Mumsnet Discussions - Sarkozy says the burqa is 'not welcome' in France

'I find this sad. That you cannot look upon people of the opposite gender as simply other human beings. That everything and everyone is seen in terms of sex, or the denial of it. How very limiting'

Isn't it though. I am fed up of innuendo with men (I had builders here for 6 weeks), having my breasts talkked too, half naked women's bodies draped over everything in order to sell products, being 'checked out' when I walk down the road.
You can never be sure if a male friend wants 'more' and is thinking about it (having just read a 'fuck buddy' thread). I had loads of male friends before I converted and there were always innuendo's and subtle hints. I was married and not interested.
Thats why I think the Islamic way is better. No sexual pressure, either from the opposite gender or having to look attractive as if its only your looks that count.

'ersonally I shudder inwardly whenever I see someone clad from head to toe in black with only their eyes showing. I know that's not an intellectual response but it's physically repulsive to me.'

Really? Physically repulsive? Because a woman is covered up?
You got ishoos.
Even I, who don't like seeing acres of flesh and muffin tops and whatever else is out on show in this heat don' get 'physically repulsed'.

I find this sad. That you cannot look upon people of the opposite gender as simply other human beings. That everything and everyone is seen in terms of sex, or the denial of it. How very limiting. sad

I don't hold that view of sex

<hippy dreadlocks and floaty skiry emoticon>

Though I do wonder why everything is about sex. Either to avoid it or seek it.

I think either the burqa should be banned in the UK or that if a woman wears it her husband should be legally obliged to do so too.

Personally I shudder inwardly whenever I see someone clad from head to toe in black with only their eyes showing. I know that's not an intellectual response but it's physically repulsive to me.

Get flaming, I'm off out.

It is their right to choose Shera. That's why a liberal democracy cannot 'ban' the Burkah, not while it remains a liberal democracy. This debate needs to be consant. Politicians depend on the media and their ficklness to keep it in the headlines. The best way to do this is to be controvercial - i.e. never say 'ban' but get the papers to add 2+2 and get 5.

I'm convinced the political strategy behind Sarkozy's announcement is just to get people discussing this, not actually to ban anything.

I might not agree with you, but I will fight for your privledge to choose for yourself and to wear what you want - as long as the silent majority have that choice too.

And just a quick question - is it blokes just finding young women attractivce that is 'pervy' or the fact that they might tell you?

yes the parents should teach the children i mean that sex is seen as private and discreet not soemthing that is everywhere, where men and women are looking at ewach other discussing who is attractive etc. and sexual imagery is used in adverts and in films etc so that children discover sex in that way

(sorry am trying to be clear here but am finding this hard to describe)

erm, i'm not sure about that littleducks?. as far as i'm concerned its down to the discretion of the parents when children learn about sex.

I can understand that, but what if he wants it every night? Can you tell him you have a headache?

Sex within a marriage is not wrong, it is to be enjoyed in private and not discussed

What is seen as wrong, is men and women looking at each other, fantasing and a whole culture of sex developing so that sex is used to sell things and children become aware of sex too early

no, sex between lawful partners is actually seen as an action of good in Islam that is encouraged to thrive within its boundaries. And procreation is a very tiny aspect of it.
all the sexual energy is channelled into marriage.
I can vouch for that wink

Is sex wrong then? That's what this seems to boil down to. Muslim men and women can't think about sex with anyone other than their wives/husbands.

Does everyone on this thread hate being looked at by men and found attractive? I dress for myself, so that I feel confident in what I'm wearing, but I do enjoy it if someone is attracted to me. I only find it sexist if they treat me like an object. But I have respect for men in general, and most of them don't treat women like sex objects.

dittany- there are solutions suggested to men who find themselves 'oogling', they are reminded to lower their gaze, refrain from entering places where there would be the temptation to look (swimming pools/beaches) if this is ineffectiove it is recommended that the fast (this is seen as purifying for your soul and lowering sexual desires) and spending their time in the company of men, active and to pray (men and women pray seperately)

I converted so didnt wear a hijab until then, i got alot of comments and men looking at me this disapeared when i started to wear hijab

in my first school, teacher glanced at me oddly when i complained and said 'well you are wearing traditional dress, aren't you'.

second school, i never used to tell my parents anything.. one of 5 kids, middle child and all that, parents both worked overtime, pretty independent kids, i just broke down sobbing one day in my bedroom and my little sister went and told my dad, so i spilled everything out. the next day my dad marched into school and saw the head of lower school, who then arranged a meeting with the other children involved and threatened to expel them. never had any real trouble after that.

I really should keep up faster.

