is there ANYTHING wrong with you?!
Nahida, you’re nervous aren’t you? That he didn’t come back? You never talk this much about nothing. You’re so anxious that you’re engaging in small talk, even though you don’t like it.
I know how feminists joke that being a feminist is a 24/7 job, but it’s okay to admit to yourself you want an explanation for his reaction. Doesn’t mean you think he owes you one. No one can be perfect at an ideology. You are taking feminism to an extreme. You’re making it something holy. You’re too hard on yourself. And feminism is such a rough ideology. There are rules for everything, because it’s so against the norm. You have to battle everything. No feminist can be this strict on herself and survive. That’s why the famous ones mess up. You taught me that today.
Steve won’t think you’re a hypocrite, and he won’t think any less of you, for showing you’re human. I know you think he will, because he’s so HARD on you. But he’s human too. And he’s only hard because he sees so much potential. You think he wastes THIS much time complaining about feminism to any feminist? To any liberal? With you it’s not a waste.
Hard for you to believe, I know. Did you read his comments? He was describing scenarios with you in college. Didn’t you notice anything about them?
You were still a liberal.
I am sorry.
He didn’t change it.
No.
Damnit, woman, is there ANYTHING wrong with you?!
Actually, I would have no idea where to take her on a date (if she dated). She doesn’t drin k alcohol or eat meat. That leaves out bars and most restaurants.
Let me tell you something about Islam. Partly unrelated (because this thread is making me self-conscious. I did want to hear from Steve. For some reason I’m okay with Chris. Didn’t quite invite the rest of you. So, change of topic to one appropriate to the public!)
Let me tell you something about Islam. Sometimes I am very convinced that there are moments at which it saved my life. Even when I was very small and the stunning silence of it, the inquiry, and the piercing clarity were absent, even when I was very small and it was something that frightened me terribly, it enveloped me in safety. But I despised the droning hours of my Islamic education with something more than just a child dreading her lessons. I despised them because I despised this kind of Islam, the one taught to me. Sometimes I forget the little things on which Muslims seem to gleefully quiz each other as though it shows how knowledgable they are, “What was the name of the Prophet’s uncle! What year was is it in the lunar calendar!” As much as Islam will always be a part of me, I have this absurd feeling of distance with most Muslims. And part of it is because growing up, everyone was discussing the history and memorizing the Qur’an while actively telling me I’m less than a person. And the rest of it is because I’ve always been a displaced sort of person.
I don’t always hear the Qur’an and think it is beautiful. I am still recovering from the impulse to cringe whenever I hear it recited in a man’s voice–a man whom I know likely has a certain and unfavorable view of most things. This troubles me deeply. This gut reaction is the result of trauma, I understand, but if it is the Word of God, why should it matter? What kind of person would I have to be that the Word of God makes my stomach churn? (The Word of God is said to repel the devil; what does it say when it repels me?) And what would other Muslims think of me, if they knew!
To attempt to locate and eliminate any built-in bias is finding myself at the edge of something very steep, so that I look over my shoulder and wonder in heartbreak if I’ve left it. But I can’t leave Islam… because it is everywhere. I’ll find it still, I’m sure, at the bottom of that cliff. There is something that resonates with me (even though I’m so clumsy with it), something fierce and innate, and a goodness that pierces from the existence of it… or of me… sometimes I truly cannot distinguish. I wasn’t born into this religion. I chose it. I don’t know when. I don’t even know if I’ve chosen it yet. But the destiny of my soul has chosen it, somewhere on a supreme timeline, in the past or future even such terms exist. And all its beauty and science and relativity and objectivity and individuality and sense of the eternal. Even if it’s not the Truth (I’m not supposed to even consider that it’s not the Truth; “good” Muslims don’t entertain such ideas) I can know it belongs to me.
That’s how I feel, except with christianity
You’re really honest. A lot of what you write resonates me.
But I left my faith, unlike you…you’re going strong. Though I feel I can never truly leave it. It will always be a part of me on some level.
I really appreciated the stuff you wrote about the hostile attitudes toward suicide victims that Muslims have. When I went through a really hard time in my life and attempted suicide, I remember those attitudes making it even worse. No one trusted me, they thought I was a failure for losing faith.
Oh aziza, I wouldn’t trust someone who hasn’t wanted to commit suicide at least once!
