|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 2:13 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
WOMEN are taught from early childhood that their worth is proportional to their attractiveness. We feel compelled to pursue abstract notions of beauty, half realizing that such a pursuit is futile.
When women reject this form of oppression, they face ridicule and contempt. Whether it's women who refuse to wear makeup or to shave their legs, or to expose their bodies, society, both men and women, have trouble dealing with them.
In the Western world, the hijab has come to symbolize either forced silence or radical, unconscionable militancy. Actually, it's neither. It is simply a woman's assertion that judgment of her physical person is to play no role whatsoever in social interaction.
Wearing the hijab has given me freedom from constant attention to my physical self. Because my appearance is not subjected to public scrutiny, my beauty, or perhaps lack of it, has been removed from the realm of what can legitimately be discussed.
No one knows whether my hair looks as if I just stepped out of a salon, whether or not I can pinch an inch, or even if I have unsightly stretch marks. And because no one knows, no one cares.
Feeling that one has to meet the impossible male standards of beauty is tiring and often humiliating. I should know, I spent my entire teenage years trying to do it. It was a borderline bulimic and spent a lot of money I didn't have on potions and lotions in hopes of becoming the next Cindy Crawford.
The definition of beauty is ever-changing; waifish is good, waifish is bad, athletic is good -- sorry, athletic is bad. Narrow hips? Great. Narrow hips? Too bad.
Women are not going to achieve equality with the right to bear their *beep* in public, as some people would like to have you believe. That would only make us party to our own objectification. True equality will be had only when women don't need to display themselves to get attention and won't need to defend their decision to keep their bodies to themselves. |
Wrapping ourselves up in veils and tents is not a satisfactory answer to the problem, IMO, but I do agree that in the West women's worth is judged by their physical beauty or lack of it. If you're not such a good looking guy, you wont be particularly disadvantaged by the fact (unless you want to front a band or be a leading Hollywood actor). If you're a woman you're judged first by how you look and everything else is secondary. It will have a huge impact on your life. I'm glad I wasn't born with an ugly face, it must be very difficult to go through life as an ugly woman. Women are held in higher esteem for things like staying slim or remaining youthful into middle age than they are for their various acheivements. And this being the 21st century. Nothing wrong with being pretty etc. It's just that women are still penalised in the workplace/public life etc when they don't meet certain physical 'standards' even when their appearance should have no bearing on their position.
But I question this a little:
| Quote: |
| Feeling that one has to meet the impossible male standards of beauty is tiring and often humiliating |
Men are much more appreciative of women's various forms than women are. It wasn't men who invented size 0. That was an ideal created by women themselves. I once read an article where they'd done a survey where they shown men a spectrum of women from small sizes up to larger sizes (American size 16 being the largest) and the guys thought all the women looked great. It's women who start being really picky about body shape. Women seem far more judgemental in this way. During various phases of my life I've experienced different body states from being very bony and slight to being somewhat plump to being slim but voluptuous and I've found that there are always men who are appreciative, and it's women who make bitchy comments about each others bodies. That's not to say that men don't share some of the guilt. Men will often be very dismissive and disrespecting of physically unappealing women. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Vicissitude
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Location: Chef School
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 4:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Vicissitude wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
Thanks for the confirmation.
Inchala? what does that mean? |
You say you were immersed in Arabic culture and you don't even know what 'inchala' means?  That's very telling. |
He knows very well what it means. He might making a point about how obvious it is? Or making fun of your choice of spelling? He's playing about at any rate. |
Oh, you're probably right. This any better:
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 6:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| It's not equivalent because you'll find the vast majority of Muslim Arab women prefer their dress covering not only because of their religion but also out of personal choice. |
But, and this is the key point, they do not have a choice, you complete imbecile. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Vicissitude wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
Thanks for the confirmation.
Inchala? what does that mean? |
You say you were immersed in Arabic culture and you don't even know what 'inchala' means? That's very telling. |
He knows very well what it means. He might making a point about how obvious it is? Or making fun of your choice of spelling? He's playing about at any rate. |
In-if
Sha (not cha)-wills
Allah- God
Insha'allah- if god wills it.