That is all truely horrific. Did the school not help you at all? I am ashamed of my countrymen sometimes. This is one of those times.

I meant to say that to MT.
Well said Sherazade. smile

dittany, , i've had the following done to me for wearing the hijab at school:

being buried under snow, age 12 by much older and bigger boys
slapped
kicked
had my lunch routinely confiscated
been held down and had cigarettes shoved into my mouth
had my clothes ripped off
been chased down throad and spat at till soaked in sweat with 'paki bitch go back to fucking pakistan '
been chased down the high street with 'osama bin laden's bitch' screamed at me

i eventually sorted it all out and went through school with virtually no friends but left with alot of respect gained for myself.

i could have removed my hijab and assimilated in an instant, being white skinned, but didn't.

didnt want to be oppressed into comforming. And wont.

this is MY struggle, this is the struggle relevent and real to ME.

It makes me so very sad to think of women living like that.
We take our freedoms for granted.

oh i did, dittany, forgot to mention that bit

dittany, i totally understand everything you are saying.

But i also so know what the daily life of a burkha wearer is like , full of movement, vibrancy, social interaction, all the burkha wearers i know have actually evolved their personal and social lives to fit around the burkha.. and it becomes a part of them, they don't suffer. i know that will be really hard for the non muslim, western mind, to ever comprehend, but these women ARE living it and loving it, isn't that their right to choose, EVEN for you if this means disregard for women at other ends of the world who are unhappy about wearing it? isn't it a right to choose?

You should have just told him to fuck off sherazade.

You allowed his perverseness to oppress you into covering up.

On the other hand it's no surprise that a patriachal religion reduces women to non-people with no individual identity under a blanket.

Imagine if men were being beaten into wearing a burkha. Or imagine if black people in South Africa had been required to wear a burkha during apartheid. Would westerners have been so quick to put one on and start claiming they "chose" it?

The burkha is only seen as acceptable in some circles because women's second class status to men is already agreed upon.

I did go through a tight jeans/tight top /anti hijab phase in my early teens. remember walking down the street and a man atleast in his forties came up to me and said 'i can see from the end of the road (he points to end of road) that YOU have got a fit body'.

i put my hijab back on after that.
the thought of someone decades older than me having a good perve at my small waist and pert breasts made me feel a bit sick.

I cross posted with you there sherazade, I saw you'd mentioned them already. The point I'm making is that this religious rule hasn't been translated into an item of clothing, restricting men's vision, whereas women's mere existence is regarded as requiring completely covering up because of male misbehaviour.

Human beings need sunlight and they need to be able to move. The burqua doesn't allow one and severely restricts the other. That's not to mention the social and emotional restrictions of having the human face covered - a face that has taken thousands of years to evolve the ability to express the feelings and humanity of the person inside. We are social animals, we read faces and women are being denied that basic human right with face covering. It's terrible.

www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/feb/16/france.paulwebster

Ronshar, this is something I want to look into. It's tricky because spousal rape is not even recorded as a crime. I have a hunch that stranger rape will be low, becasue many women are not allowed out without chaperone, but spousal rape will be endemic - as it was in our culture whilst women were legally deemed the property of their husbands.

Gathering stats on the women in jails for adultery might also give us a clue. But it's all guess work as who is going to allow a study like this?? There are of course the sanctioned rapes - gang rapes - where a woman/girl is raped in vengence for a crime of the father/brothers/uncles/cousins.

The rape stats in the French banlieue are high.[[ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/feb/16/france.paulwebster]]It doesn't appear to have gotten much better even since this article in 2003.

dittany, thre are strict rules about men looking at women. looking at an unrelated woman in a sexual way is considered sinful and answerable to god it if is recurrent (ie a single glance is acceptable, but not beyond that).. islamically it is known as the 'fornication of the eye'.

Oh right there are strictures for men. They just don't seem to have been converted into a item of clothing. Funny that.

Remind me what sex all the religious leaders are in Islam again.

So why aren't there strictures in Islam against Muslim men ogling then? Why aren't they made to wear blinkers if they can't stop themselves looking at women?

Once again it is women who are being oppressed because of male behaviour.

I don't get ogled either. The last time I did, a couple of years ago, I gave the pair that were doing it such a filthy look that they looked away in shame. But most men aren't ogling women all the time.

ronshar, please ask away. I'm not accusing you of being racist.

wearing the hijab is not about preventing rape, it is about the the muslim's belief that a woman has a basic right not to be treated as a sexual object. Her sexuality and body is something very private nad personal between her husband and her. The onus is ALSO on men, to lower the gaze. I quote the Qur'an:

"Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty.''

