Model falls to her death

1« Previous thread | Next thread »
- Iris
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Model falls to her death
OP - December 27, 2008, 06:53 PM

http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/relationships/article5400567.ece

Quote
The death of a model who learnt that her husband was already married has shone a light into the murky world of Muslim polygamy in Britain.

Sahar Daftary, 23, fell 150ft from the twelfth storey of a block of flats where she had gone to collect her belongings at the home of a businessman whom she had married in a religious ceremony last year.

Her husband, Rashid Jamil, 33, was arrested on suspicion of murder but bailed by police after they found no evidence that the death was anything other than an accident or suicide.

Ghayasuddin Siddiqui, the head of the Muslim Parliament of Great Britain, told The Times: ?This story is very common, unfortunately. We have tried to plug some of the holes in the whole system, but unfortunately our clerics do not live on this planet. They don?t understand. For them, controlling the sexuality of the woman is far more important than justice, so we have this problem.?

Ms Daftary, a Sunni Muslim from London whose family comes from Afghanistan, was crowned Miss Face of Asia in a beauty contest last year. She was found critically injured by the apartment block in Salford Quays near the Manchester United football ground on Saturday. She had been helping with make-up at a fashion show in the city but left early to collect clothes from Mr Jamil?s home.

Ms Daftary also wanted to arrange an Islamic divorce from him. She had undergone a Muslim wedding ceremony in Brentford, West London, only to learn later that her husband already had a wife.

Her sister, Mariya Massumi, a hairdresser, said: ?A few months after they got married we had a phone call from Narissa Amjad, and she said she was Rashid?s wife. We were very shocked and we confronted him.? Relatives learnt that Ms Amjad, 29, a marketing executive, was expecting a second child by Mr Jamil.

Islam traditionally allows husbands to take up to four wives at a time. A confrontation took place at Mr Jamil?s detached house in Altrincham, Manchester, where Ms Amjad lived.

Ms Massumi said: ?When we arrived he was very calm. He said to Sahar he was not happy with his wife. He said in front of his wife he wanted to live with Sahar. His wife Narissa was also very calm and said that was OK. We were all so shocked. Rashid told Sahar he loved her.?

Mr Jamil also had a former wife, Sebina Malik, a lawyer. They had a daughter but were formally divorced. According to relatives, Mr Jamil had also undergone an arranged marriage in Pakistan that ended in divorce.

Dr Siddiqui said some British Muslim clerics performed polygamous marriages. The ceremonies are unrecog-nised by law. Clerics let husbands end marriages by saying ?I divorce you? three times. Ex-wives have no rights.

Ahmad Thomson, a barrister and founder of the Association of Muslim Lawyers, said that polygamous marriages could work in Britain if all parties were open and in agreement. But he added: ?Sometimes the husband has tried to keep the earlier marriage secret. When the second or third wife finds out, it?s devastating.? dkennedy@thetimes.co.uk

The cause of death is still unknown but to be fair Rashid Jamil is not under suspicion.
I found the quote by the head of the Muslim Parliament of Britain interesting, he's surprisingly honest about the obsession with female sexuality.

Life is a sexually transmitted disease which is invariably fatal.
- Nour
- Ex-Muslim
- Misanthropic ex-'revert'
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #1 - December 27, 2008, 07:43 PM

This was the cover story of the local morning Metro paper the other day but the details of the story were pretty sketchy. I still think that Mr Jamil should be punished for being a total dick and not telling Ms Daftary about his other wife.

Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

The sleeper has awakened - Dune

Give a man a fish, and you'll feed him for a day Give him a religion, and he'll starve to death while praying for a fish!
- Iris
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #2 - December 27, 2008, 08:42 PM

Men act like dicks every day, should they all be punished? when does the law have the right to intervene?
Sahar Daftary married her husband in a religious ceremony, as far as I understand it he was not legally her husband, and though his behaviour was morally reprehensible he hasnt committed any crime.

