So then, you do not believe there are muslims practicing dhimitude. Is that correct?

Alias, exactly what do you mean by dhimitude? I looked it up on dictionary.com and was pointed to this.

Then I looked it up on Mirlyn, the UM's online card catalog, and only French books (or translations) came up:

Bat Yeʾor. The decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam : from Jihad to Dhimmitude : seventh-twentieth century / Bat Ye’or ; with a foreword by Jacques Ellul ; translated from the French by Miriam Kochan

Lahmy Gentil, Alain Jacques. Le grand procès historique entre les Juifs et les Arabes : Dhimmitude juive et sionisme face à l’extrémisme et au pacifisme arabes, quelques aspects escamotés du mouvement national palestinien

Bat Yeʾor. Islam and Dhimmitude : where civilizations collide / Bat Yeʾor ; translated from the French by Miriam Kochan and David Littman.

This site will help you understand what is going on from a historical perspective.

Islam: Dhimmi and Dhimitude

Thanks. Not sure I got the concept. Historically Muslims set up a different set of laws for non-Muslims in countries they've conquered, where the non-Muslims are not treated equally? Is that it?

I guess I'm not seeing the connection between the historical perspective and a woman's complaint in a gym. Care to enlighten me?

It's amazing how you repeatedly presume I believe in things I never claimed...

Of course I understand that some muslim areas do practice this...

dhimmi A Dhimmi, or Zimmi (Arabic ), as defined in classical Islamic legal and political literature, is a person living in a Muslim state who is a member of an officially tolerated non-Islamic religion. The term literally means person of the dhimma, the security treaty signed with the Muslim state. In both legal theory and practice, dhimmis have fewer legal rights and obligations than Muslims.

Now what the heck does this have to do with the gym situation?
Is it because SOME Muslims behave this way, THESE two muslim women must also be doing something like this???

In addition, we're talking about Muslims living in a NON-muslim state...
The definition specifies NON-muslims living in a MUSLIM state...
It violates your very definition, which is why I earlier asked if you were using the perjorative ABUSE of the term.

The muslim woman in the gym is but one incident. The Imams at the airport in Minneapolis. Muslims in Britain demanding they live under Sharia law and not the laws of Britain. Muslims in Britain demanding special holidays for Muslims only. Muslims in Holland demanding Sharia law instead of the law of the land. This is dhimitude. They are demanding special treatment. They are demanding that there be no question of their actions, yet they demand subservience by others.

If it's dhimmitude, it's in reverse, then. Muslims in the US, UK, and Holland are in the minority, whereas the historical dhimmitude they were the dominant power.

On the Sharia law - according to the Telegraph newspaper in the UK, this is in addition to the British courts, and seems similar to arbitration rather than special treatment. Seems like it'd be a positive thing to take care of minor disagreements on one's own and not be sue-happy, provided the resolutions (punishments) are not illegal (like stoning and such).

I found a discussion of the demand for special holidays on the Daily Mail's website. One response from a Muslim to the article:
So you gotta remember that not all British Muslims want this.

Where are they demanding subservience by others? Is it other Muslims you are talking about?

I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill with the gym complaint (that we don't even know the particulars on).

I understand you would think I'm making a mountain out of a mole hill. I'm trying to keep the mole hill from becoming a mountain which is where it is headed. This is increasing every day around the world. I don't think Sharia law would be a good thing. You can't have 2 sets of laws in a society. Do you really think the muslims demanding sharia law are going to follow 2 sets of laws? Not hardly.

What about the guy in Somalia demanding everyone pray 5 times a day or you will be beheaded. Is that another mole hill? Read this:

Pray or be beheaded, residents warned

Ah, the slippery slope concept. I get that one.

Is it increasing or is the media just reporting it more?

I agree that two sets of law are not good, but I think we already have them here in a way. (I presume) each person follows the laws of their religion, whether you call them Commandments or not. Some don't eat pork, some eat only Kosher, and so on. But we're all under the same secular laws.

And remember, at least one response on that news article was totally against Sharia law being implemented in Britain. I would think that there are mixed opinions about it all over the globe, and that some Muslims agree with us.

I find the town's decision (to behead persons not practicing their religion) to be backwards. You catch more flies with honey... instead of harshly punishing the ones who don't.. reward the ones who do. Encouragement works wonders, especially when accompanied with a smile. I also find it odd that you can have one town with different policies than the rest of the country...

Do you really think the muslims demanding Sharia law are going to follow the laws of the land also? I don't. I think they are trying to establish a muslim state. I also believe there are muslims in America who would be more than willing to establish a muslim nation in America run on muslim law. A great forest fire begins with one little spark.