(chapter nur)

Riven I agree. It is tiresome. But very few men act upon the thoughts that kind of dress code aroses.
I have no idea of the figures but are sex crimes lower among a predominatly muslim society than a traditional "western" society. I would like to think they were otherwise it is self defeating to cover women up! Or again am I missing the real meaning?
I feel really awkward asking these kinds of questions because, as has already happened, it is so easy to be accused of being a bit racist. Which I would like to think I am not. Maybe ignorant of other cultures but I would certainly defend any bodies right to freedom of expression even if I disagree with it.

oh give it a rest Cote. There is actually an intersteing debate happening here if you would care to get your head out of your arse

oggle is what a series of men was doing, young and old when driving past a young lady wearing hot pants the other day. Every head turned and every eye ball looked her up and down. And not at the road. I told DH about it and he said 'where?'
Many women will tell you that if they have large breasts quite often the person (usually male) they are talking too are talking to their breasts. Its biology. Males are visual creatures. I have not yet met a man who, hand on heart, has not let his eyes stray away from a well endowed lady's face.
Mind you, wearing an abaya doesn't seem to stop it. its tiresome.

I meant "our country" as in the country that most of us on this site live in. I did not mean at any point our country as in not for non white thank you. You dont know me and you dont know where I come from.
What ever country I go to I endeavour to follow the laws of that country, regardless as to whether I agree with them or not.
I dont oggle them as they go by. It is common knowledge and a police man who lives next door to one of them has spoken to them and they didnt care!
I am interested in the use of the word oggle!

Umm. <watches the point sail past>

and you're too busy ogling into the cars of the headscarf ladies at your dd's school, ronshar. the things these people do in 'our country'. tut tut.

Then I misunderstood the whole point of covering up the female form! I thought it was because men can't control themselves and one glimpse of a womans hair/flesh would mean that the man couldn't be held responsible for what ever they did to said woman!
Please enlighten me as to the point then.
I dont get oggled when I walk down the road because I wear normal clothing. I have a vest tshirt on and linen 3/4 trousers today and have been into town and all over the place! Made it back in one piece!
As I said I dont really understand what it is all about, so I hope I am not offending anyone.

'I also feel that they are making jugdements about my husband/brother/father/son. They are saying that they are all rapist's.'

thats your interpretation. I don't know any woman who thinks lke that (outisde 80's Greenham Common)
But there's no denying men like an oggle. I don't want to be oggled.

I know you will say "oh well THERE they do" and it's too hot to go around collecting examples of people stoned by mobs for minor infractions, but it demonstrates that we are not making it all up based on the daily mail.

CoteDAzur, I'm glad that people are not arrested, imprisoned, executed for infractions. I had somehow picked up the entirely wrong idea from the 1000s of news items which contradict what you are saying.

Just to pick one out of the air. this is one of the cases where the BBC News lied and pretended that something bad happened in Saudi Arabia. The people at the BBC should be arrested for such deception.

Saudi Arabia's religious police stopped schoolgirls from leaving a blazing building because they were not wearing correct Islamic dress.

There are also lots of articles about the Mutaween who are wrongly described as religous police and whom I'm now sure are in fact ice cream sellers.

Btw do you claim to be a non believer because you seem quite het up when anyone has any doubts about the perfection of islam.

I didn't say it didn't matter angry

, my point was that far worse things were happening such as women having to watch their children starve to death.

"So what is to be done?"

Well in Afghanistan there's always RAWA:

www.rawa.org/wom-view.htm

And they do think the burqua is an important issue, despite your claims that if you lived there it wouldn't matter. They say it a way of dehumanising women:

"Under the latter, women were totally deprived of the right....... to being human (they could not show their faces in public to male strangers, they could not wear bright colored clothing, they could not wear make up, they could only appear outside their houses clad head to foot in shapeless bags called burqas"

I guess the yellow stars were the least of Jewish people's worries in Nazi Germany. Imagine if Jews in the UK had sported a yellow star at the time and then claimed "I like it, and I choose it, so it's OK".

It's just astonishing to me that what amounts to a prison made of cloth for women is being defended ....... by women.

Also some women who wear the full garb are basically saying that they are superior to all other women, even other muslim women as they are holier than thou!
I'm western, this is a western country and in this hot weather we'll show off as much flesh as we want!

MT - Her degrees and nationality notwithstanding, if your hero Hirsii Ali is an atheist who thinks she is a Muslim, she has very little idea about what "Muslim" is.

And if you don't know about Islam to know that, you should be far more modest about the extent of your understanding on this subject.

"So when a Muslim decides that the religion and Allah are a load of hogwash and rejects it, that should be between them and God and they should not have the threat of death hanging over them"

And in most places, there is no such threat. I come from one such place, never believed, always said so, and lived to tell.

