Is this sexist?

[Real blank]

“Former UFC champion Khabib Nurmagomedovrefused to shake Kate Scott's hand during a Champions League TV segment on account of his faith.”

“Nurmagomedov then appeared to clarify his refusal to the presenter - previously known as Kate Abdo prior to her marriage to boxing trainer Malik Scott last year - who subsequently apologised on air.”

Awkward moment Muslim UFC legend refuses to shake Kate Scott's hand

As the undefeated former fighter made his way over to his group he embraced each member individually before declining a handshake from Scott as her hand remained awkwardly outstretched.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[bythoughts]

In general, even our secular society holds that touching requires consent. If he doesn't want to touch anyone of the opposite sex, as part of a general prohibition against acts that are presumably desirable, it isn't a statement that women are bad/inferior/etc. It's simply not his custom. Insisting everyone do a handshaking ritual can come off as a sort of cultural imperialism.

That said, well, it seems like a sacrifice here. Surely it's better to say that greeting by kissing on the lips is part of your culture and it wouldn't be appropriate for her to insult you by refusing!

 

[Cosmo]

In general, even our secular society holds that touching requires consent. If he doesn't want to touch anyone of the opposite sex, as part of a general prohibition against acts that are presumably desirable, it isn't a statement that women are bad/inferior/etc. It's simply not his custom. Insisting everyone do a handshaking ritual can come off as a sort of cultural imperialism.

That said, well, it seems like a sacrifice here. Surely it's better to say that greeting by kissing on the lips is part of your culture and it wouldn't be appropriate for her to insult you by refusing!

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Ummmmmmmmmm, not the first thread posted on here asking that disingenuous question.

I could educate the OP on the question, but hey, when MY culture is the only correct culture, and YOUR culture is not the correct culture, then I will ridicule your culture.

 

[Real blank]

Ummmmmmmmmm, not the first thread posted on here asking that disingenuous question.

I could educate the OP on the question, but hey, when MY culture is the only correct culture, and YOUR culture is not the correct culture, then I will ridicule your culture.

Is sexism culturally defined then ?

 

[j brown's body]

In general, even our secular society holds that touching requires consent. If he doesn't want to touch anyone of the opposite sex, as part of a general prohibition against acts that are presumably desirable, it isn't a statement that women are bad/inferior/etc. It's simply not his custom. Insisting everyone do a handshaking ritual can come off as a sort of cultural imperialism.

That said, well, it seems like a sacrifice here. Surely it's better to say that greeting by kissing on the lips is part of your culture and it wouldn't be appropriate for her to insult you by refusing!

Much less touching, it didn’t look like he was going to even acknowledge her until she reached to him.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Is sexism culturally defined then ?

Nice twist of my words. I actually took a course in communication back in the day. True story. One of the examples given is how some cultures don't like speaking to you close up face to face. So they appear standoffish. But they aren't. They respect distance.
Same with this question of a hand shake. If you are going to judge whether someone should have offered to accept a hand shake or not, you are revealing our own bias and..................sorry to say..................prejudice. Not everyone is going to be comfortable with YOUR expectations.
AND this has not been the first thread on this topic, so you are a bit late to the game.

 

[Real blank]

Nice twist of my words. I actually took a course in communication back in the day. True story. One of the examples given is how some cultures don't like speaking to you close up face to face. So they appear standoffish. But they aren't. They respect distance.
Same with this question of a hand shake. If you are going to judge whether someone should have offered to accept a hand shake or not, you are revealing our own bias and..................sorry to say..................prejudice. Not everyone is going to be comfortable with YOUR expectations.
AND this has not been the first thread on this topic, so you are a bit late to the game.

Totally dissed her in front of her colleagues because of his fantasy beliefs. Why does he take precedence ?

 

[Noodlegawd]

“Former UFC champion Khabib Nurmagomedovrefused to shake Kate Scott's hand during a Champions League TV segment on account of his faith.”

“Nurmagomedov then appeared to clarify his refusal to the presenter - previously known as Kate Abdo prior to her marriage to boxing trainer Malik Scott last year - who subsequently apologised on air.”

Awkward moment Muslim UFC legend refuses to shake Kate Scott's hand

As the undefeated former fighter made his way over to his group he embraced each member individually before declining a handshake from Scott as her hand remained awkwardly outstretched.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Yes, it is sexist.

