If you find a woman
with a wild heart
do not try to tame her.
You must adore her
recklessly, the way
she is meant to be loved.

Do not try to quiet her,
for her roars will reach
far and wide.
She has something
important to say.
Help her say it.

Do not get in her way.
She stops for no one.
Do not try to change
the path she has chosen.
Learn also to love the wind
and let it change you.

—  C.B. Wild-Hearted Woman (via h-o-r-n-g-r-y)

20 hours ago · 5,234 notes · Source · Reblogged from madnessandhoney

Wearing a hijab isn’t inherently liberating – but neither is baring one’s breasts. What is liberating is being able to choose either of these things. It’s pretty ludicrous to think that oppression is somehow proportional to how covered or uncovered someone’s body is. Both sides of this argument present a shallow understanding of women’s empowerment, which only drowns out the substantive challenges facing all women – issues that cannot be encapsulated in a debate about a piece of fabric.
—   Sara Yasin, Is the Hijab Worth Fighting Over? (via too-indie-for-you-bro)

1 day ago · 129 notes · Source · Reblogged from pbnpineapples

1 day ago · 11,320 notes · Source · Reblogged from dropitlikeitshalal

Time to part from my babies. #bookmarks #bookslut #booksaremybreadandbutter

Time to part from my babies. #bookmarks #bookslut #booksaremybreadandbutter

2 days ago · 0 notes

2 days ago · 361,559 notes · Source · Reblogged from dropitlikeitshalal

I hope you have the courage to pursue someone who is worth pursuing, and not someone who is convenient. Convenience is impatience disguised as your desires, you are worth more than what time has told you, you are worthy of finding someone who will wait for you; don’t settle for what is easy, settle for what is good.
—  T.B. LaBerge // Go Now  (via thatkindofwoman)

2 days ago · 49,014 notes · Source · Reblogged from thatkindofwoman

2 days ago · 4,926 notes · Source · Reblogged from dropitlikeitshalal

Anonymous asked: “How much land was actually "given" to the Israelis by the UN, as Israelis claim?”




I take it you mean the 1947 partition plan. Alright, this might be a tad bit long, but let’s talk about that, shall we?

The 1947 partition plan, was a framework proposed by the UN in an attempt to divide historical Palestine into 2 states for 2 peoples. This was to be implemented at the end of the British Mandate of Palestine. There would be as they named it one “Arab state”, and one “Jewish state”. Jerusalem would remain an international city open for all.

Unsurprisingly, the Palestinians and the rest of the Arabs, refused this. Why? Let’s go over the basics. And I mean the very bare basics, you could write a book on this, so I’m just sticking to the essentials.

A common argument I see from a lot of pro-Israelis, is that Palestinians had the chance to have peace, and have a state of their own if they had just accepted this plan. The state we could have gotten, would have been much larger and all of this fighting would have been unnecessary.

As you know, historical Palestine has always had a Jewish community. This was never contested, there never were issues with the indigenous Jewish Palestinians.

No, the root of the matter truly began with Zionism. Zionism was an ideology developed by Theodor Herzl (and others) that promoted the creation of a Jewish state. This ideology in practice is basically very heavy on the settler colonialism. If you read any of Herzl’s books you will find them chock full of “White man’s burden” mimicry, and other examples that would make any colonial proud.

There were many candidates for the location of this Jewish state, including Argentina, but in the end they chose Palestine, despite the fact that Palestine was already inhabited.

The first significant waves of European Zionist migration began at the end of the 19th century. So in the 1880s upward. The partition plan was proposed in 1947. So by the time this plan came along, the vast majority of the Zionist population in Palestine had barely been on the land for a few decades, at most.

Despite this massive immigration to Palestine, the Zionist population was still a minority. The most generous of estimates are that they made up only a third of the population, and owned land no more than 6-7% of historical Palestine.

So what exactly were the specifics of the partition plan?