"Similarly, if someone wants to be Muslim and gay, that should be between them and God."

Similarly, I know quite a few Muslim gay men and one Muslim gay woman who were never hounded. In fact, I fondly remember a gay club in 1990s in Istanbul which started the whole clubbing scene there. Again, no problems for anybody (except maybe the hangovers).

The problem is that a lot of you people are basing your opinions on stereotypes of Muslims and their countries. That those who renounce Islam are killed, or that gays are prosecuted. In some places, yes. In others, no.

I personnally find any form of male control offensive how ever that may manifest itself.
I feel that women who wear the Nicab or Burqa are signalling to the rest of the world that it is ok for Muslims to think that anyone who isnt wearing one is a slut or worse.
I also feel that they are making jugdements about my husband/brother/father/son. They are saying that they are all rapist's.

There are a few women at DD's school who wear headscarves. Yet they dont strap their children in to their cars because they dont have any car seats!! So they devoutly follow a "law" which has been imposed by men for men, not by their God. But dont follow a basic law of our country which has been designed to prevent children getting seriously hurt in an accident!!!!

This is only my opinion and I fully understand that everyone has the fundamental right to have an opinion, so I am not attacking anyone just really dont understand why women allow themselves to be ruled in such a manor!

Well I think all of us - Muslims and non-Muslims alike - are in agreement that oppression of women is wrong.

And for those women who are oppressed into wearing it, I would guess that the burqa is the least of their worries. If I was living in a Taliban-controlled area, being denied an education and opportunity to work would bother me far more than wearing a burqa. Yes, in some places as LeninGrad says it is symptomatic of oppression against women.

So what is to be done? The rise of this kind of fundamentalism can to some extent be attributed to socio-economic and political factors. How is denying women here, who choose to freely wear it, going to change all that?

The Taliban aren't going to suddenly say, yes we agree it is oppressive.

riven i would like to as you a question
can you email me on najah83@gmail.com

thats your belief, I have mine. Neither of us can be proved right or wrong.

Well as men invented god in their image I'd prefer to take it up with them, and point out the sexism and oppression of these rules they impose upon women.

God didn't sit down and write the Qu'ran, men did that.

really, take it up with God then. The Qu'ran, and therefore God, calls upon men and women to behave and dress modestly.
Thats what I do.

I think you're getting confused between having an individual opinion, which is what everybody's opinion is - nobody has a group opinion, and using individualism (me, me, me, my choice) as a justification for actions.

Who said you weren't "allowed" to disagree? Don't confuse me with your religion. I don't have any rules for you to follow. I'm making an argument, if you find it convincing that's up to you.

The other thing to remember is that when men aren't around god apparently doesn't require muslim women to be "modest", so it's not an across the board stricture, it's situational, which says to me it's men that need to change, not women's clothing.

and I disagree with you. I am allowed too you know.
Your arguments are rather individualistic to you. YOU find the burqa oppressive so therefore it must be oppressive to ALL women.
Why don't you listen to burqa wearing women and ask what they want?

I certainly can call you one of Thatcher's children if your arguments fall back on "what I want", individualism and "choice".

Modest clothing as you call it is just a flipside of the oppressive beauty culture. At the root of them is the same issue - men's opinions on how women look. It is quite possible to opt out of western beauty culture without resorting to a different set of oppressive clothing.

I also think it's offensive to equate verbal abuse to being beaten in the streets for what a woman wears. As is pretending that you speak for all Muslim women - you don't know what they want any more than anybody does. I've never claimed I do, what I've said is that the burqua is oppressive. I think high-heeled shoes and breast implants are oppressive too, having those opinions isn't claiming to know what all Muslim women want.

"This is about banning the burkha, mt. "

I don't think it is. It's about female oppression. But default, the women who choose to wear the burkha are not at the centre of this debate, altjough they will be the most vocal and active. So it is vital that they represent their silent 'sisters'.

'How would your husband, family, friends and community respond if you didn't cover yourself by the way Riven?

I'm taking it at face value that you have a choice. Would they care? Would it have any social or family implications for you?

What do the other women in your family or social circle do? '

They would say it is up to me. Neither of my sons is a muslim. My husband is an athiest. My friends are a mix of muslims and non-muslims and wouldn't give a tiny fart either. My muslim friends would remind themselves that there 'is no compulsion in religion' commanded in the Qu'ran.
My mother is an evangelical Christian and my daughter has bought into the whole thin/image thing sadly enough.
How I dress is between me and God. I dress modestly so find an abaya by far the easiest and coolest thing to wear.

