<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Get your 4 wives here!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tasmiya.com/index.php/2006/03/09/get-your-4-wives-here/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tasmiya.com/index.php/2006/03/09/get-your-4-wives-here/</link>
	<description>No one of consequence</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Aug 2013 03:58:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nzingha</title>
		<link>http://tasmiya.com/index.php/2006/03/09/get-your-4-wives-here/comment-page-1/#comment-375</link>
		<dc:creator>Nzingha</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Mar 2006 09:26:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tasmiya.com/?p=99#comment-375</guid>
		<description>I would see it as a natural deduction that a man can use his wifes property to support other wives. (don&#039;t jump on me yet) Since the article points out that the wife will be dependent upon a man to do with her property as she wants, i.e a wakil set up like here in Saudi she wouldn&#039;t be seen as a full owner of the property. This set up says, a woman can not have full control over property, she can not buy sell or dispose of her property, buisness, or income that is totally controlled by her. The controller is the husband who would have the legal rights over her property, if he wanted he could give the go ahead to seel her property and pocket the funds. 

Its a totally messed up way of thinking, but when you go from point a to point b with a system that doesn&#039;t think of women as fully capable functioning adults you&#039;ll end up with garbage like this. 

* do note I don&#039;t agree with the very foundation of this thinking. Let alone agree with in anyway that a man can Islamically rip off his wife and get more wives as a result. So sad Malaysia is doing this, I love Malaysia, but this is uggghhh</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would see it as a natural deduction that a man can use his wifes property to support other wives. (don&#8217;t jump on me yet) Since the article points out that the wife will be dependent upon a man to do with her property as she wants, i.e a wakil set up like here in Saudi she wouldn&#8217;t be seen as a full owner of the property. This set up says, a woman can not have full control over property, she can not buy sell or dispose of her property, buisness, or income that is totally controlled by her. The controller is the husband who would have the legal rights over her property, if he wanted he could give the go ahead to seel her property and pocket the funds. </p>
<p>Its a totally messed up way of thinking, but when you go from point a to point b with a system that doesn&#8217;t think of women as fully capable functioning adults you&#8217;ll end up with garbage like this. </p>
<p>* do note I don&#8217;t agree with the very foundation of this thinking. Let alone agree with in anyway that a man can Islamically rip off his wife and get more wives as a result. So sad Malaysia is doing this, I love Malaysia, but this is uggghhh</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