I can’t even describe how that just made me feel.
Dear Steve, I can’t decide if this disappearance is just your regular absence (if you are just very busy) or if you are deliberately ignoring / avoiding this place. In the event of the latter, I have wryly credited myself for ruining a friendship that wasn’t even a friendship, which must be some sort of record or something. And with the resolve of repairing what I’ve done, I had briefly committed to discerning your reaction, considering you abhor liberals with the intensity one directs at the devil himself and I could not for the life of me understand why you would ever make an exception for me.
Chris characterized this as modesty, but in imagining how you might feel, I was dismayed to uncover that I would be incredibly frustrated if someone were attempting to tell me how I feel, or that it was against the conditions I’ve drawn myself as though I weren’t already acutely and painfully aware. And the kind of modesty that invalidates the feelings of others is ridiculous, to the point of annoyance. Though I simply don’t understand, I won’t belittle what is a decision of the heart with the application of logic. So I will honor your word that you feel as though God is mocking you, and recognize that whether your desires qualify me as an exception to your own criteria is not something you can control.
At this point, I don’t know what I can say to ease your disdain at the timing of the universe and its dark sense of humor, except that being in a relationship with a conventionally attractive woman is not as incredible as it sounds. I suppose you can claim that I have never been in a relationship with a conventionally attractive woman, but everyone seems to insist that I have the experience of being one, and I can tell you that hanging out with myself is kind of just quiet. I don’t mind, but you might. As someone specified, I don’t drink or eat meat, which doesn’t mean that you can’t either… but you wouldn’t be able to drink if you wanted to kiss me (I don’t mind personally, but religiously a single drop of alcohol and my prayers are invalidated for 40 days, and I’m certain that can be transferred in saliva) which is probably already a restriction that you would never have had to make. I’m introverted. My two best friends who are closet to me live the furthest away, Lebanon and South Africa, and I love them through letters and gifts expressing my heart. One of my very best friends (a third, who lives near me and I can see frequently) is a Jehovah’s Witness who’s convinced I’m damned to Hell, and I love her to death. I carry around my passport (not supposed to, I know) romanticizing the idea that I might fly out of the country on whim or some exciting call and visit some foreign place, as though my life were nearly that exciting. That’s all I’m good for—dreaming impossibly, living quietly—and that’s what I’ve done with you (I’ll spare you the graphic explicit details, as you seem to have preferred). You’re really not missing anything, I’m not that wonderful, and I assure you the concept will be less compelling over time. There are thousands of pretty women, and prettier, who are much more remarkable.
Ugh, I was signed in.
Why would he feel let down anyway if he knows it’s the man in her mind?
Because it’s Steve’s WORK.
The man in her mind is just getting credit. But Steve INVENTED him.
Oh for goodness sake, there is no ‘man in my mind’! I’m not under the impression that it’s anyone but Steve. The way human beings understand each other in any situation is a joint creation of meaning. And if Steve invented him, well he took him from me too.
Well he was playing with fire, and he burned you to a point where he didn’t even know…
Now you may be doing the same.
Isn’t it kind of his right to take him from you, though? “Woman, I will NOT be your plaything…” =P
I really don’t feel let down. Like you said, it’s not me. It’s the man in her mind. If she really knew me she wouldn’t give me the time of day (not in the sense you all mean at least). Not only because of looks mind you but she is just so much more sophisticated than I am.
I just wish you all wouldn’t talk about it any more since we have already established that it’s not me she is really fantasizing over.
Just curious Nahida, how long must someone go without alcohol before kissing you? I guess that is a dumb question because someone can’t kiss you even before getting married to you. I actually kind of like this. It harkens back to more innocent times even in America (1890s and so) where people didn’t date and had to have chaperons and the way they met women was to be invited into the women’s parlor to have lemonade and meet the family.
She’s still a snowflake but I won’t mention it anymore because it bothers her, and I understand why it does.
*rolls eyes* I offered them all different topics above and they chose to cling to this one.
You heard him, EVERYONE ELSE SHADDUP!!