I also agree that it's easy to be divided and conquered. Whilst we're arguing with each other, we're not addressing fundamental issues and concerns to women everywhere. These are all symptoms, not necessarily causes.

yes Dittany and I've been involved in muslim women's rights groups.
Women who reject the beauty culture are genrally bullied verbally. I worked with anorexic girls too. They are just as oppressed as if they are being betaen. To me, wearing modest clothing is rejecting that 'what a woman looks like is vital' culture.

And you can hardly call me one of Thatchers Children. To be honest this argument is going round in circles. A MAN yet again has expressed wishes about what women should and should not wear. Tell him to fuck off and let women decide for themslves.
Muslim women are changing male entrenched attitudes in this country but it is a slow process. I recently went round the mosques to campaign against women's areas being upstairs with no bloody lift. Not great for disabled muslim women.
And I do think wesatern non-muslim women do not have a great understanding of what muslim women want. they just see it from their own veiwpoint. Which is oppression.

How would your husband, family, friends and community respond if you didn't cover yourself by the way Riven?

I'm taking it at face value that you have a choice. Would they care? Would it have any social or family implications for you?

What do the other women in your family or social circle do?

It makes a difference to women here for goodness sake. There are plenty of women being extremely oppressed in Muslim households right here in this country. Did you read the piece by Saira Khan further up thread?

I also do have a big disagreement with women who pull the "choice" nonsense about buying into the oppressive beauty culture. But again women aren't being beaten for not dieting, or having cosmetic surgery. Although funnily enough Iran is the nose job capital of the world, one sexist oppression heaped on another.

"I like covering."

Yup, me, me, me. Thatchers' children at their finest. Just ignore the political implications for other women, as long as you're happy.

Actually Riven, I do think all those things should be challenged too. Personal choice does have wider implications.

None of this is easy and I'd much prefer dialogue, discussion and compromise. The alternative is that people become entrenched in their positions and there is no room for manoeuvre then.

I hope you are railing against women who are dieting, have cosmetic surgery, are orange etc etc for propping up male sexual images of women and oppressing those of us who are not a size zero with big breasts.
Whether a woman in the west wears a burqa or bikini makes sod all difference to a woman in Afghanistan.
I like covering.

I've already said that your actions have wider implications than just "me, me, me". Just because it hasn't happened to you individually doesn't mean that you shouldn't take a stand. Collectively women are oppressed by this and you are buying into it.

But you carry on with your teenage rebellion. The fundamentalists in the US or Afghanistan will be delighted that you complied so easily and made it even harder for other women who want to be free of these kind of strictures.

And women in the US who are forced to cover their heads in fundamentalist churches, Jewish women who can't display their hair or the women who were expected to wear a veil at the Pope's funeral as a sign of "respect" are all being oppressed to.

So it's not just limited to one religion.

sure dittany. Next time I meet a muslim male telling us women that we must cover up, shall start railing. Consider it done .

Why don't you rail against the strictures of Islamic bullies then? There are plenty of male Muslims telling women that they must cover up and even attacking them if they don't. Sarkozy hasn't even passed a law yet. It's pathetic to use a symbol of women's oppression as your own little act of teenage rebellion against people who point out it has wider implications than "me, me, me, this is what I want".

It's a red herring to pretend that this is about choice for women, if it was a free choice there would be just as many Muslim men wearing the burkha and they don't. It's about men oppressing women and persuading women into taking part in their own oppression by using religion as an excuse.

.. i have a niqab sitting in my bottom drawer actually. It's positively itching to be worn grin

its almost making me want to go out and buy a burqa. Soon as someone tels me I cant do something I turn into a 3 yo grin

I might come to the MN Xmas meet in a burqa. Cuts out the 'what will I wear/will I look fat' crap grin

it's like banging yer head against a brick wall... riven wink

I think the Sarkozy is right. For me it's not a free women who wears a burka. It's a terrible thing to see. hmm

How many non-muslim women actually have muslim friends and go to their houses and ask then what they want to wear?
You cant speak for muslim women and called them oppressed really.

This is about banning the burkha, mt. It would be ridiculously unfair to disregard the majority of women who love it, believe in it, and chose to wear it, for rare (never known any myself) minority of women who are forced into it. surely there are other ways to combat extremism. I don't live in france.

the article doesn't mention the burkha- or does it

I'm not sure they are a rareity. But these are the women who are also far more likely to be invisible. That doesn't make them a non-issue. It makes then the issue, IMHO.

Im I wrong in thinking you live in France?

www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/13/60minutes/main617270.shtml

YES pornococktail, because they believe it is a religious obligation and are unable to fulfil it, and they tend to be very unhappy about it. their husbands are quite controlling in other ways though. For them, it is a struggle, and so they are oppressed.