The “Arab” state, despite the Arab Palestinians being the vast majority, would receive ~43% of the land of historical Palestine, relegating them to the mountainous regions, a third of the coast, and losing any access to the red sea.

The “Jewish” state, despite the Zionists being a minority with not a single district outside of Yaffa having a Jewish population majority (port city, most immigrants off the boat ended there), were given around ~56% of the land of historical Palestine. With the majority of the coastline and fertile agricultural lands.

Btw, just to show how small the Zionist population was, even the “Jewish” state would have only had a 55% Jewish population.

So, answer me this: Why should the indigenous population give up more than half of their historical homeland? What sense would that make? And not only that, they’d be giving it up for a minority of newcomers fresh off the boat. Who in their right mind would not resist this?

This is not a question of living together peacefully, the only way Zionists could have their self determination in this context was to deny Palestinians their self determination. The only way they could have a Jewish state with a vast Jewish majority (A Zionist goal), was if the Palestinians were removed from the picture. And we were.

Just so you understand what I mean by this, here is but one example of a quote from David Ben Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel in 1948:

"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population."

So when people ask me why we didn’t accept the 1947 partition plan..the only thing I can think of is this line by Ghassan Kanafani:

“They rob you of your bread, but leave you a small chunk, they then command you to thank them for their generosity. Oh their audacity.”

It’s better that they leave you a chunk of your land than the remains of your homes and families. God tells us to be grateful. Palestinians have no solution of their own other than to fight the jews and what the last 71 years since this have shown that they’re incapable to do so. If someone offers you anything that’s better than a neverending war that the Jews are winning, you’d be wise to accept. That generation could have saved 43% of their land but their arrogance and the feeling of entitlement to it (this entitlement that we accuse the Jews of) is what made them loose even more. All countries have had to defend their land and been forced to sign peace contracts that made the land smaller when they lost the battle.

Ok Habibi, when someone comes and robs you blind, don’t call the police, just be thankful they weren’t able to take the nailed down bed and thank Allah for it.

I never knew it was “arrogance” to want to defend your land from invasion. Don’t you dare try and paint this defeatism and cowardice as “God teaches us”.

Please piss off with that, you’re literally repeating Zionist arguments. There is so much I want to say to you, but it’s a waste. Disgusting excuse for a “Muslim”. Covering your Zionist apologia in a veil of religious righteousness. As if Islam itself does not teach us to fight against injustice in all forms.

You can reblog your Quran verses till your arms fall off, that literally means nothing if you’re advocating and contributing with that disgusting attitude to the oppression of innocent people.

I don’t understand, after having read that post, how you could still come at me with that.

3 days ago · 2,742 notes · Source · Reblogged from pbnpineapples

5 days ago · 1,719 notes · Source · Reblogged from dropitlikeitshalal






Man Saves a Shark

look at that man. When the shark starts thrashing around he just lets go and calmly takes a step back and waits for it to be done. Then it’s back to work. What a badass.





That is really badass. Awesome.

im so happy right now that just made my day

Tears. Literally tears. :’)

1 week ago · 162,250 notes · Source · Reblogged from dropitlikeitshalal

stupidhuman-shitforbrains asked: “Can you explain more about why you're against spanking? I agree, I'd just like to hear what you have to say.”


  • it is hurting someone
  • your child, specifically, who should not be hurt by you of all people
  • it doesnt work in the long term
  • it develops trust issues
  • it is reliant on fear, and teaches them to be afraid instead of actually learning what they did and how to self-discipline (i.e., “mommy spanked me when i tried crossing the road by myself, so i shouldn’t do it in front of her so i don’t get spanked” instead of “mommy told me i could get hurt if i cross the road by myself, so i won’t do it”)
  • it asserts the ideology of stronger = right, and that because someone hurts you they are correct
  • it shows that violence solves issues, which causes your child not only to normalize violence, but to partake in it
  • it disregards bodily autonomy (as in people not touching you without your consent)
  • it hurts their self-esteem, as well as affects their mental health, and their intelligence
  • it becomes a gateway to harsher abuse due to desensitization
  • it creates detachment of the parent/child bond
  • it normalizes degrading and harmful behavior on the parent’s end
  • it continues on the cycle of abuse
  • it’s just overall shitty don’t hit someone, especially not someone who is smaller than you, defenseless, and VERY easily affected by it ok just don’t