(He was probably talking to me too but dammit I am not letting the following go without a fight):
since we have already established that it’s not me
Well I haven’t established it! I’ve said it already–there was never a clear distinction for me between you and… you. Not any more than anyone who knows you in real life. Joint creation of meaning, above. Why do you think that Steve? Why do you think you aren’t ‘sophisticated’ enough? And seriously, what does that even mean? I don’t think you’re any less ‘sophisticated’ than I am! Or anyone. Have you noticed I’ve begun cursing like a sailor here Steve? How’s that for sophisticated? Why does everyone keep insisting it’s still ‘classy’ when I do it? You’re all wrong. And you’re wrong to tell Steve it isn’t him yet neglect to convince him I’m not the snowflake he thinks I am. Why won’t you admit it’s you? Are you afraid I can’t handle it? I’m perfectly capable of accepting I can’t have someone who actually exists. That’s what I was doing before Lily.
I don’t want to be sophisticated. I don’t even want to be pretty, and for the record, I don’t even think I am. I think I’m truly average, and Steve, you’re just convinced I’m very attractive because everyone keeps saying it. I mean, you never said anything before then. It only takes one person to think so, and then everyone politely agrees, and the world is convinced that it must be true. What’s so attractive? And why so suddenly?
That said, I’m relieved you’re not let down. I still want to smack you in the back of the head and order you to stop feeling so inferior. You aren’t. Who the hell are the pricks who convinced you that you were? Damn them to hell! (Not really, I don’t want anyone to go there, but honestly I hope you haven’t lived your whole life believing that bullshit.)
Okay, that is all.
And I never bothered to look that up–but it would be the same amount of time that alcohol stays in your saliva. The first Muslims were great drinkers, even after the verse condemning intoxication was revealed. They wrote songs commemorating wine. We are much more restrict now than we used to be. They also had premarital sex, because the Qur’an definition of “adultery” has been interpreted differently. If you were a free person (not a slave) and not married, you couldn’t commit adultery. Now it refers to any sex outside marriage.
I actually kind of like this.
Well I don’t. Do you really think those times were so innocent? Do you think the Muslim community really preserves this? Did you hear about the imam who was caught fornicating with a niqabi woman (undressed) in his car? Of course you didn’t–I said one word about it and everyone screamed at me to shut up. “You’re making Islam look bad!” Great, your imam is fucking a woman in his car (not married to her, obviously) and I’m the one making Islam look bad for openly pointing out his ineptitude. I’m not going to lie to the world about Muslims… I have too much respect for my own religion to do that; if Muslims fear that their behavior is contaminating the image of Islam they should stop behaving this way instead of continuing it with a false facade of piety.
I’m sorry, Steve, but your expectations are heartbreakingly high. For the Muslim community, for their imams, for their niqabis, and also for me. I’m not going to do something like THAT obviously (not while I’m imam anywhere, anyway; blatantly lying to my congregation–how would I live with such a thing?! I felt my throat close at even the thought) but I have come dangerously close to kissing. And it’s going to happen; all my resistance will never be distance enough! And you know the worst part, Steve? I probably wouldn’t even feel guilty. And you know what’s even worse than that, Steve? I don’t even think God would want me to feel guilty. Unless I deliberately break someone’s heart, or am manipulative or deceptive or otherwise weaponizing that kiss with other factors, I think that would make it a sin. And I think it’s terrible, terrible terrible terrible, that women grovel in their own guilt.
I wonder what happened to that niqabi. I’m sure the imam got away with it.
Nahida, would you really feel that bad for lying to your congregation?
Oh Chris, what else would I have in this world?
I would lose every sense of myself if I did something like that. I think I would absolutely dissolve, with no grasp of my own identity. We are nothing without virtue. And a breach of trust… is a betrayal of the virtue of love. I don’t know how there can ever be an imam who doesn’t love his congregation! With the purest of love, the kind between the dearest of friends. The kind of love that hurts. Really aches. Love is the most divine thing there is! I think I might find it in my heart to forgive that imam if he loved her, really loved her to death. But I doubt it. In his car? I’m not judging where… it’s just a really strange place isn’t it? Seems more like spur of the moment than being in love. And if it was only spur of the moment because they were in love and impassioned (I suppose a married couple could find themselves in their car) then why weren’t they respectful enough to make sure they wouldn’t disturb anyone with indiscretion? I don’t think they had respect for each other, or him for her, and so I wouldn’t buy that he was in love.