"I know lots of women whose husbands don't even let them wear a headscarf"

Do you consider them to be oppressed?

same here riven (am white also and do get confused for a convert but i'm just a white skinned arab). My husband really didn't like it when I wore an abaya in the airport this year. He's convinced that the sight of a white woman in islamic garb aggravates people.

my husband isn't happy with me wearing abaya/hijab in our local High Street because he is frightenend of racial abuse (and I'm white!) but elsewhere its up to me what I wear. So I'm being oppressed by not being allowed to wear coverings already!
And if I went to London, I;d wear niqab abd foil the 5 zillion surveillance cameras.

*I'm not convinced this is an issue, sorry

this it the thing, MT. The muslim women on this forum are testifying that in EUROPE, in our muslim communities, a woman that is forced to wear the burkha is an absolute rareity. If anything I know lots of women whose husbands don't even elt them wear a headscarf for fear of alienation.

The argument that this law, will be a relief for the many many women who are forced into the burkha is completely redundant, if you know the muslim community at all.

My English muslim convert friends, wear the burkha through choice. They can go back to the other end of the spectrum any minute they please. SOME do. Most don't.
It's the same for my born-muslim acquaintances that wear the burkha. Whilst they know that I think the burkha is unnecessary and at most times out of place/ attracts unnecssary attention and gives off negative vibes. i wouldn't dream of telling them what they can and cannot do.

In the meanwhile, what of the women that are forced into the burkha? Practically speaking it is a free country and I dont know of any reported cases of women who have been victimised by others for removing it.

forced marriages are a big issue amongst namely sub continent based muslim families , but this is a CULTURAL problem, because if those exerting marriages on others knew a thing about islam they'd know that a marriage in which a woman did not give true and valid consent is absolutely void.

as for forced burkha, i'm not convinced this is just no an issue. Like i've said previously, it is all about assimilating muslims into secular french society.

I didn't see universal covering in Dubai (my brother lived there) but did hear people on the plane home bemoaning the terrible covering laws. When none of them had had to cover. The 'stories' became more extreme the further we got so I can well imagine people returning regaling facinated relatives with 'we had to cover everything, even both eyes, aren't they oppressed'
Its like the Daily Mail and their stories. When they printed about Jack Straw and the lady in niqab they failed to mention that Jack Straw has a hearing impairment and lip reads. Whatever makes a good story.
But we're not talking about the UAE. It was Europe and its views on the burqa. Here in Europe we don't have clothing laws (aprt from nakedness which isn't allowed and we do have one law for men and one for women. Men can take their top off, women would be arested. You're all oppressed OMG!)
If a woman wants to cover head to toe then let her.

I think you mean Riven MT.

I agree with you.

Spokette - "people's interpretation of religious rules are important to them. If a muslim women feels she is fulfilling her religious obligations by covering her face then thats right by her. It might not be required strcitly by the religion (and isn't) but its between a person and god really. Not up to other people."

I agree with you. But while there are many many women who have no choice, this debate needs to carry on.

"Well, having a Pope hasn't stopped Christianity from coming up with a large variety of "versions", and in the end, if there is a major disagreement, there will be a schism (a la Protestantism vs. Catholicism)."

But that's my point! If it was me, I would like to be recognisable as belonging to a moderate body who say 'this is our belief' and we want nothing to do with the extemists and don't want to be mistaken for them.

''When my cousins worked in UAE, everytime they went out, they had to cover everything up. Not so the men btw. They were in a Muslim country so abided by the law because not to would mean a fate worse than death.''

the law in the UAE does not compel women to 'cover everything up... or face a fate worse than death'. hijab is NOT the law in uae. I visit the emirates regularly to visit in laws, and one can see everything from hot pants to burkhas. It is not about competing realities , it is a fact. I don't care for your unreliable anecdotes. And I don't need to ask Allah for confirmation, I've been out many a time with my sister in law who dons skinny jeans and boobtubes in the uae and so far she hasn't been arrested hmm

.

polemic, I see what you mean now.
There are two large bodies- the muslim council of britain and the european council for fatwa and research, that unite and bring together mainstream muslims. they have unanaimously concemned atrocities like 9/11 and 7/7, madrid, mumbai, and i think they represent how mainstream muslims envisage their position in europe/britain.

Hirsi Ali isn't an authority on the subject? She was a practicing Muslim for most of her life. She only bacame an 'apostate' recently. She is a politician. She is a scholar. If she can't be called an authority, yet you can, the world is in big trouble.