I was both perplexed by your spelling of the word and the context in which you used it.
| Quote: |
| But, and this is the key point, they do not have a choice |
indeed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vicissitude
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Location: Chef School
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 9:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bigverne wrote: |
| Quote: |
| It's not equivalent because you'll find the vast majority of Muslim Arab women prefer their dress covering not only because of their religion but also out of personal choice. |
But, and this is the key point, they do not have a choice, you complete imbecile. |
Who's telling you this load of crap? Notice I said majority and they most certainly do have choices all over the world about what to wear. True, some of Saudi is very strict but this is not the majority of the Arab women in the world. Even when the women happen to leave and travel to places where they do have a choice as to what to wear, they still do as they please. Some, like my friends, wear normal western clothes and no abaya or scarf. But I think it's safe to say that the majority of Saudi women continue to wear what they are use to whenever they travel abroad. I see it nearly every single day.
imbecile, huh?  You obviously don't know what the heck you are talking about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vicissitude
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Location: Chef School
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 9:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Vicissitude wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
Thanks for the confirmation.
Inchala? what does that mean? |
You say you were immersed in Arabic culture and you don't even know what 'inchala' means? That's very telling. |
He knows very well what it means. He might making a point about how obvious it is? Or making fun of your choice of spelling? He's playing about at any rate. |
In-if
Sha (not cha)-wills
Allah- God
Insha'allah- if god wills it.
I was both perplexed by your spelling of the word and the context in which you used it. |
This is really stupid. You insist on quibbling over an English transliteration of an Arabic word which is spelt different ways but nevertheless sounds the same as it is written. So I used a �c� instead of an �s� and I left out an �l�. Big deal. As far as the context goes, this word is commonly used as a retort. But you should know this if you were really immersed in Arab culture as you say. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Vicissitude wrote:
| Quote: |
On the other hand wrote:
Quote:
The decreasing molarity and trials of this time makes Hijaab even more in need. More than ever before sex crimes are rampant. Although this society tells women they can wear what they want to wear, anytime a rape occurs the woman is the one put on trial an one of the first questions is, "What were you wearing?" This concept seems as though it is a set up directed against the so called contemporary woman.
The writer's argument is equivalent to saying that Jim Crow laws were justified to protect blacks, since blacks who went into white areas often got attacked by whites.
It's not equivalent because you'll find the vast majority of Muslim Arab women prefer their dress covering not only because of their religion but also out of personal choice. In contrast, Black people had laws placed on them that they were NOT in agreement with as evidence in the civil rights movement. So it's not a good comparison; that is the dress of Muslim women and that of Jim Crow Laws. |
Okay, let me rework the analogy.
Imagine that, during the height of lynching, certain mixed-race churches adopted as a religious tenet the idea that blacks should vountarily avoid ever going into white neighbourhoods, even where there was no segregation, because blacks who did so risked violence from whites. Let's further say that these churches said nothing about white people going into black neighbourhoods. That was still okay. And of course memberships in these churches was strictly voluntary.
Now, we might regard such voluntary segregation as a good, albeit very short term, solution to the problem of racist violence. But I don't think too many people would hold it up as a great step forward for the rights of black people, the way that blogger talks about the hijab for women.
Last edited by On the other hand on Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:40 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Also...
| Quote: |
Fair is not 'fairness.'
Quote:
The picture of equality looks awfully strange to Kim Shamsky. The 47-year-old business owner pays her ex, a 65-year-old retired Major League Baseball player, thousands per month in temporary spousal support.
He's not seeking alimony to help pay for the kids' birthday parties, since they don't have children. Nor was he instrumental in building her business. They married seven years after she started a handful of staffing firms and amassed a small fortune on her own. The daughter of a New York City taxi driver, Shamsky started her first staffing agency at age 27 with the help of a 21% loan. Not only was she able to make her first business profitable, but she's also worked furiously to ensure the success of all five businesses she's started since. Small wonder she is outraged at having to pay thousands of dollars a month to her ex.
"He used to scream and throw tantrums and demand more money," Shamsky says of her ex-husband. "It was like he thought, 'Hey, you have money, why shouldn't I?'" She adds flatly: "I will never marry again. And I'm getting T-shirts made with the word 'prenup' written across the chest."