Thanks to Steve’s absurdity, I thought to copy&paste bits of the comments where I blatantly assert I am not a snowflake into a post on the site, fearfully, so that with my faults disclosed no one ever gets that idea, ever.
“Have you noticed I’ve begun cursing like a sailor here Steve? How’s that for sophisticated?”
You were doing that on purpose. Yeah, I noticed the change. And figured out why you were doing it. But you can’t help it, your words reveal you. I thought what you said about your congregation was so beautiful.
“I mean, you never said anything before then…”
I didn’t want you to get the wrong idea and also I don’t believe there were any pictures around of you until quite recently.
I wouldn’t have gotten the wrong idea.
On second thought, I would have loved to have gotten the wrong idea.
…That was partly an attempt at being crude, but I can’t do it to the intensity that I want because I know it will make you feel uncomfortable, and I can’t bring myself to deliberately make you uncomfortable. I wish I could! That would convince you.
I so wish I wasn’t twice your age.
Even if you used crude language it wouldn’t convince me. But again, I shouldn’t be talking to you about it because it really isn’t something you should believe about yourself.
You’re not twice my age. That’s exponential. You won’t be 60 when I’m 30.
it’s just a really strange place isn’t it?
No, people do that all the time.
You know, Nahida, you never cease to amaze me. You’re very sexual (appropriate for your age) but at the same time you’re so sexually pure. I could’ve sworn that combination was impossible.
Actually, come to think of it, “sexual” is the wrong word. I mean sometimes you are, but you’re more sensual. Even when you’re not talking about it, you kind of exude sensuality.
I was going to say it’s because of your age, but to be honest I think it’s just you.
Is anyone getting what I’m talking about, or am I making things up here?
Did you see Nahida’s recent post on HER website.
Wow!
I feel so sorry for Steve.
Although I don’t know how an unmarried Muslim woman knows anything about a Female orgasm, and of course she definitely doesn’t know about the male orgasm.
I believe that Nahida is yielding a bit to America’s oversexed youth culture.
Not in actually acting of course, as that would be against her religion but in her fantasizing.
I remember she said that she fantasized once about BDSM? I wonder if she fantasized about being the dominant or the submissive? The top or the bottom. Though that is a very inappropriate question to ask though she kind of opens up the discussion a bit with that post. Though something that private she doesn’t need to answer.
I bet this is because of the enormous pressure she feels at school.
Just a thought. I’m not a religious person at all, but Nahida sort of reminds me of why I don’t want religion to go away completely. She had an appreciation for Steve’s belief in “snowflakes” that only a truly good religious person could have. Bad religious people mock the beliefs of others. Not only that, but they allow other people to think they’re gods. If you noticed, her reaction wasn’t just stating a fact that she isn’t a snowflake, but GUILT on top of that. She kept saying that she was “impersonating” something that’s very special to him. That’s true respect. Bad religious people wouldn’t have that respect for the beliefs of someone else, and would belittle them by allowing them to think they’re divine.
Her story about how to approach schizophrenic people was the same. If I had an experience like that, or if I saw something, and all I needed was for someone to believe me… I wouldn’t go to someone with no beliefs like me. I’d go to Nahida. I would probably be angry if everyone was trying to explain it away when I KNOW what I saw. And that would make me more sick (if I was sick.) Nahida would be rational and logical while still allowing me that comfort of belief.
So yeah, I wouldn’t want to do away with religion entirely. Even though sometimes it depresses me.
Didn’t Nahida say that “snowflakes” were part of Muslim believe (at least a certain Sect)? And Steve posted how it could be found in the Jewish religion. And, while I don’t think it’s really part of the Christian religion, the naming of “Saints” kind of lends itself to that kind of thinking.
I am sorry, but I am not Steve.
Sorry, I mistook those BDSM comments for being yours.
And how did Steve throw you under the bus? It seems to me he has been essentially kind and understanding about the whole thing?
Gosh, even after all of that he called you a “snowflake”. Quite a complement, but more importantly it showed that he didn’t think any less of you.
Oh wow. How do you know that’s him?
Nahida, I’m so SORRY. Can’t imagine what you’re probably feeling right now, knowing he did this. Instead of asking you??
From someone you wanted… Well, I’m glad you stopped!
Oh, Chris.
If only I had.
I am sorry, but I am not Steve.
Sorry, I mistook those BDSM comments for being yours.