Life is a sexually transmitted disease which is invariably fatal.
- BerberElla
- Class A'sexual
- Creator Goddess
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #3 - December 27, 2008, 08:46 PM

Such a shame, a bit wierd how she died, I mean how can you accidentally fall from that far? and did she seem suicidal to the people who knew her best?

I agree that it's good to hear some honesty about how widespread this polygamous marriages are.

Infact I actually think that polygamy will become legal in this country sooner or later, since as long as all parties are in agreement I don't see why it should be against the law, infact making it legal would be better as it would protect (legally) all parties involed.

Inhale the good shit, exhale the bullshit.
- Iris
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #4 - December 27, 2008, 08:59 PM

Do you really think it will become legal? Why - pressure from muslims?
Would that really be a good thing - I can see your point about protecting all parties but wouldnt it also make it more socially acceptable?

Life is a sexually transmitted disease which is invariably fatal.
- BerberElla
- Class A'sexual
- Creator Goddess
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #5 - December 27, 2008, 09:05 PM

Quote from: Iris on December 27, 2008, 08:59 PM
Do you really think it will become legal? Why - pressure from muslims?

I think in terms of rethinking, then the muslim issue is what brings it back to the table, but I don't think it will be pressure, just people rethinking it now that it is an issue if you see what I mean (not explaining it right I think )

Quote
Would that really be a good thing - I can see your point about protecting all parties but wouldnt it also make it more socially acceptable?

I think as long as all parties are happy with the arrangement then there is no reason why it shouldn't be socially acceptable, The same for polyandry of course.

I mean I'd never be for it, but I think I could do an open relationship, so I ask myself if the reason I am (previously) against it is because I have only ever known it from an islamic slant which is very unfair to females, if it was an equal thing, where it was legal for both men and women to have 2 or 3, then I guess it's not for me to judge as long as they are happy, legally protected etc etc.

Still not making sense, but that's becaus I am still hashing it out in my mind.

Inhale the good shit, exhale the bullshit.
- Iris
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #6 - December 27, 2008, 09:29 PM

Yeah so am I , which is why I ask

I'm undecided on the whole issue of polygamy , the fact that its only acceptable for men makes it inherently unfair, if both parties agreed then I guess I wouldnt think it morally wrong, but I think in most cases if the wife did agree she would be coerced or agree for the sake of the peace or not wanting her husband to divorce her because she's emotionally attached to him or for the sake of the children or because she is financially dependent on him etc...
How many women would agree to it freely without co-ercion? I have often heard women say it would get their husbands out of their hair, but when it comes down to it they find it a betrayal, not to mention the shame they feel.
It doesnt exactly encourage strong and healthy family relationships.

As far as polyandry and open relationships - could be fun but if you really loved your partner would you want to share him?

Life is a sexually transmitted disease which is invariably fatal.
- BerberElla
- Class A'sexual
- Creator Goddess
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #7 - December 27, 2008, 09:39 PM

Quote from: Iris on December 27, 2008, 09:29 PM
Yeah so am I , which is why I ask

I'm undecided on the whole issue of polygamy , the fact that its only acceptable for men makes it inherently unfair, if both parties agreed then I guess I wouldnt think it morally wrong, but I think in most cases if the wife did agree she would be coerced or agree for the sake of the peace or not wanting her husband to divorce her because she's emotionally attached to him or for the sake of the children or because she is financially dependent on him etc...
How many women would agree to it freely without co-ercion? I have often heard women say it would get their husbands out of their hair, but when it comes down to it they find it a betrayal, not to mention the shame they feel.
It doesnt exactly encourage strong and healthy family relationships.

I'm sort of envisioning the kind of woman who can't be coerced into it, the sort of strong independent woman that I dream one day we will be raising in this society, but I guess in my vision it's all the idealistic side of things.

If she was strong, and knew her mind and wasn't coerced, then it should be ok, but like you say (and infact I remember) women aren't like that, at least not enough of them so yeah it probably wouldn;t be all above board.

But then if it was legal wouldn't that at least offer some protection? he or she could be coerced into a polygamous marriage (or the polyandry one) but it wouldn't be so easy dissolving it without a heavy price to pay, might make people less eager to commit if it was supported by legal protection? maybe.......still rehashing lol

Quote
As far as polyandry and open relationships - could be fun but if you really loved your partner would you want to share him?

