The Red Pill/Manosphere

[kakaballi]

Re: The Red Pill/Manosphere

@Zafra

That still a normal year. It ain’t dog years. And supposedly according to the website a 7 year old can fend for himself without parental supervision.

I haven’t read the arguments here, so can’t say.

Just saying that for jurisprudence, one has to be very specific and perhaps therefore they emphasize ‘Islamic’ years (which are 10 days shorter than solar years).

[Southie]

Re: The Red Pill/Manosphere

^ please read the thread before commenting.

[badabing]

Re: The Red Pill/Manosphere

@Deeba1234

In Islam in “normal” cases the mother would only get custody if the children were very young (up to 7ish for a boy and puberty for a girl).. If the children were younger but she were to remarry she’d also forfeit custody to the father.. After the ages mentioned they would go and live with their father.. A son can choose who he wants to live with later on but a daughter stays under her father’s custody until she marries so it’s actually only in cases where the children are very young that the mother usually gets custody..

Detailed info here: Custody of Children after divorce | Relationships | Fiqh

(I personally don’t think it’s so fair that she needs to stay unmarried to keep her children whilst her husband can remarry with apparently no effect)

Thank you. Islamically, mother gets custody of boys below 7 and i think 13 or 18 (someone please correct me) for girls - British Pakistani women don’t follow this during divorce, they do the old “but islam says we have to follow the law of the land we live in” routine lol. Why not give custody to the father or follow the islamic ruling of custody, and the mother provide financial support, seems fair to me - whats good for the gander is good for the goose? Gender equality is what i’m after - in child custody cases here in the UK, women have privilege, yet complain about male privilege in other aspects of society.

[Thornewood9]

Re: The Red Pill/Manosphere

@Deeba1234

In Islam in “normal” cases the mother would only get custody if the children were very young (up to 7ish for a boy and puberty for a girl).. If the children were younger but she were to remarry she’d also forfeit custody to the father.. After the ages mentioned they would go and live with their father.. A son can choose who he wants to live with later on but a daughter stays under her father’s custody until she marries so it’s actually only in cases where the children are very young that the mother usually gets custody..

Detailed info here: Custody of Children after divorce | Relationships | Fiqh

(I personally don’t think it’s so fair that she needs to stay unmarried to keep her children whilst her husband can remarry with apparently no effect)

I’m just going to copy and paste some stuff here.
“if divorce did take place, and both parties demand their rights, then the right of custody will be in the following way. In should be remembered here that there is nothing wrong in making a mutual arrangement, as long as there is no objection from those who have a right to custody”

And then comes your part. Yes its true what you stated however that only comes about if there is no mutual agreement over the children. And the fairness of a mother remarrying comes in to protect the children of her first husband. Her first husband has a right over his children, he is their father not a stepfather. And any female children would have to do hijab before their stepfather.
It may not seem fair to you but it wasnt made up without reason or thought. Nor was it made to be unfair to the mother.

"Irrespective of who (mother/father) has the right of custody, the other party has visitation rights according to mutual understanding and consent. Generally, the party having the rights of custody use the child as a weapon to punish the other party by depriving them of visitation rights. This is totally against the concept of Islam and a severe, brutal and grave sin indeed, and also very harmful to the child. Unfortunately, many so called “religious” people are also involved in this heinous act.

At all times, the father of the child is responsible for maintaining the child; in the case of a female, until she marries; while in the case of a healthy male, until he reaches maturity. In the case of a disabled child (male or female) the father is permanently responsible.

When the mother has the rights of custody but does not have a shelter to stay in with the child, the father must provide shelter for both."

Child Custody after Divorce - IslamQA

And Allah knows best.