And how did Steve throw you under the bus? It seems to me he has been essentially kind and understanding about the whole thing?
Gosh, even after all of that he called you a “snowflake”. Quite a complement, but more importantly it showed that he didn’t think any less of you.
If he did unintentionally “throw you under the bus” in some way, perhaps that just proves that he is as unsophisticated as he thinks he is.
I am sorry, but I am not Steve.
Sorry, I mistook those BDSM comments for being yours.
And how did Steve throw you under the bus? It seems to me he has been essentially kind and understanding about the whole thing?
Gosh, even after all of that he called you a “snowflake”. Quite a complement, but more importantly it showed that he didn’t think any less of you.
If he did unintentionally “throw you under the bus” in some way, perhaps that just proves that he is as unsophisticated as he thinks he is. I am sure he didn’t mean to do it intentionally.
I’m not a snowflake.
Phil, if you are indeed a different person (I think you’re lying) then I see no further reason to converse with you regarding this matter. I meant shoving me under the bus by bringing up BDSM, and if Steve feels I’ve wronged him in this accusation (if you are not him), I will apologize to him sincerely upon his return.
Seeing that I don’t owe you, Phil, the security of comfort, I’ll tell you with the intention of being as filthy and tactless as possible, that I was dominant. But I’m a switch; I can do either. (I had never disclosed any of this in my comment section.) Please proceed to picture me smirking like I want to punch you in the face, because you’re an asshole.
How strange… there appears to have been some sort of malfunction with the timestamps and the comments are out of order.
Steve, is that really not you? Tell me the truth; I promise I won’t be angry!
I just have a hard time believing someone else would be so rude as to state they feel sorry for you because nothing’s happening to you. How preposterous and tasteless for a third party to make such an assertion.
And he does write like you.
Okay, I was angry, but if you’re so insecure about how I would react if you wrote under your name that you need to do this, then I can only be anything but.
This drama is tiring, and I would very much appreciate it if you asked me about why I write things before concluding that I’ve succumbed to the oversexualization of youth culture; you can tell me anything you want and I won’t judge you, I promise. I can’t pretend I won’t be pissed off or hurt, but I’ll probably get over it. I was kind of annoyed when you tried justifying what you said to me by claiming it came from a place of concern (if I could count how many times in my life a man has told me he hurt me only because he cared about me! that is not what ‘concern’ feels like) but I still understood your intentions. Believe me, I can make more excuses for people in my mind than they can ever make for themselves. It’s something I absolutely loathe about myself; a terrible weakness that I am certain one day will destroy me.
Come clean; it will be better.
Phil is not me.
I tried to post that several times already but this dumb blog won’t post it.
By the way if you want me to throw myself under the bus on this BDSM thing I will. After all I did post it on your blog a while back.
It was me and I said I fantasized about being a submissive.
Happy Phil.
Finally it posted!
Well alright then.
In that event,
WTF PHIL that was SUPER RUDE. Stop telling people you feel sorry for them because nothing is happening to them. Seriously, who the hell do you think you are? And seeing that in context it came right after your view of what I posted, were you also indirectly calling me sexually promiscuous? Feel sorry for THIS *cyber punches*
Sadly I only cyber punch because I can’t punch people in real life…
…Aaaand I just checked my email. Sorry!
You do know that being a snowflake has nothing to do with sexuality one way or the other? Right. I know I was not going to talk to you about you being one t but I just mean in general.
I know that some spiritual traditions make a big connection between spirituality and being a virgin. But I do believe someone could be sexual and still be a snowflake. One doesn’t have to be, though either. Like I said it has nothing to do one way or the other.
(Steve, for the record I wasn’t talking about the kind that causes pain [but thwarts pleasure].)
And everyone, I will now stop engaging in this utter nonsense. Seriously, you all need to get a life. Good day.
What just…happened. Yeah okay, I can’t keep up with this.