No doubt Shamsky would find more than a few buyers for the shirts. The idea that men can receive spousal support from their wives may feel like a freakish concept, but as women have become higher earners, it's increasingly common.
...
Kim Shamsky admits she's angry about paying her ex-husband spousal support mostly because he's a man. After all, men are supposed to be breadwinners, not bread takers.
"A real man just wouldn't do this sort of thing," she says. "Maybe it's my Italian upbringing, but I don't think it's right."
Right or not, as women's earnings grow, so will their financial responsibility during divorce. That's equality for you.
|
What exactly is supposed to be so unfair about this? Unless you can show that a man in the same circumstances and jurisdiction would be getting a sweeter deal than this woman is, I don't see why this shouldn't be regarded as a straighforward case of equal treatment.
| Quote: |
Kim Shamsky admits she's angry about paying her ex-husband spousal support mostly because he's a man. After all, men are supposed to be breadwinners, not bread takers.
|
Just to repeat...
| Quote: |
men are supposed to be breadwinners, not bread takers.
|
Not exactly on the cutting edge of feminist theory here, are we. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 11:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Vicissitude wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Vicissitude wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
Thanks for the confirmation.
Inchala? what does that mean? |
You say you were immersed in Arabic culture and you don't even know what 'inchala' means? That's very telling. |
He knows very well what it means. He might making a point about how obvious it is? Or making fun of your choice of spelling? He's playing about at any rate. |
In-if
Sha (not cha)-wills
Allah- God
Insha'allah- if god wills it.
I was both perplexed by your spelling of the word and the context in which you used it. |
This is really stupid. You insist on quibbling over an English transliteration of an Arabic word which is spelt different ways but nevertheless sounds the same as it is written. So I used a �c� instead of an �s� and I left out an �l�. Big deal. As far as the context goes, this word is commonly used as a retort. But you should know this if you were really immersed in Arab culture as you say. |
1. There is no "cha" sound in arabic. There is no letter that represents "ch" in the Arabic script. In fact the "sh" sound comes from one letter in the arabic script that clearly has an equivalent in English (the "sh" combo).
2. Eh not quite. It is the english equivalent of saying, "yeah, well, we'll just see what happens." While that can be a retort, i wouldn't say it would be a useful one in this case since we're talking about the present and not about what will happen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From today's Guardian:
�1,000 gap between men and women's pay after graduation
� Discrepancy apparent soon after ending studies
� Inequality begins even before effect of childbirth
| Quote: |
Women graduates are paid less from the very beginning of their careers, with men earning �1,000 more than their college classmates within three years of leaving university, according to a major study published today.
Men are significantly more likely to go straight into high paid jobs. Forty per cent of men are earning more than �25,000 a year compared with 26% of women three years after graduation.
The findings are contained in the largest ever survey of graduates' experiences by the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa) which for the first time tracked 25,000 students three years after they graduated. |
| Quote: |
| But these findings suggest that women are paid badly even in fulltime graduate jobs and even before they start to have children, take time out and fall behind in their careers. |
| Quote: |
| Kat Stark, women's officer for the National Union of Students, said: "These figures show that even after attending university, women are earning less than men. "Many women are unaware that they are being paid less than men - in order to tackle this, the government should force employers to reveal how much they pay their employees." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bramble
Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Location: National treasures need homes
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
From today's Guardian:
�1,000 gap between men and women's pay after graduation
� Discrepancy apparent soon after ending studies
� Inequality begins even before effect of childbirth
| Quote: |
Women graduates are paid less from the very beginning of their careers, with men earning �1,000 more than their college classmates within three years of leaving university, according to a major study published today.
Men are significantly more likely to go straight into high paid jobs. Forty per cent of men are earning more than �25,000 a year compared with 26% of women three years after graduation.