 

[Grand Mal]

Is sexism culturally defined then ?

Yes.

 

[Real blank]

Yes.

Really that’s what you think?

 

[Grand Mal]

Really that’s what you think?

Yes.
I think my culture's definition is the correct one, but I recognize that different cultures define sexism differently.
Isn't that how culture works?

 

[Real blank]

Yes.
I think my culture's definition is the correct one, but I recognize that different cultures define sexism differently.
Isn't that how culture works?

Weak sauce

 

[Grand Mal]

Weak sauce

His culture tells him not to touch women he's not related to. Your, and my, culture say it's acceptable to shake a woman's hand when you first meet. Personally, I think we have it right but it's still a cultural expression. In his culture, he's not being sexist, he's being respectful, but he wasn't in a Muslim cultural setting, he was in the West and he should have conducted himself according to our culture, much as he can. That's what I do, try to do, when I travel.

 

[Grand Mal]

In general, even our secular society holds that touching requires consent. If he doesn't want to touch anyone of the opposite sex, as part of a general prohibition against acts that are presumably desirable, it isn't a statement that women are bad/inferior/etc. It's simply not his custom. Insisting everyone do a handshaking ritual can come off as a sort of cultural imperialism.

That said, well, it seems like a sacrifice here. Surely it's better to say that greeting by kissing on the lips is part of your culture and it wouldn't be appropriate for her to insult you by refusing!

In his culture he wasn't being sexist, he was being respectful, not touching a strange woman, but when he's in the west he should try to conduct himself according our culture, much as he can. That's what good travellers do.

 

[CLAX1911]

“Former UFC champion Khabib Nurmagomedovrefused to shake Kate Scott's hand during a Champions League TV segment on account of his faith.”

“Nurmagomedov then appeared to clarify his refusal to the presenter - previously known as Kate Abdo prior to her marriage to boxing trainer Malik Scott last year - who subsequently apologised on air.”

Awkward moment Muslim UFC legend refuses to shake Kate Scott's hand

As the undefeated former fighter made his way over to his group he embraced each member individually before declining a handshake from Scott as her hand remained awkwardly outstretched.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Yes it's sexist Islam is a sexist ideology. Have you ever seen how women dress in Islamic countries? They are beaten if they don't dress that way sometimes raped and it's okay.

 

[CLAX1911]

Yes.
I think my culture's definition is the correct one, but I recognize that different cultures define sexism differently.
Isn't that how culture works?

So a culture that thinks if a 45 year old man rapes a 13 year old girl that 13 year old girl must marry that man, is equal to one that imprisons a man for doing that?

 

[CLAX1911]

In his culture he wasn't being sexist,

Yes he was. In his culture women are muscle that's the very definition of a sexist. It's not equal it's worse our culture is better.

he was being respectful, not touching a strange woman, but when he's in the west he should try to conduct himself according our culture, much as he can. That's what good travellers do.

So if 45 year old man rapes his 12 year old daughter and he forces his daughter to marry that man that's just like people getting married in the US right cuz all cultures are equal?

I disagree some cultures are despicable.

 

[Lisa]

So a culture that thinks if a 45 year old man rapes a 13 year old girl that 13 year old girl must marry that man, is equal to one that imprisons a man for doing that?

This is Old Testament law that conservative Christianity would enforce if they had the political power to do so. The separation of church and state exists for this very reason, to keep religion and the government separate.

Does Deuteronomy 22:28-29 command a rape victim to marry her rapist? | GotQuestions.org

Does Deuteronomy 22:28-29 command a rape victim to marry her rapist? Why would God command a woman to marry the man who just raped her?

www.gotquestions.org

 

[CLAX1911]

This is Old Testament law that conservative Christianity would enforce if they had the political power to do so.

Prior to the Renaissance perhaps. But do you know where that happens today in Islamic countries.

The separation of church and state exists for this very reason, to keep religion and the government separate.

Which is yet another reason why Islamic culture is backward.