Steve (only Steve), a part of me still believes that you were posting as Phil, even though logically I shouldn’t, since you stated straight-out that you weren’t, and that should be enough. And it is! Or at least it will be, eventually, as I begin to grasp it. I don’t know why I can’t fully grasp it now; something is preventing me. Unfortunately I am not as accepting of a person as I wish I were, or as faithful of other people… it is such a sign of pure character when people are so good they take it for granted that others are good too. But I’m not pure of character, and unfortunately quite discerning of the motives of strangers. And ever since Lilianna (she is very dear to me, bless her) let something very private slip into the public without my willingness I’ve been so frustrated about how much is let out without my control. What is kept in the private sphere is safe and sacred; it is part of the reason I’m not so quick to disclose my religious beliefs to others (or play the “Muslim card” as you called it) because it is such a special and personal thing, and additionally I wouldn’t want to make others feel uncomfortable as though I were proselytizing or to make them feel self-aware or pressured to cater to my religious needs.
And when something like this was disclosed, I was horrified not only for the sake of your comfort, but–selfishly–for the sake of preserving the intimacy of such a thing. It is something of an assurance to tell myself that the traffic through this blog is few, and that the various nyms who are posting are the same people, so really it can’t be that many people who know. I wanted to keep what you’d become to me absolutely to myself; since I could never tell you (everyone things I’m so mature but I wasn’t silent contently!), the next best thing was to tell no one. So that it was always safe and secure and intimate, a special secret. I’m glad I’m not a public figure; people dream of being famous and I think I would hate it!
I attempt to avoid (over and over) returning here because so much has leaked, but I always want to come back for you. Whenever I’m notified that you’re in a fit of rage against me in my absence I feel compelled to sort it out because I don’t like the idea of you being angry or distressed, especially after you’d decided that you know my take on something, and this is the only way I can explain things to you and ameliorate such unpleasant emotion. I guess I should just let it go, because it is utterly ridiculous and ultimately selfish… everyone will be forgotten. And that means that in your memory I will evolve into something different–seeing that you think I’m a snowflake at this point I am hoping for the rage to return–until finally, you forget me entirely.
I was terrified, and still am, that one day something will happen to you, and I will never know.
And because I am so pathetic and strange I wanted to keep something that was yours (it wasn’t by chance I was wondering your eye color) even though over time it will dissolve into meaninglessness, just to grasp it for the moment during which it exists temporarily. And, well, now I know you believe in snowflakes. And I am happy (not so thrilled you think I am one, however) to know it, and keep such a lovely thing.
And I’m betting this means you weren’t Ben either (the one who said the banner on my site was sensual) or *shudder* Scott (who went on about Kelly), and I need to stop being so suspicious…
..Not to get involved, but Nahida, I think when Phil said he felt sorry for Steve, it was because for a man to read that, it must be torture because you’re so desirable. I don’t think he meant that he was sorry for Steve’s life, like you interpreted. Though it is very sweet you became so defensive.
But yeah, I agree he’s an asshole.
Oh. I don’t think Steve felt like that. But okay. Perhaps I misread Phil’s intention.
And I also don’t appreciate being told I don’t know anything about the female orgasm, as though this complete jackass of a stranger knows what I’ve experienced or how it felt. And I have yet to be corrected on the male orgasm, thank you very much. It’s just intuitive.
Ugh, still fuming a little.
He probably DID feel tortured, and he’s too much of a gentleman to tell you! Attractive women are always judgmental about how easily they turn men on. I’m sure you’re having lots of fun aren’t you? Heartless, like I said before.
I… wouldn’t judge him. At all. I would be fine if he told me. I just don’t think I could have that effect!
That’s it. That’s absolutely it. I can’t believe you’re all adults. I didn’t like kids even when I was a kid, and I had a feeling grown ups were immature, but I had no idea they were worse.
You know, I never had a chance to be a little girl. I can’t match you in a tantrum, because I never learned how to throw one. But neither do the second graders to whom I teach Islamic studies on Sundays. Not like this. I am done with you.
RTelier, you don’t just have issues, you’re actually a BULLY.
The amount of Slut Shaming here is MAGNIFICENT. Men like you are the reason feminists like Nahida become more and more radical.
Sweetie, I’m so sorry.
RTelier, she clearly said that she misinterpreted what Phil meant by he felt sorry for Steve because she doesn’t think she could have that effect on a man.
That’s amazing how even a woman’s MODESTY can be slut shamed.
Because he is working.
Good to know the naive little girl understands he has to work and doesn’t have time to play around.
…she’s not a naive little girl?
WHAT is your problem dude
What else do you call someone who thinks that stuff about a person without meeting him?
A saint.
A slut.