This basically lists everything I feel about spanking. And coming from a culture where a severe beating of a child is not seen as strange, and where fear is seen as respect, this is a necessary PSA.

1 week ago · 8,592 notes · Source · Reblogged from mymegafeminist

Anonymous asked: “Salam. I have a problem - I worry ALL the time about religion. Whenever I have a spare moment, I find myself thinking about religion, going over topics of discussion, racking myself, asking whether as Muslims we're just a bunch of hypocrites who quote the Prophet to feel good, and that none of us could really stomach Islam as it really is. And I find myself thinking - maybe if I stopped being religious, I'd just stop worrying all the time.”


Wa alykum as-salaam,

Stop worrying. God is awesome. Islam is chill.

Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, probably the most well-known scholar today, wrote:

"Islam is a practical religion, it does not float in the stratosphere of imaginary ideals but remains with the human being on the ground of realities and day-to-day concerns.

It does not regard people as angels but accepts them as mortals who eat food and walk in the marketplace. Islam does not require of Muslims that their speech should consist entirely of pious utterances, that their silence should be a meditation, that they should listen to nothing except the recitation of the Qur’an, nor that they should spend all their leisure time om the mosque.

Rather, it recognizes that Allah has created human beings with needs and desires, so that, as they need to eat and drink, they also need to relax, and to enjoy themselves.”

In the Hadith Collection of Imam Muslim we have the following in which Hanzalah al-Usaidi, narrated about himself:

"Abu Bakr met me and asked, ‘How are you, Hanzalah?’

I replied, ‘Hanzalah has becomea hypocrite.’

He said, ‘Subhanallah! What are you saying?’

I replied, ‘When we are with God’s Messenger (peace be on him), he mentions the Fire and the Garden until it is as if we can see them. But when we leave The Prophet’s company and play with our wives and children or busy ourselves with our properties, we forget much.’

Abu Bakr said, ‘By God, I have experienced the same thing.’

He and I then went to visit The Messenger of God (peace be on him), and I said, ‘O Messenger of God, Hanzalah has become a hypocrite.’

He asked, ‘And how is that?’

I replied, ‘O Messenger of God, when we are with you, you talk about the Fire and the Garden until it is as if we can see them. Then we go out and play with our wives and children and deal with
our properties, and we forget much.’

The Messenger of God (peace be on him) then said, ‘By Him in Whose Hand is my soul, if you were to continue at the same level at which you were when with me and in remembering God, the angels would shake hands with you when you are resting and when you walk about, but, O Hanzalah, there is a time (for this) and a time (for that).’ He repeated this phrase three times.”

Furthermore, Ali ibn Abu Talib, addressing the issue of leisure, said: “Minds get tired, as do bodies, so treat them with humor,” and “Refresh your minds from time to time, for a tired mind becomes blind.”

Another story of The Prophet, found in Shamail al Muhammadiyyah of Imam Tirmidhi reports the following:

"…an old woman came to Rasulullah [SAW] and made a request [asked]: ‘O Messenger of Allah, make Dua that Allah grants me entrance into Jannah.’

Rasulullah [SAW] replied, ‘O Mother, an old woman cannot enter Jannah.’