It could be said if you really loved you partner would you want to deny him that if that is what he wanted? or if that was what you wanted?

No doubt I would be stark raving mad with jealousy if such a scenario ever came up lol

Inhale the good shit, exhale the bullshit.
- A_G
- Member
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #8 - December 27, 2008, 10:29 PM

She made two fatal mistakes

1: getting involved with a man who is a Muslim
2: Getting involved with a man who is a womaniser. Don?t tell me she didn?t know. She knew but just didn?t want to believe it.

oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, this is a Jew behind me, come and kill him!"
- Iris
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #9 - December 27, 2008, 11:24 PM

Quote from: animation_guy on December 27, 2008, 10:29 PM
She made two fatal mistakes

1: getting involved with a man who is a Muslim
2: Getting involved with a man who is a womaniser. Don?t tell me she didn?t know. She knew but just didn?t want to believe it.

I agre with number 2, have to object to number 1 though, considering that my dad and brothers are muslim.

Life is a sexually transmitted disease which is invariably fatal.
- A_G
- Member
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #10 - December 27, 2008, 11:34 PM

Quote

I agre with number 2, have to object to number 1 though, considering that my dad and brothers are muslim.

Just because your father and brother are Muslims it shouldn't let you cloud your judgement. She clearly wasn't someone with a strong faith. Person like that should never marry a Muslim. Muslim and womaniser make for a dangerous combination.

oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, this is a Jew behind me, come and kill him!"
- awais
- Ex-Muslim
- mulhid taqwa
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #11 - December 28, 2008, 02:14 AM

I chose to get circumcised at 17, don't tell me I never believed.
- Biaxident
- Huggy Bear
- Pub Regular
- Regularly Irregular
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #12 - December 28, 2008, 05:46 AM

Quote from: BerberElla on December 27, 2008, 09:39 PM
Quote from: Iris on December 27, 2008, 09:29 PM
Yeah so am I , which is why I ask

I'm undecided on the whole issue of polygamy , the fact that its only acceptable for men makes it inherently unfair, if both parties agreed then I guess I wouldnt think it morally wrong, but I think in most cases if the wife did agree she would be coerced or agree for the sake of the peace or not wanting her husband to divorce her because she's emotionally attached to him or for the sake of the children or because she is financially dependent on him etc...
How many women would agree to it freely without co-ercion? I have often heard women say it would get their husbands out of their hair, but when it comes down to it they find it a betrayal, not to mention the shame they feel.
It doesnt exactly encourage strong and healthy family relationships.

I'm sort of envisioning the kind of woman who can't be coerced into it, the sort of strong independent woman that I dream one day we will be raising in this society, but I guess in my vision it's all the idealistic side of things.

If she was strong, and knew her mind and wasn't coerced, then it should be ok, but like you say (and infact I remember) women aren't like that, at least not enough of them so yeah it probably wouldn;t be all above board.

But then if it was legal wouldn't that at least offer some protection? he or she could be coerced into a polygamous marriage (or the polyandry one) but it wouldn't be so easy dissolving it without a heavy price to pay, might make people less eager to commit if it was supported by legal protection? maybe.......still rehashing lol

Quote
As far as polyandry and open relationships - could be fun but if you really loved your partner would you want to share him?

It could be said if you really loved you partner would you want to deny him that if that is what he wanted? or if that was what you wanted?

No doubt I would be stark raving mad with jealousy if such a scenario ever came up lol

You have to remember ladies, you would also need a man who doesn't mind you having more than one husband.

Personally I think that the religious undertones(or overtones) to the word "marriage", and its use as a word to describe a religious ritual. Should make it less likely that it would be a word used to describe unconventional relationships in legal documents.

Most, if not all religious groups have strokes and commit mass suicide if they think the "sanctity of marriage" is threatened by unconventional relationships.

I think relationships besides one man and one woman should be known as cohabitation and if you want legal recognition draw up a cohabitation contract, and let anyone involved have a say in how it reads as far as the disposition of all property and children, before anyone signs it to make it legally binding.