The findings are contained in the largest ever survey of graduates' experiences by the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa) which for the first time tracked 25,000 students three years after they graduated. |
| Quote: |
| But these findings suggest that women are paid badly even in fulltime graduate jobs and even before they start to have children, take time out and fall behind in their careers. |
| Quote: |
| Kat Stark, women's officer for the National Union of Students, said: "These figures show that even after attending university, women are earning less than men. "Many women are unaware that they are being paid less than men - in order to tackle this, the government should force employers to reveal how much they pay their employees." |
|
Thanks for the link. It's pretty disturbing, in this day and age ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vicissitude
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Location: Chef School
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 2:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
1. There is no "cha" sound in arabic. There is no letter that represents "ch" in the Arabic script. In fact the "sh" sound comes from one letter in the arabic script that clearly has an equivalent in English (the "sh" combo). |
Maybe you should stick to teaching Arabic, because you are obviously having a serious problem with understanding the English consonant digraph 'ch.' It has several phonetic sounds. Are you a native English speaker? Please tell me you are not teaching ESL.
I am merciful, so I'll help you out here:
| Quote: |
| The consonant digraph ch is used to represent a single sound /ch/. It can appear in initial, final, and medial positions as in change, couch, and voucher. The digraph ch can be silent as in yacht. It can also be used to represent the /k/ sound as in chasm and anchor. When ch appears in final and medial positions, it is often spelled tch as in match, watch, pitcher, and hatchet. Other spellings include c as in cello, t as in posture, and ti as in question. |
Futhermore, there are many words with the the consonant digraph ch, which are pronounced as the consonant digraph sh. Work on the following words and get back with me:
chandelier, charlatan, chauffeur, chauvinism, chemise, chic, chenille, chef... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Vicissitude wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
1. There is no "cha" sound in arabic. There is no letter that represents "ch" in the Arabic script. In fact the "sh" sound comes from one letter in the arabic script that clearly has an equivalent in English (the "sh" combo). |
Maybe you should stick to teaching Arabic, because you are obviously having a serious problem with understanding the English consonant digraph 'ch.' It has several phonetic sounds. Are you a native English speaker? Please tell me you are not teaching ESL.
I am merciful, so I'll help you out here:
| Quote: |
| The consonant digraph ch is used to represent a single sound /ch/. It can appear in initial, final, and medial positions as in change, couch, and voucher. The digraph ch can be silent as in yacht. It can also be used to represent the /k/ sound as in chasm and anchor. When ch appears in final and medial positions, it is often spelled tch as in match, watch, pitcher, and hatchet. Other spellings include c as in cello, t as in posture, and ti as in question. |
Futhermore, there are many words with the the consonant digraph ch, which are pronounced as the consonant digraph sh. Work on the following words and get back with me:
chandelier, charlatan, chauffeur, chauvinism, chemise, chic, chenille, chef... |
notice how all of those words have "ch" at the beginning, and not in the middle. If you can come up with one other English source that used inchala instead of inshallah (or insha'allah, etc) then I will apologize and say you were accurate in your spelling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vicissitude
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Location: Chef School
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 10:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| Vicissitude wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
1. There is no "cha" sound in arabic. There is no letter that represents "ch" in the Arabic script. In fact the "sh" sound comes from one letter in the arabic script that clearly has an equivalent in English (the "sh" combo). |
Maybe you should stick to teaching Arabic, because you are obviously having a serious problem with understanding the English consonant digraph 'ch.' It has several phonetic sounds. Are you a native English speaker? Please tell me you are not teaching ESL.
I am merciful, so I'll help you out here:
| Quote: |
| The consonant digraph ch is used to represent a single sound /ch/. It can appear in initial, final, and medial positions as in change, couch, and voucher. The digraph ch can be silent as in yacht. It can also be used to represent the /k/ sound as in chasm and anchor. When ch appears in final and medial positions, it is often spelled tch as in match, watch, pitcher, and hatchet. Other spellings include c as in cello, t as in posture, and ti as in question. |
Futhermore, there are many words with the the consonant digraph ch, which are pronounced as the consonant digraph sh. Work on the following words and get back with me:
chandelier, charlatan, chauffeur, chauvinism, chemise, chic, chenille, chef... |
notice how all of those words have "ch" at the beginning, and not in the middle. If you can come up with one other English source that used inchala instead of inshallah (or insha'allah, etc) then I will apologize and say you were accurate in your spelling. |
**nonchalant**
| Quote: |
we are so happy for u sheikh hamdan and sheikha yasmine and inchala a happy life and a lot of kids.