That woman started crying and began to leave. Rasulullah [SAW] said, ‘Say to the woman that one will not enter in a state of old age, but Allah will make all the women of Jannah young virgins. Allah Ta’ala says, “Lo! We have created them a (new) creation and made them virgins, lovers, equal in age.’” [56:35-37]”

This was a joke from The Prophet. The fact that he did this is underlined by the following Hadith, narrated in Al-Adab Al-Mufrad (among other places):

Abu Hurayra reported that the people said, “Messenger of God, you joke with us!” He replied, “But I only speak the truth.”

Finally, Imam Abu Hanifa, underlined that humor was not something alien to Muslims, let alone people of knowledge:

A man came to Imam Abu Hanifa and asked: “if I take off my clothes and bathe in the river should I face the qibla or another direction?”

Imam Abu Hanifa replied: “it’s best to face the direction of your clothes just in case they get stolen.”

All these super religious people joked around, they had lives, they chilled, they cared about their families, and so I don’t think you are giving yourself a fair shake. Relax a little bit, and maybe talk to a counselor, it might help, but I don’t think it’s about “being religious” because I doubt you’d put these fears away by ignoring them. The reality is that you have a view of Islam that is unnecessarily strict (on yourself) so please, relax and rest knowing that God is Merciful.

I hope this helps, insha Allah.

1 week ago · 211 notes · Reblogged from partytilfajr

1 week ago · 5,632 notes · Source · Reblogged from madnessandhoney

On one hand, people of faith are far too eager to distance themselves from extremists in their community, often denying that religious violence has any religious motivation whatsoever. This is especially true of Muslims, who often glibly dismiss those who commit acts of terror in the name of Islam as “not really Muslim.”

On the other, critics of religion tend to exhibit an inability to understand religion outside of its absolutist connotations. They scour holy texts for bits of savagery and point to extreme examples of religious bigotry, of which there are too many, to generalize about the causes of oppression throughout the world.

What both the believers and the critics often miss is that religion is often far more a matter of identity than it is a matter of beliefs and practices. The phrase “I am a Muslim,” “I am a Christian,” “I am a Jew” and the like is, often, not so much a description of what a person believes or what rituals he or she follows, as a simple statement of identity, of how the speaker views her or his place in the world.

As a form of identity, religion is inextricable from all the other factors that make up a person’s self-understanding, like culture, ethnicity, nationality, gender and sexual orientation. What a member of a suburban megachurch in Texas calls Christianity may be radically different from what an impoverished coffee picker in the hills of Guatemala calls Christianity. The cultural practices of a Saudi Muslim, when it comes to the role of women in society, are largely irrelevant to a Muslim in a more secular society like Turkey or Indonesia. The differences between Tibetan Buddhists living in exile in India and militant Buddhist monks persecuting the Muslim minority known as the Rohingya, in neighboring Myanmar, has everything to do with the political cultures of those countries and almost nothing to do with Buddhism itself.

No religion exists in a vacuum. On the contrary, every faith is rooted in the soil in which it is planted. It is a fallacy to believe that people of faith derive their values primarily from their Scriptures. The opposite is true. People of faith insert their values into their Scriptures, reading them through the lens of their own cultural, ethnic, nationalistic and even political perspectives.

1 week ago · 23 notes · Reblogged from pbnpineapples

pseudoscorpions asked: “you know that they make urns that they put your ashes in a tree seed and you become a tree”


Certain schools of thought in Islam believe that one should be buried in unmarked graves so that generations later, the land is taken over by vegetation, and in turn, by future people to re purpose the land however they want to.  These schools of thought do not believe in marking graves for the sole reason that they often becomes symbols and shrines that hold living people to false ideas of hope (the idea of praying to an ancestor, for instance, to intercede on one’s behalf, is considered by many Muslims to be blasphemous. Hence, marking graves to give it symbolism is abhored by many Muslims). 

The idea of being cremated does not necessarily attract me. When I saw the picture, and talked about giving life out of death, I was thinking of that Islamic principle. To be buried as I am, to decompose into Earth from which I came, and in turn, to be able to give life. 

1 week ago · 3 notes · Reblogged from pbnpineapples