A Western Feminist Defends the Muslim Veil

[Gharib]

My "issue" with the Hijab is not what it is, but the fact that in many cases it's forced upon Women to wear, and they're not allowed to take it off. Ideally-speaking, there's nothing wrong with a Woman wearing a Hijab, which is basically just a headscarf, I'm sure many Women love to wear it and do so out of personal choice, but I don't like it how a lot fo them are forced to wear it

one thing i can tell. you never read the article/link.

here we are having proof from some lady that the hijab is a personal choice and as soon as Paul walks into the picture he makes himself look bad like a cry baby.

However, generally speaking I do have a problem with the Niqab, I don't think it should be worn at all, atleast not in public. If you wanna play dress-up in your own home, then be my guest.

how can someone in a niqab be your guest if you don't want them to wear it outside their homes?

 

[YmirGF]

how can someone in a niqab be your guest if you don't want them to wear it outside their homes?

...

 

[Aquitaine]

one thing i can tell. you never read the article/link.

here we are having proof from some lady that the hijab is a personal choice and as soon as Paul walks into the picture he makes himself look bad like a cry baby.




how can someone in a niqab be your guest if you don't want them to wear it outside their homes?

So, do you deny that in many areas of the Muslim world, Women are forced to wear Hijab/Niqab, just because one Western Woman finds it "liberating" herself if she wears it?

Also, "be my guest" is a figure of speech which means "go ahead, if you want to". So, looking back at what I said now, it means "if you want to play dress-up in your own home, go ahead, if you want to".

But I'm talking about wearing the Niqab in Public, and I personally believe I have credible justifcation for it to be banned form public use (however, with private use in one's own home be my guest!).

 

[Gharib]

So, do you deny that in many areas of the Muslim world, Women are forced to wear Hijab/Niqab, just because one Western Woman finds it "liberating" herself if she wears it?

not because one western woman says so, thats for you. i know it is not forced upon women, oppression is forbiden in islam. women wear it because they want to. why do western women not wear it because they are forced or choose to? what about nuns?

Also, "be my guest" is a figure of speech which means "go ahead, if you want to". So, looking back at what I said now, it means "if you want to play dress-up in your own home, go ahead, if you want to".

But I'm talking about wearing the Niqab in Public, and I personally believe I have credible justifcation for it to be banned form public use (however, with private use in one's own home be my guest!).

sarcasm man, sarcasm. :slap:

and whats your credible justification for it being banned? i'd like to hear that.

 

[Aquitaine]

not because one western woman says so, thats for you. i know it is not forced upon women, oppression is forbiden in islam.

Oh come on, you can't seriously believe that it never happens, ever, at all, simply because you think from your interpretation of Islam, that it's forbidden?

Homosexuality is also forbidden in Islam, yet there are plenty of Gay Muslims, and gay activities amongst Muslims all over the world.

It would be like if I said that Murder and Rape don't exist in the West, because it's forbidden (against the Law) to do so.

why do western women not wear it because they are forced or choose to? what about nuns?

I'm sorry, but I don't quite understand your question. Could you please re-phrase that?

sarcasm man, sarcasm. :slap:

Fair enough.

and whats your credible justification for it being banned? i'd like to hear that.

Well, just to clarify, by "Niqab" I'm referring not the the Hijab (headscarf), but the garment that covers the face, and leaves only the eyes visible.
Now, I could honestly go into greater detail as to why I think it has credible grounds to be banned from public, but do I really need to? Are the implications of the Niqab really not that obvious when it comes to Public usage?

 

[Gharib]

Oh come on, you can't seriously believe that it never happens, ever, at all, simply because you think from your interpretation of Islam, that it's forbidden?

Homosexuality is also forbidden in Islam, yet there are plenty of Gay Muslims, and gay activities amongst Muslims all over the world.

It would be like if I said that Murder and Rape don't exist in the West, because it's forbidden (against the Law) to do so.

i never said it hasn't happened, but then again i have never heard a woman say that she was forced to wear it, without being forced to say it.

I'm sorry, but I don't quite understand your question. Could you please re-phrase that?

yeah sure.

why don't western women wear the hijab, is it because they are forced not to wear it or do they choose not to wear it.

and why do nuns wear the head veil, is it because they are forced to do so or because they choose to do so?

Well, just to clarify, by "Niqab" I'm referring not the the Hijab (headscarf), but the garment that covers the face, and leaves only the eyes visible.
Now, I could honestly go into greater detail as to why I think it has credible grounds to be banned from public, but do I really need to?

i honestly think you need to. let me hear it.

