Alan C wrote:I was flipping through an old Time magazine at work and looking at the quote section I read one by a [presumably] French muslim girl. The exact words escape me but essentially she was saying for her to be disallowed from wearing a veil would be as if she was forced to go naked in public [upon typing this I remembered Durro's Saudi accounts].
Now, my own personal opinion on this is needless and melodramatic bullshit. In fact, I consider the veil to be a senseless, archaic and misogynistic practise indoctrinated into most muslim girls. Then, of course, there's the issue of practicality in terms of identification for business, employment and travel. Then thing that really gets me is the expectation that full black robes are expected to be worn in the fucking heat of the Middle East.

If I'm wrong on some or all of this by all means explain. I'm looking to kick of a discussion on this somewhat obvious and topical matter.

Beatsong wrote:
You're only wrong in leaving out the bit about who's business it is. If SHE feels naked not wearing a veil, then that's the point, as far as she has the right to decide what she wears. It's not up to you to tell her whether she should feel that way, any more than it's up to her to tell you what colour socks you should like wearing.

Although I agree with you about the practicality issues, and would add that wearing the full veil discourages communication, and thus integration, in every way. As such it should be at the very least discouraged.

I wonder if there's a way to do that while respecting the rights of people to decide their own standard of modesty?

Alan C wrote:Then thing that really gets me is the expectation that full black robes are expected to be worn in the fucking heat of the Middle East.

Mr Ashbo wrote:Anybody care to comment on the underlying thought processes and chain of logic that leads to a culture or religion insisting that 50% of its followers dress in a certain way?

I would speculate that the 'laws' defining dress codes were defined and written by the 50% of the population that were (are) in complete and powerful control of the other 50%. I would further speculate that behind this requirement lies a desire to not only subjugate women but to clearly and utterly demonstrate their ownership by the husband who determines who is allowed to look at his wife's hair and body. This is really about power and authority here on earth.

To my mind it smacks of depersonalistion/dehumanisation - and the Muslim women who claim to prefer to dress this way are victims of a lifetime of cultural and religious brainwashing- they can think no other way.

Is this really such a big step away from female circumscision and slavery? How far should western democracies demonstrate their cultural and religious tolerance ?

Personally where ever and whenever I see women in burkhas I feel nothing but pity for them and resentful of the males that have forced them to comply to their will.

blackarmada wrote:I remember reading Benazir Bhutto's memoirs, she explained that Islam when first conceived actually improved women rights and dress codes at the time.

Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 72, Number 715
Narrated ‘Ikrima:
Rifa'a divorced his wife whereupon 'AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. ‘Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband AND SHOWED HER A GREEN SPOT ON HER SKIN CAUSED BY BEATING). It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, ‘Aisha said, "I have not seen any woman suffering AS MUCH AS THE BELIEVING WOMEN. Look! Her skin IS GREENER THAN HER CLOTHES!" When ‘AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but he is impotent and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, ‘Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient and wants to go back to Rifa'a." Allah's Apostle said, to her, "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa'a unless Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you." Then the Prophet saw two boys with 'Abdur-Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that ‘AbdurRahman said, ‘Yes.’ The Prophet said, ‘You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,’

Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 43, Number 648
Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abbas:
…Then ‘Umar went on relating the narration and said. "I and an Ansari neighbor of mine from Bani Umaiya bin Zaid who used to live in 'Awali Al-Medina, used to visit the Prophet in turns. He used to go one day, and I another day. When I went I would bring him the news of what had happened that day regarding the instructions and orders and when he went, he used to do the same for me. We, the people of Quraish, used to have authority over women, but when we came to live with the Ansar, we noticed that the Ansari women had the upper hand over their men, so our women started acquiring the habits of the Ansari women. Once I shouted at my wife and she paid me back in my coin and I disliked that she should answer me back. She said, ‘Why do you take it ill that I retort upon you? By Allah, the wives of the Prophet retort upon him, and some of them may not speak with him for the whole day till night.’ What she said scared me and I said to her, ‘Whoever amongst them does so, will be a great loser.’ … So, I entered upon the Prophet and saw him lying on a mat without bedding on it, and the mat had left its mark on the body of the Prophet, and he was leaning on a leather pillow stuffed with palm fibres. I greeted him and while still standing, I said: "Have you divorced your wives?" He raised his eyes to me and replied in the negative. And then while still standing, I said chatting: "Will you heed what I say, O Allah’s Apostle! We, the people of Quraish used to have the upper hand over our women (wives), and when we came to the people whose women had the upper hand over them…"

Abu Dawood , Book 11, Number 2141:
Narrated Abdullah ibn AbuDhubab:
Iyas ibn Abdullah ibn AbuDhubab reported the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) as saying: Do not beat Allah's handmaidens, but when Umar came to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) and said: Women have become emboldened towards their husbands, he (the Prophet) gave permission to beat them. Then many women came round the family of the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) complaining against their husbands. So the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) said: Many women have gone round Muhammad's family complaining against their husbands. They are not the best among you.

angelo wrote:He also fails miserably at compassion.

Boadacia! wrote:

angelo wrote:He also fails miserably at compassion.

He's not too hot on answering questions either! Or being photographed!

angelo wrote:It's a crying shame really. These people are blinded by their religion into wearing these tent like outfits.

But even the Catholic women place a veil on their scones when in church. God must hate hair.

angelo wrote:It's a crying shame really. These people are blinded by their religion into wearing these tent like outfits.

But even the Catholic women place a veil on their scones when in church. God must hate hair.

Some women who have a less than perfect body can use this tent to hide themselves from men, but what a shame if they have a stunning body to hide it from the appreciative look from guys like me.