Cote, its a no brainer. If you disagree, disagree. That's it.

Well, having a Pope hasn't stopped Christianity from coming up with a large variety of "versions", and in the end, if there is a major disagreement, there will be a schism (a la Protestantism vs. Catholicism).

There was a Caliphate, until the end of the Ottoman Empire, but it did not prevent splinter groups. It is highly unlikely that it would do so now: if a group believes that their version of a religion is the "true" version, and then central body agrees, they will just split (there's are hundreds and hundreds of examples of these in Christianity, such as the Waldensians).

"Now, electing a pope like figure (which is SO contradictory to the teachings of islam that i wouldn't know where to begin in order to explain why), is hardly going to stop a minortiy of madmen"

It doesn't need to be a single 'pope' person, it could be a committee or a council or something similar. All it needs is someone/thing to say "this is un-islamic".
If you (muslims generally) refuse to condemn them, then you give rise to the suspicion that you condone them.

Sherazade, if their reality does not agree with your reality, that is your problem. My cousins are not liars, neither am I.

Why don't you pray to Allah and ask him for confirmation? hmm

Though I do agree with you sherazade that just because a minority of people hold unacceptable (to the majority) views, one shouldn't equate that with the views of others of the same religion. Just look at bible belt christians and their views on homosexuality, evolution etc.

I don't think it's fair to accuse Spokette (or the people she knows) of lying. She didn't say they had to cover their faces. And nor did she say they would face death.

well, spokette, frankly one of you are lying, nobody in the uae, certainly not nurses, have to be completely covered up or face death.

polemic, people do and say lots of terrible things in the name of religion. Now, electing a pope like figure (which is SO contradictory to the teachings of islam that i wouldn't know where to begin in order to explain why), is hardly going to stop a minortiy of madmen.

"and all this about muslims making things up as they go along is nonsense. why should muslims have a uniform way of life? one can do what one pleases, within the limits set by the qur'an and hadtih."

Because if you don't have an accepted code of conduct you get people shouting 'death to the infidels' in the name of your religion. Is that what you want!? shock

Words fail me.

They were working as nurses out there. I have no idea where but they had to cover up.

really, spokette?

where in the uae were they based?

my MUSLIM female relatives that reside in the UAE usually wear cropped pants and vests outside (they're not religious).

so are you telling me that all the mini skirt clad phillipinos i saw in the malls this january, in dubai, were having the burkha week off?

and all this about muslims making things up as they go along is nonsense. why should muslims have a uniform way of life? one can do what one pleases, within the limits set by the qur'an and hadtih.

as for difference of opinion, thats the beauty of islam. you choose the fatwa according to which you find most convincing.

issues like FGM, enforcement of face veil, are largely due to people neglecting the basic sources of islam, and choosing to prioritise the values of their culture.

That is probably why most ayslum seekers rarely flee to Islamic countries

ROFL

"If you are forced to wear something and you don't want to, you are being oppressed

Absolutely.

When my cousins worked in UAE, everytime they went out, they had to cover everything up. Not so the men btw. They were in a Muslim country so abided by the law because not to would mean a fate worse than death.

That is probably why most ayslum seekers rarely flee to Islamic countries wink

saadia: "how can anything they say be binding if they have no legal legitimacy?"

What are you on about!? The Pope manages to keep the alleigence of Catholics in CofE Britain without needing any legal force. All you need are rules that the members of the club (religion) agree amongst themselves, that are in accordance with the rest of society.

if a woman chooses to wear it, then its not oppressive. If she doesn't then it is.
And that goes for any item of clothing. If you are forced to wear something and you don't want to, you are being oppressed.

And also, I thought you were of the opinion that the Burqa was not a religious choice but a cultural one? Or am I confused blush

Saadia: "But burqa-wearing (when done freely) is not harming anyone. I'm not defending burqa-wearing from the religious POV as I don't believe it is a requirement, I'm defending it because I think it is a gross violation to tell women what they can't wear just because they are of a different religion."

I don't think anyone disagrees with you on that point! But I think that what we are debating is whether Buraqs oppress women.

'So when a Muslim decides that the religion and Allah are a load of hogwash and rejects it, that should be between them and God and they should not have the threat of death hanging over them because they have apostasised.

Similarly, if someone wants to be Muslim and gay, that should be between them and God.

Salman Rushdie should never had a fatwa issued against him for having the temerity to write fiction regarding Mohammed. If he did wrong (and he most certainly did not), that is between him and God.