In a perfectly secular world of course.

I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I remain.
- diotima
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #13 - December 28, 2008, 11:58 AM

Quote from: BerberElla on December 27, 2008, 08:46 PM
Such a shame, a bit wierd how she died, I mean how can you accidentally fall from that far? and did she seem suicidal to the people who knew her best?

I agree that it's good to hear some honesty about how widespread this polygamous marriages are.

Infact I actually think that polygamy will become legal in this country sooner or later, since as long as all parties are in agreement I don't see why it should be against the law, infact making it legal would be better as it would protect (legally) all parties involed.

I don?t see any reason to legally protect any of the parties. Let them eat the soup they put in their plates.
- BerberElla
- Class A'sexual
- Creator Goddess
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #14 - December 28, 2008, 12:13 PM

Why, because they veered away from the general one man one woman marriage?

The only thing that sets the marriage as one man one woman is the religion this country was built upon, but that doesn't make it the only valid road to love.

Inhale the good shit, exhale the bullshit.
- Cheetah
- Global Moderator
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #15 - December 28, 2008, 12:20 PM

Marriage being restricted to one man/one woman makes sense as a child rearing unit and as a social construct, with or without religion. If people want to make other arrangements with their love lives, there's nothing stopping them, but they shouldn't get legal recognition on an equal footing with marriage.

This may be a case of you can take the girl out of the Catholic Church, but you can't take the church out of the girl, because I totally agree with Dio.

"Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny." - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
- diotima
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #16 - December 28, 2008, 12:21 PM

Quote from: BerberElla on December 28, 2008, 12:13 PM
Why, because they veered away from the general one man one woman marriage?

The only thing that sets the marriage as one man one woman is the religion this country was built upon, but that doesn't make it the only valid road to love.

Yes, it does. To think otherwise is foolish, self-serving delusion (as is most of the "if it makes them happy and they are consenting adults, anyway" baloney). What you call "love" here, I call egotistical pleasure-seeking, that has no regard for anyone or anything but oneself, and what feels good right now. Why does that deserve, why does that NEED legal protection or recognition? Fuck around all you want, but stop calling it marriage.

And you are right - THAT religion built the country you live in. It showed, until recently. Be grateful for that and look at what OTHER religions built, especially for women ... sati, polygamy, female infanticide, talaq-divorce (which we are getting closer to each day) etc. Marriage as it developed in the west was a protection for women and their children - not always perfect, but a whole lot better, than many other "solutions".
- diotima
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #17 - December 28, 2008, 12:22 PM

Quote from: SnowFlake on December 28, 2008, 12:20 PM
Marriage being restricted to one man/one woman makes sense as a child rearing unit and as a social construct, with or without religion. If people want to make other arrangements with their love lives, there's nothing stopping them, but they shouldn't get legal recognition on an equal footing with marriage.

This may be a case of you can take the girl out of the Catholic Church, but you can't take the church out of the girl, because I totally agree with Dio.

be grateful for the church-remnants in you, Snowflake. Believe me - once they will be gone from our lands, hearts, minds and souls, we?ll badly miss them.
- BerberElla
- Class A'sexual
- Creator Goddess
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #18 - December 28, 2008, 12:28 PM

Quote from: SnowFlake on December 28, 2008, 12:20 PM
Marriage being restricted to one man/one woman makes sense as a child rearing unit and as a social construct, with or without religion. If people want to make other arrangements with their love lives, there's nothing stopping them, but they shouldn't get legal recognition on an equal footing with marriage.

This may be a case of you can take the girl out of the Catholic Church, but you can't take the church out of the girl, because I totally agree with Dio.

So everytime (ignoring the hodge podge islam made of it) polygamy/polyandry has been introduced to a country it has gone pear shaped? or not worked out? or totally screwed over the children?