Does Deuteronomy 22:28-29 command a rape victim to marry her rapist? | GotQuestions.org

Does Deuteronomy 22:28-29 command a rape victim to marry her rapist? Why would God command a woman to marry the man who just raped her?

www.gotquestions.org

 

[Lisa]

Prior to the Renaissance perhaps. But do you know where that happens today in Islamic countries.

Conservative christianity is just as bad if they had the power to enforce their biblical nuttery.

Which is yet another reason why Islamic culture is backward.

Conservative Christianity is just as backward as Islam. We keep it in check with the First Amendment so we don't have a theocracy like they do in many middle eastern countries. Christian nationalists are trying to weaken the First Amendment so they can create a conservative christian government. F' that nonsense.

 

[CLAX1911]

Conservative christianity is just as bad if they had the power to enforce their biblical nuttery.

So they allow themselves to not have this power because they could take it if they wanted it.

Sounds like you're reaching.

Conservative Christianity is just as backward as Islam.

And that's why the Renaissance happened and medical advancements and all of the things that make your life better because Christians are just like the people who run the Islamic world right?

I think you have some bigotry here

We keep it in check with the First Amendment

They allow the First amendment in fact they were the ones that created it did you know in the Islamic world they don't have that because they don't allow it.

so we don't have a theocracy like they do in many middle eastern countries.

Christians allow that too. If they wanted to there's enough of them they could overpower you and anyone that fights against you I think they prefer not to live in a theocracy which is why the Renaissance was able to happen and how it led to Western advancement.

Christian nationalists are trying to weaken the First Amendment so they can create a conservative christian government.

And they're typically outvoted and overpowered by all of the other Christians that don't want that because you're wrong about it.

F' that nonsense.

Your persecution complex I agree that's nonsense.

The mere fact that the Renaissance was a loud to happen and that the declaration of Independence was allowed to happen and the founding of the country ratification of the Constitution was allowed to happen proves you wrong. You're talking about a period in which 98% of the country was very conservative Christian.

 

[Lisa]

So they allow themselves to not have this power because they could take it if they wanted it.

Sounds like you're reaching.

And that's why the Renaissance happened and medical advancements and all of the things that make your life better because Christians are just like the people who run the Islamic world right?

I think you have some bigotry here

They allow the First amendment in fact they were the ones that created it did you know in the Islamic world they don't have that because they don't allow it.

Christians allow that too. If they wanted to there's enough of them they could overpower you and anyone that fights against you I think they prefer not to live in a theocracy which is why the Renaissance was able to happen and how it led to Western advancement.

And they're typically outvoted and overpowered by all of the other Christians that don't want that because you're wrong about it.

Your persecution complex I agree that's nonsense.

The mere fact that the Renaissance was a loud to happen and that the declaration of Independence was allowed to happen and the founding of the country ratification of the Constitution was allowed to happen proves you wrong. You're talking about a period in which 98% of the country was very conservative Christian.

The Renaissance in the 1500s had nothing to do with the religious wars in Europe between the Catholics and protestants in the 1600-1700s. It is because of those wars that I am an American because my ancestors were on the losing side and came to the US too escape that violent religious idiocy, arriving here in the mid 1800s.

History of Europe - Wars of Religion, Reformation, Conflicts | Britannica

History of Europe - Wars of Religion, Reformation, Conflicts: Germany, France, and the Netherlands each achieved a settlement of the religious problem by means of war, and in each case the solution contained original aspects. In Germany the territorial formula of cuius regio, eius religio...

www.britannica.com

 

[CLAX1911]

The Renaissance in the 1500s had nothing to do with the religious wars in Europe between the Catholics and protestants in the 1600-1700s. It is because of those wars that I am an American because my ancestors were on the losing side and came to the US too escape that violent religious idiocy, arriving here in the mid 1800s.

History of Europe - Wars of Religion, Reformation, Conflicts | Britannica

History of Europe - Wars of Religion, Reformation, Conflicts: Germany, France, and the Netherlands each achieved a settlement of the religious problem by means of war, and in each case the solution contained original aspects. In Germany the territorial formula of cuius regio, eius religio...

www.britannica.com

Your historically and culturally illiterate on the subject I'll disregard everything you say from now on it.

Anytime you mentioned conservative Christians on just assume you're talking about your own trauma.

Other than a very very tiny subset within Christians I would call them a cult they're pretty permissive about this sort of thing.