Photog by Peter Vidani
Powered by Tumblr

niqabisinparis:

vul-va:

niqabisinparis:

sourkey:

Y’all don’t understand the importance of this image right here. Y’all don’t know the strength that lies within a mother lap, a mothers embrace. Nothing in this world can compare the peace of mind you get when you put your head in your moms lap and just rest. Just look at this picture, the child looks so at peace, as if nothing in this world bring harm upon them and the mom knows this, just look at her, the mom knows that on her watch, nothing can harm her child. 
Respect and love and mothers yo. 

this show was amazing wallahi

I know it’s a Pakistani drama because the actresses are Pakistani but what’s the name. That’s Samina Peerzada with Sanam Saeed.

It’s a show called Zindagi Gulzar Hai. So, so good. Delves into the topic of cherishing daughters in a society that sees them as burdens, social class in Pakistan, marriage and its trials, and outwardly tough but fragile and broken girls (Kashaf/Sanam Saeed). 

niqabisinparis:

vul-va:

niqabisinparis:

sourkey:

Y’all don’t understand the importance of this image right here. Y’all don’t know the strength that lies within a mother lap, a mothers embrace. Nothing in this world can compare the peace of mind you get when you put your head in your moms lap and just rest. Just look at this picture, the child looks so at peace, as if nothing in this world bring harm upon them and the mom knows this, just look at her, the mom knows that on her watch, nothing can harm her child. 

Respect and love and mothers yo. 

this show was amazing wallahi

I know it’s a Pakistani drama because the actresses are Pakistani but what’s the name. That’s Samina Peerzada with Sanam Saeed.

It’s a show called Zindagi Gulzar Hai. So, so good. Delves into the topic of cherishing daughters in a society that sees them as burdens, social class in Pakistan, marriage and its trials, and outwardly tough but fragile and broken girls (Kashaf/Sanam Saeed). 

(via ladybrun)

Anonymous said: Do you agree that if a man marries another wife , can really hurt the first wife? Don't you think that it could interfere with the trust ? & the whole concept of marriage where her opinion & consent is crucial alongside with his ?

tmihijabi:

kashmirkikali:

tmihijabi:

the-art-of-protest:

hammmad:

the-art-of-protest:

I don’t agree with polygamy in this day and age.

What it used to be was a social safety net equivalent to welfare and state protection for widows and single women and now we have those systems embedded into governmental structures. 

I personally see no point of it or understand why we discuss it normally in this era. 

Hmm… yet in Allah’s infinite wisdom, aren’t all men in Paradise in a polygamous relationship and guaranteed a min of 2 wives?

I don’t see how this has any relevancy.

There are rivers of wine in heaven, does that mean the factors, environment and reality of heaven is similar to ours?

I’m not saying Polygamy is haram and halal, I just don’t see a scenario in today’s age where it is applicable? 

Well let’s see. The high numbers of revert women who are over the age of cultural acceptance of marriage?

I can think of 15 women who reverted over the age of 40 who have a difficult time supporting themselves.

Why would anyone default to polygamy rather than mobilizing to equip women with the education and skills to support themselves? I am wildly uncomfortable with anyone espousing polygamy as some sort of cure all when turning a last resort into  a “viable alternative,” does nothing more than strip her of her agency even further because of the false choice placed in front of her.

The disparities between the lives of men and women  and the privileges we are or are not allotted by our societies cannot be solved by expecting women to remain dependent upon a men because the community is so apathetic that they default to expecting women to submit themselves in all ways to the whims of those who wield power over them.

Because supporting oneself goes beyond money. It includes companionship. I see a lot of merit in educating and teaching women to support themselves, and a multi-pronged approach to this situation would certainly be for the benefit of everyone involved.

The average person has a need for companionship. Yes, there are exceptions which should also be acknowledged, but that doesn’t mean everyone should be forced to live by an exception that may or may not fit their lifestyle.

I think expecting women to be stoic and self-supporting is just as wrong as expecting women to be married by default. Each person has their own set of unique needs, problems, and history, and they should be allowed to find a solution that works for them.

Unfortunately, polygamy is hardly ever a solution nowadays because it is abused by men and women are so invested in their titles of “wife” and “mother” that they refuse to share that with anyone else.

standwithpalestine:

Do you remember how big a deal it was in the media when Israel accused Hamas of this? 
Do you see how the information that Hamas weren’t behind it is not being covered by the media?
Over 1,000 dead in Gaza. This was another genocidal Zionist lie.

standwithpalestine:

Do you remember how big a deal it was in the media when Israel accused Hamas of this? 

Do you see how the information that Hamas weren’t behind it is not being covered by the media?

Over 1,000 dead in Gaza. This was another genocidal Zionist lie.

(via iheartallah)


(via sarajevomoja)

priceofliberty:

"I will never apologize for the United States — I don’t care what the facts are… I’m not an apologize-for-America kind of guy." — George H. W. Bush as Vice-president, during a presidential campaign function (2 Aug 1988), commenting on the Navy warship USS Vincennes having shot down Iran Air Flight 655 in a commercial air corridor on July 3, killing 290 civilians, as quoted in “Perspectives”, the quote of the week section of Newsweek (15 August 1988)

priceofliberty:

"I will never apologize for the United States — I don’t care what the facts are… I’m not an apologize-for-America kind of guy." — George H. W. Bush as Vice-president, during a presidential campaign function (2 Aug 1988), commenting on the Navy warship USS Vincennes having shot down Iran Air Flight 655 in a commercial air corridor on July 3, killing 290 civilians, as quoted in “Perspectives”, the quote of the week section of Newsweek (15 August 1988)

(Source: the-flame-imperishable, via ladybrun)

"

Why single out Israel? Because Israel is the only serial human rights abuser that enjoys consistent and enthusiastic support by all the liberal democracies of the North.

This support gives the Israeli state an impunity that Iran, Sudan, Zimbabwe or Burma, to name but four, do not enjoy because their human rights abuses are all—rightly and however unprincipled—attacked by the major powers.

Israel alone is allowed to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity; it alone is allowed to repeatedly ignore United Nations resolutions without any opposition from northern governments and major institutions.

"

‘Why Israel only’ is tired and hypocritical

This is so important. No one is saying Israel is the only state to ever commit human rights abuses, but it is unique in enjoying support for those human rights abuses [from most of powerful states] by painting itself, the oppressor, repeatedly as the victim.

(via stay-human)

(via seulmates)

coffeeandfaith:

Extremely problematic when a mosque’s first question is “where are they from?” in terms of being asked if they could help a family who is in dire need. When someone who is seeking the help of fellow Muslims is turned away because of cultural/racial differences.

(Source: momo33me, via youm7elo)