Inhale the good shit, exhale the bullshit.
- Cheetah
- Global Moderator
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #19 - December 28, 2008, 12:34 PM

Maybe not "totally screwed over", but put yourself in the position of the child. Say your parents agree between themselves to a second wife, (or husband). Another person enters your life, takes up the available time of one of your parents, has a right to some of your family's assets in the event of a divorce, and you have no say in it. I would have hugely resented it, most children would I suspect.

Its less than ideal, to say the least. If a married person is no longer satisfied with just their spouse, either get divorced or just discreetly have an affair or an open marriage or something the children don't have to deal with.

"Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny." - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
- BerberElla
- Class A'sexual
- Creator Goddess
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #20 - December 28, 2008, 12:42 PM

Quote from: SnowFlake on December 28, 2008, 12:34 PM
Maybe not "totally screwed over", but put yourself in the position of the child. Say your parents agree between themselves to a second wife, (or husband). Another person enters your life, takes up the available time of one of your parents, has a right to some of your family's assets in the event of a divorce, and you have no say in it. I would have hugely resented it, most children would I suspect.

Maybe in a world where they were used to not sharing, but if they grew up knowing no different why would they resent it? You would have resnted seeing your half sisters or brothers taken care of in the event of a divorce with spouse number 2? or would you have seen half brothers and sisters as deserving it too?

I mean I also personally think the division of assets at times is pathetically humongous for no real reason.

Taking assets into consideration, In a mistress/affair situation the mistress could be known, and accepted by the wife, she could have kids of her own, but neither she nor the kids in question have any legal rights when it comes to pretty much anything.

Quote

Its less than ideal, to say the least. If a married person is no longer satisfied with just their spouse, either get divorced or just discreetly have an affair or an open marriage or something the children don't have to deal with.

Maybe, as I said to Iris I am hashing things out in my head right now. But I think I am still leaning towards people have a right to choose what kind of marriage they want, and having legal protection even if they don't choose the traditional.

I can see the same arguements being used by anti gay marriage people, and anti gay adoption people.

Inhale the good shit, exhale the bullshit.
- Cheetah
- Global Moderator
- offline
Re: Model falls to her death
Reply #21 - December 28, 2008, 01:04 PM

Quote
Maybe in a world where they were used to not sharing, but if they grew up knowing no different why would they resent it?

Its not a question of learning to share, its a question of being aware of your own rights. I make no apologies for being materialistic about it either. If someone brings children into the world with one wife/husband they have no right to be taking resources away from those children by indulging in polygamy.

Quote
You would have resnted seeing your half sisters or brothers taken care of in the event of a divorce with spouse number 2? or would you have seen half brothers and sisters as deserving it too?

I wouldn't have resented my half brothers and sisters taken care of, but I would have resented spouse number 2 long before half brothers and sisters arrived.

Quote
I mean I also personally think the division of assets at times is pathetically humongous for no real reason.

Its unavoidable in the event of a divorce, but there you have to weigh up the potential harm done to the children by forcing two adults that are incompatible to carry on living together. In the case of polygamy, it is totally avoidable - just don't legalise it.

Quote
Taking assets into consideration, In a mistress/affair situation the mistress could be known, and accepted by the wife, she could have kids of her own, but neither she nor the kids in question have any legal rights when it comes to pretty much anything.

I don't think that's true. Once somebody is named as the father on the birth cert, he is liable for child support regardless of whether he is married to the mother. The rights of children from spouse number 2 wouldn't change by changing the mother's legal status from mistress to wife. The rights of children by spouse number 1 would just be downgraded.

Quote
Maybe, as I said to Iris I am hashing things out in my head right now. But I think I am still leaning towards people have a right to choose what kind of marriage they want, and having legal protection even if they don't choose the traditional.

An adults right to choose stops when it impacts on the lives of their children.

Quote
I can see the same arguements being used by anti gay marriage people, and anti gay adoption people.

I don't think my arguments could be used against gay adoption, but against gay marriage, yes. I've no problem with civil partnerships which give gay couples the same rights to tax breaks, etc, but gay marriage is silly. Some traditions have good reasons behind them and restricting marriage to one man/one woman is IMO, one of them.

"Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny." - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
1« Previous thread | Next thread »