[Thornewood9]

Re: The Red Pill/Manosphere

@badabing

Thank you. Islamically, mother gets custody of boys below 7 and i think 13 or 18 (someone please correct me) for girls - British Pakistani women don’t follow this during divorce, they do the old “but islam says we have to follow the law of the land we live in” routine lol. Why not give custody to the father or follow the islamic ruling of custody, and the mother provide financial support, seems fair to me - whats good for the gander is good for the goose? Gender equality is what i’m after - in child custody cases here in the UK, women have privilege, yet complain about male privilege in other aspects of society.

Please read my post above. And the father has financial responsibility in Islam over his children till they reach maturity or puberty. In islam the above guidelines are for those who cannot come to a mutual agreement and nowhere does it state that the children are not allowed any contact with their mother or father while living with the opposite parent. It has been done so that the children are treated fairly. And again you are just generalising. Not all British Pakistanis women are scheming evil witches who just pick and choose whatever they want from the religion. Don’t be ridiculous.

[Deeba1234]

Re: The Red Pill/Manosphere

^Staying civil and visitation rights still doesn’t change the fact that the kids Islamically should be living with their father after the age of 7/8ish.. If there’s a son he can choose to move back in with his mother later if he wants to but the daughter has no such rights.. The hijab thing makes sense from a religious perspective but I still don’t agree with the overall idea of it.. Giving more rights to a father so the children will likely be “nurtured” by a new stepmother or other female relative over their own mum doesn’t seem to be the best idea to me, even if that’s what’s supposed to happen.. Joint custody in “normal” cases (ie with no abuse or wrongdoing involved) seems fairer imo..

[Thornewood9]

Re: The Red Pill/Manosphere

@Deeba1234

^Staying civil and visitation rights still doesn’t change the fact that the kids Islamically should be living with their father after the age of 7/8ish.. If there’s a son he can choose to move back in with his mother later if he wants to but the daughter has no such rights.. The hijab thing makes sense from a religious perspective but I still don’t agree with the overall idea of it.. Giving more rights to a father so the children will likely be “nurtured” by a new stepmother or other female relative over their own mum doesn’t seem to be the best idea to me, even if that’s what’s supposed to happen.. Joint custody in “normal” cases (ie with no abuse or wrongdoing involved) seems fairer imo..

If there is a mutual agreement between them and they both decide that the children will stay with the mother then that’s between them and allowed. If they can’t agree these are the guidelines Islam has set down. If you still don’t think its fair then that’s fine but its not up to us anyway.

[salma_mehnaz]

Re: The Red Pill/Manosphere

@badabing

**Here in the West, British Pakistani women in particular, including my phupos, khalas, cousins etc - they want their Islamic rights of mehr, separate dwelling, no inlaw bs, 50/50 on chores, the ability for men to provide when she wants to do the stay at home mum thing but yet if a marriage turns sour they love the British legal system to screw their husbands over for lame reasons such as the spark is gone, you don’t show me affection anymore, I love you but not in love with you, if you cheat its your fault and if I cheat its your fault, you work to late for the things I desire but please don’t reduce my ability to consume by working less hours - I’ll just go out and and get my sexual gratification from outside the list goes on and on. So if a woman ends a marriage in the West for these reasons, why should a man loose upto 70% of his net worth, his home, see his kids every other weekend? I actually prefer the Pakistani system where the man gets to keep all his ****. **

Me the fellas and girls and work were talking about this a few hours after the opening trading rush, and the men agreed with me - alot said these are the reasons they aren’t committing to relationships anymore - just fuc.k them and dump them. The women were agasped, like they were entitled to treat men this way because their mothers told them so.

I see more and more British Pakistanis turning agnostic - I fear in a generation or two we’ll be exactly the same over here.

I agree, chivalry is great, but if women want equality in all realms, why can’t a woman be chivalrous? 50/50, no? If men have moved on a lot of issues in the last 50 years here in the West, why can’t women move from their preconceived ideas of how a man should behave?

Agree :k:

[kakaballi]

Re: The Red Pill/Manosphere

meanwhile: Turkish Men Are Wearing Miniskirts to Fight for Women’s Rights