(she is a friend of me i love her so much...good luck my dear) |
http://www.dubaiforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=203376
http://schiavoni.blogspot.com/2005/04/inchala.html
| Quote: |
Inchala
I'm finally getting used to what I call the "inchala" lifestyle. "Inchala," in Arabic, literally means "god willing." However, in practice, it works less like its English translation "as soon as possible" and more like the English phrases "in due time," "sooner or later" or "eventually."
And practically every request is answered with an "inchala."
"I will look over your sponsorship packages tomorrow inchala."
"I will get you some three-ring binders inchala."
"You will have your own computer tomorrow inchala." |
| Quote: |
| Maria how are you i hop fine how summer with you inchala Lebanon be fine and other country like Iraq to visit all imam and Lebanon next year |
Enjoy the music: http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=163689169
I could go on and on. There is no shortage of "sources." Now don't you feel like a complete and total ass?
And just to make you look even MORE like an ass, I'll have you know that you can spell it many different ways including the following:
| Quote: |
In sha Allah
In sha allah
In sha' allah
In-sha-Allah
Insha'Allah
Insha'allah
Insh Allah
Inshallah
Inshalla |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 11:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Vicissitude wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| Vicissitude wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
1. There is no "cha" sound in arabic. There is no letter that represents "ch" in the Arabic script. In fact the "sh" sound comes from one letter in the arabic script that clearly has an equivalent in English (the "sh" combo). |
Maybe you should stick to teaching Arabic, because you are obviously having a serious problem with understanding the English consonant digraph 'ch.' It has several phonetic sounds. Are you a native English speaker? Please tell me you are not teaching ESL.
I am merciful, so I'll help you out here:
| Quote: |
| The consonant digraph ch is used to represent a single sound /ch/. It can appear in initial, final, and medial positions as in change, couch, and voucher. The digraph ch can be silent as in yacht. It can also be used to represent the /k/ sound as in chasm and anchor. When ch appears in final and medial positions, it is often spelled tch as in match, watch, pitcher, and hatchet. Other spellings include c as in cello, t as in posture, and ti as in question. |
Futhermore, there are many words with the the consonant digraph ch, which are pronounced as the consonant digraph sh. Work on the following words and get back with me:
chandelier, charlatan, chauffeur, chauvinism, chemise, chic, chenille, chef... |
notice how all of those words have "ch" at the beginning, and not in the middle. If you can come up with one other English source that used inchala instead of inshallah (or insha'allah, etc) then I will apologize and say you were accurate in your spelling. |
**nonchalant**
| Quote: |
we are so happy for u sheikh hamdan and sheikha yasmine and inchala a happy life and a lot of kids.
(she is a friend of me i love her so much...good luck my dear) |
http://www.dubaiforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=203376
http://schiavoni.blogspot.com/2005/04/inchala.html
| Quote: |
Inchala
I'm finally getting used to what I call the "inchala" lifestyle. "Inchala," in Arabic, literally means "god willing." However, in practice, it works less like its English translation "as soon as possible" and more like the English phrases "in due time," "sooner or later" or "eventually."
And practically every request is answered with an "inchala."
"I will look over your sponsorship packages tomorrow inchala."
"I will get you some three-ring binders inchala."
"You will have your own computer tomorrow inchala." |
| Quote: |
| Maria how are you i hop fine how summer with you inchala Lebanon be fine and other country like Iraq to visit all imam and Lebanon next year |
Enjoy the music: http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=163689169
I could go on and on. There is no shortage of "sources." Now don't you feel like a complete and total ass?
And just to make you look even MORE like an ass, I'll have you know that you can spell it many different ways including the following:
| Quote: |
In sha Allah
In sha allah
In sha' allah
In-sha-Allah
Insha'Allah
Insha'allah
Insh Allah
Inshallah
Inshalla |
|
Yes, all of those spellings have "sh" in them. That was my point of disagreement with you (sh vs ch) not the rest of the word. So nope, don't feel like an ass but thanks.
In regards to finding inchala, ok, i do apologize. I should have considered such brilliant sources such as myspace and personal blogs. Shame on me for not thinking of that.
Personally I will stick to Insha'allah (or inshallah, etc) since the those forms you posted at the bottom are found in mainstream media and academia (as opposed to inchala). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