 

[England my lionheart]

I agree with Paul,the headscarf is fine if the Women truly want to wear it but i find this unacceptable for logical reasons:

 

[Gharib]

I agree with Paul,the headscarf is fine if the Women truly want to wear it but i find this unacceptable for logical reasons:

really? so tell em england what is illogical with wearing it?

 

[England my lionheart]

really? so tell em england what is illogical with wearing it?

Think on this Eselam,there have been 3 reported bank robberies done by people copying this dress code plus if there were a

violent demonstration how would you identify the perpetrator if they were dressed this way,therefore it would be logical to prevent people wearing it in Public,what they wear in their own home is entirely their own business but out in the Public domain not.

 

[Aquitaine]

i never said it hasn't happened, but then again i have never heard a woman say that she was forced to wear it, without being forced to say it.

lulwut?

So you know of scenarios where Women have been forced to say that they're forced to wear the Niqab, when infact they're not?

yeah sure.

why don't western women wear the hijab, is it because they are forced not to wear it or do they choose not to wear it.

Actually, there are plenty of Western Women who are Muslim, and do wear the Hijab. As for the non-Muslim Western Women who don't wear a Hijab, well, the don't wear it simply because they're non-Muslim and don't want to.

Just like how you wouldn't dress like a Jew.

and why do nuns wear the head veil, is it because they are forced to do so or because they choose to do so?

Well...... "Nuns" are Women (mostly Catholic, in the West, but in the East there does exist Buddhist "Nuns" etc) who have, through their religious conviction, decided to live their lives in a Monastary, Covenant or what-like. They choose to isolate themselves from mainstream society and live the way they do.

I don't agree with it, and I think their dress is an eye-sore, but, like the Hijab I will accept it being worn in Public (because unlike the Niqab, it doesn't cover the face).

To me, a Nun's outfit reminds me of the Catholic oppression and rule, it's an ugly reminder of our past that I don't like. Just like the Hijab, to me, is a reminder of Female oppression. I don't like either of them, but I will accept their right to wear it in Public. The Niqab however, is a different story.

i honestly think you need to. let me hear it.

Okay then, the first three reasons off the top of my head are:

1) Security.
2) Identity.
3) Interaction.

Security
This one is obvious. The Niqab covers the full body, but most importantly the face. It's no different (and less "dangerous") than a Chav wearing a balaclava. There have been cases in the UK of Muslim Men robbing stores dressed in Niqabs, and even a terror suspect escaped the country wearing one too.

Identity
Wearing a full Niqab can hinder the ability to tell whether or not the user is a Man or a Woman. Not only that, but unfortunately the UK is far too tolerant of "religious sensitivities", especially with Islam (because we're constantly being told it's somehow "Racist" to criticise Islam). This means that the likelihood of say, a member off Staff at a Womans' Gym stopping an individual wearing a Niqab and tellign them to remove the head garment to check the Gender of the person is highly unlikely. Any pervert can dress up in a Niqab and enter Female changing rooms/toilets.

Interaction
When in Public, you need to interact with other members of the public. Simple as. It will just hamper communications between say a Niqab-wearer and a Bus driver asking where she wants to be taken to etc. Even in a professional enviroment (like Teaching children) it is important for them to be able to understand you, and see your facial expressions and movements etc.

I hope that's good enough for you.

 

[Gharib]

Think on this Eselam,there have been 3 reported bank robberies done by people copying this dress code plus if there were a

violent demonstration how would you identify the perpetrator if they were dressed this way,therefore it would be logical to prevent people wearing it in Public,what they wear in their own home is entirely their own business but out in the Public domain not.

Okay then, the first three reasons off the top of my head are:

1) Security.
2) Identity.
3) Interaction.

Security
This one is obvious. The Niqab covers the full body, but most importantly the face. It's no different (and less "dangerous") than a Chav wearing a balaclava. There have been cases in the UK of Muslim Men robbing stores dressed in Niqabs, and even a terror suspect escaped the country wearing one too.

Identity
Wearing a full Niqab can hinder the ability to tell whether or not the user is a Man or a Woman. Not only that, but unfortunately the UK is far too tolerant of "religious sensitivities", especially with Islam (because we're constantly being told it's somehow "Racist" to criticise Islam). This means that the likelihood of say, a member off Staff at a Womans' Gym stopping an individual wearing a Niqab and tellign them to remove the head garment to check the Gender of the person is highly unlikely. Any pervert can dress up in a Niqab and enter Female changing rooms/toilets.

Interaction
When in Public, you need to interact with other members of the public. Simple as. It will just hamper communications between say a Niqab-wearer and a Bus driver asking where she wants to be taken to etc. Even in a professional enviroment (like Teaching children) it is important for them to be able to understand you, and see your facial expressions and movements etc.

I hope that's good enough for you.

i will be honest about those 2 posts.

they have got to be the most unthought out properly statements in RF history. (i don't know if what i've said makes sense, have i said that right?)

do you guys want to add some more, it will only make me look good.

i'm being honest about this, they are very poor reasons and one would think you are putting a restriction of freedom on people of another faith and ethnicity to that of the english.

 

[Aquitaine]

i will be honest about those 2 posts.

they have got to be the most unthought out properly statements in RF history. (i don't know if what i've said makes sense, have i said that right?)

do you guys want to add some more, it will only make me look good.

i'm being honest about this, they are very poor reasons and one would think you are putting a restriction of freedom on people of another faith and ethnicity to that of the english.

I think they're good reasons. We have CCTV for a reason in Public. Niqabs render them useless.

Oh and before you claim it's got anything to do with "oppressing" religious/ethnical practice, well the same would apply to the following:

Just to clarify, it's not neccessarily the hoody-tops themselves, but the clothing that obstructs the face, along with the hood pulled over the top.

IMO they shouldn't be worn in Public.

 

[Gharib]

I think they're good reasons. We have CCTV for a reason in Public. Niqabs render them useless.

Oh and before you claim it's got anything to do with "oppressing" religious/ethnical practice, well the same would apply to the following:

Just to clarify, it's not neccessarily the hoody-tops themselves, but the clothing that obstructs the face, along with the hood pulled over the top.

IMO they shouldn't be worn in Public.

i was actually going to answer your previous post, but then i saw this one.

you still have alot to learn Paul.

 

[Aquitaine]

i was actually going to answer your previous post, but then i saw this one.

you still have alot to learn Paul.

I thought you already did answer my previous post by telling me how foolish it was?

What's wrong with what I wrote in the now previous post? What have I got to learn?

 

[Yerda]

]...the UK is far too tolerant of "religious sensitivities", especially with Islam (because we're constantly being told it's somehow "Racist" to criticise Islam).

By whom?

Do you read the Daily Mail?

 

[Makaveli]

i will be honest about those 2 posts.

they have got to be the most unthought out properly statements in RF history. (i don't know if what i've said makes sense, have i said that right?)

do you guys want to add some more, it will only make me look good.

i'm being honest about this, they are very poor reasons and one would think you are putting a restriction of freedom on people of another faith and ethnicity to that of the english.

What is so improper about wanting to be able to identify people? It's important for both security and social cohesion. People wear head coverings to keep their identity secret, and it hampers proper socialization with fellow citizens and the identification of people.

There is no problem with the hiqab because it does not cover a person's face and they can be identified. The niqab covers the full body except for the eyes and men will wear the veil in the commission of a crime to hide their identities. When I was in England the last year I remember seeing a news story of a Muslim man wearing a head scarf going around stabbing people in London. If I walked into a bank wearing a ski mask, the tellers working there would think that I was there to rob the place.

Sometimes religious freedom must subordinate itself in the interest of society as a whole when the practice is irrelevant and socially dangerous. Wearing the niqab, as Paul said, lowers security, keeps people from identifying each other, and inhibits social cohesion. If they want to wear their niqabs in public, perhaps they should have stayed in their home countries where it is socially acceptable to do so. Here, we base our interaction on being able to see people's faces and look them in the eye, not through a mask.

 

[MissAlice]

I don't get how this has anything to do with femenism.

Feminism should be about the freedom for females to be their self instead having a society make it mandatory for them to be or not be who they want to be.

Anyway good for her and I agree but I still don't know what this has to do with femenism....or did I miss something?:sarcastic

 

[Aquitaine]

By whom?

Do you read the Daily Mail?

I constantly hear about people being branded "Racist" for criticizing Islam, not only that but on TV there's always some Muslim from a "commitee" who likes to use words like "Racist" or "Islamophobic" when one criticizes Islam.

However, even in daily life, the attitudes of a lot of average people is the same. Even my friends think I'm being Racist when I mention Muslims, so I myself have been an example.

Atleast where I live, "Muslim" seems to mean "Asian/Pakistani/Arab Ethnicity".

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Naomi Wolf, a third wave Western feminist, has written an article defending the voluntary use of the veil by women.

Behind the veil lives a thriving Muslim sexuality - Opinion - smh.com.au



Her article has caused a bit of controversy:

Feminists face off over the veil - Broadsheet - Salon.com

What do you make of Wolf's article?

What do you make of the controversy?

It's fine if she wants to defend a woman's choice to wear the veil. I do, too. But I disagree with Wolf and how she seems to be going one step further...her article seems to insinuate that the attitude against showing skin is more feminist and "free" by practicing modesty. And all for keeping sexuality channeled toward marriage.

Riiiiight. Women have been known to seduce and entice with a mere look in their eyes. Body language, posture, burning gazes, a knowing grin - these simple acts many times evoke more strongly a reaction in the subject than showing a thigh.

I will defend any woman's choice to wear whatever she wants, anything (heck, look at what I think is awesome - ninja-wear LOL).........but the minute anyone decides that a woman's choice in her attire is inappropriate for society, I will raise a fuss. And a fuss I am raising against Naomi Wolf for her suddenly empathizing with the position of demonizing skin.

I've always said that a truly beautiful woman is one who struts her stuff and speaks her mind. It's her choice, too, in exactly how she struts her stuff and speaks her mind, though, and ideally should not be decided by anyone else but her. If she feels beautiful, alive, and sexual under a veil, I applaud her. If she feels liberated, powerful, and divine when she shows ample cleavage and most of her legs, I applaud her.

I only find it shameful when entire societies of women are either forced or shamed into doing either one. A woman shouldn't ever be coerced into veiling herself or exposing herself.

Modesty is the "ideal" now for feminism? Please........like Miss Alice said, this has nothing to do with feminism. It's still informally codifying a woman's choice and behavior on societal norms that is not held to the same standard in men's circles. If anything, it still regurgitates the same tired song and dance that women have heard for centuries on how we ought to behave, dress, and speak.

And for the record, I have never suggested that all women ought to act like me, either - loud, feisty, and mostly bare. :rainbow1:

 

[Aquitaine]

It's fine if she wants to defend a woman's choice to wear the veil. I do, too. But I disagree with Wolf and how she seems to be going one step further...her article seems to insinuate that the attitude against showing skin is more feminist and "free" by practicing modesty. And all for keeping sexuality channeled toward marriage.

Riiiiight. Women have been known to seduce and entice with a mere look in their eyes. Body language, posture, burning gazes, a knowing grin - these simple acts many times evoke more strongly a reaction in the subject than showing a thigh.

I will defend any woman's choice to wear whatever she wants, anything (heck, look at what I think is awesome - ninja-wear LOL).........but the minute anyone decides that a woman's choice in her attire is inappropriate for society, I will raise a fuss. And a fuss I am raising against Naomi Wolf for her suddenly empathizing with the position of demonizing skin.

I've always said that a truly beautiful woman is one who struts her stuff and speaks her mind. It's her choice, too, in exactly how she struts her stuff and speaks her mind, though, and ideally should not be decided by anyone else but her. If she feels beautiful, alive, and sexual under a veil, I applaud her. If she feels liberated, powerful, and divine when she shows ample cleavage and most of her legs, I applaud her.

I only find it shameful when entire societies of women are either forced or shamed into doing either one. A woman shouldn't ever be coerced into veiling herself or exposing herself.

Modesty is the "ideal" now for feminism? Please........like Miss Alice said, this has nothing to do with feminism. It's still informally codifying a woman's choice and behavior on societal norms that is not held to the same standard in men's circles. If anything, it still regurgitates the same tired song and dance that women have heard for centuries on how we ought to behave, dress, and speak.

And for the record, I have never suggested that all women ought to act like me, either - loud, feisty, and mostly bare. :rainbow1:

Y' know, I couldn't agree with you more here. "Modesty" cannot even be defined anyways. Also, too many Muslims think no-Hijab is just exploitive, on the other hand though, a lot of non-Muslims think the Hijab by default is oppressive.

I like what you mentioned though about "demonizing skin", it's her body, it's her skin, it's her "modesty".

I myself don't like the Hijab, or Nun's outfit etc, but that said I will still recognise their right to wear it, but most importantly, to not wear it.

EDIT: Oh, and just for you......