Muslims can't have it both ways. '

Of course it should be. The Qu'ran says there should be no compulsion in religion.
Unfortunately people are people with their prejudices and judgey-hats on. Atheist or religious, lots of people want to assert how they think/feel/eat/dress on other people. And its not right whoever does it.

well there are religious leaders in all Muslim countries, how can anything they say be binding if they have no legal legitimacy?

Wiki says a caliphate is "a traditional form of government based on the religion of Islam. The term is also sometimes used to refer to a state which implements such a government a form of government"
I was hoping for a leader of religious ideas, not an imposition of goverance. hmm

And again I agree, we do need a central body, like a Caliphate.

Yes you are right, they do make up stuff, for example those who sanction suicide bombs, and it's not OK by the majority of Muslims.

But burqa-wearing (when done freely) is not harming anyone. I'm not defending burqa-wearing from the religious POV as I don't believe it is a requirement, I'm defending it because I think it is a gross violation to tell women what they can't wear just because they are of a different religion.

saadia: because that 'extreme example' is not unheard of. I tried to google it to get some more info but got some very scary websites and wished that it wasn't on my internet history now angry

Why are muslims allowed to make it up as they go along. If a muslim says, 'I fancy doing xyz in the name of my religion' then they seem to think that it is OK. It really needs some central body or person to say, 'this, this and this are muslim and that, that and that are not' You can't have each individual going around making up their own rules. hmm

Riven

people's interpretation of religious rules are important to them. If a muslim women feels she is fulfilling her religious obligations by covering her face then thats right by her. It might not be required strcitly by the religion (and isn't) but its between a person and god really. Not up to other people.

So when a Muslim decides that the religion and Allah are a load of hogwash and rejects it, that should be between them and God and they should not have the threat of death hanging over them because they have apostasised.

Similarly, if someone wants to be Muslim and gay, that should be between them and God.

Salman Rushdie should never had a fatwa issued against him for having the temerity to write fiction regarding Mohammed. If he did wrong (and he most certainly did not), that is between him and God.

Muslims can't have it both ways.

People get het up about discrimination. If muslim men had to wear the burqa too then it would be (slightly) different

I'm not being trite, I'm wondering why you would come up with such an extreme example?

Scotsmen wear kilts. David Beckham wore a sarong but got mocked because it was not from his culture.
When did you last see a man wearing a burqa?

people get very het up about what women wear

Only women wear skirts as a rule. How does that fit in with equality? If a man wore a skirt, it would be frowned upon.

If a woman wants to wear a burqa of her own free will, then let her. It's nobody's business.

Don't be trite saadia, it doesn't help the conversation

Are you equating burqa-wearing with murder?

It'sGrim: only women wear burqa. How does that fit in with egalite?

Well the French motto of "Liberty, Equality and Fraternity" could equally be used to defend a woman's right to wear a burqa - freedom of choice and all that.

But it is pretty much taken as read that what's important to someone is "hugely influenced" by their culture.

What happened to society? If I think that it is a good idea to kill all infidels do 'other people' have a say in that!

"Fine to be a Muslim if you want, but also behave like a Frenchwoman."

I really don't think what one wears prevents one from behaving in a decent, civilised manner as a fully, responsible member of modern society. That's what matters. Not what one wears.

For pity's sake, how does a Frenchwoman behave then? Who defines that?

How does an Englishwoman behave?

people's interpretation of religious rules are important to them. If a muslim women feels she is fulfilling her religious obligations by covering her face then thats right by her. It might not be required strcitly by the religion (and isn't) but its between a person and god really. Not up to other people.

Cote, surely there's a cultural difference in what counts as religious. You would say for instance that face covering is purely cultural and not Islamic, but women in countries where they do it would say they are doing it because it is religious, wouldn't they?

(Of course a Muslim is never going to agree with a non-Muslim about how far Islam is influenced by culture anyway because I assume a Muslim would say the Quran is the word of God where a non-Muslim would say it is itself a product of culture.)

What Islam is and what Islam means to people are two different things imo. So yes, the words of prayer and body movements are the same. But all those things MT mentions that are different in different cultures are done ^in the name^ of Islamic law. Aren't they? So really, before you can debate whether Islam is influenced by culture or not, you both need to make clear what you understand Islam to be.

<backs away from the middle>

So going back to the original point, the burqa is a cultural thing, not a requirement, not one of the 5 pillars. It is therefore reasonable for Sarkozy to say that the culture in France is to not hide your face. That the culture in France is liberte, egalite etc.
Fine to be a Muslim if you want, but also behave like a Frenchwoman.

Like what?

What "cultural differences"? And don't say "color of scarf" or some such which has nothing to do with the religion itself.

Something to justify your claim that Islam is "hugely" (no less hmm

) influenced by local cultures.

Well that's your struggle not mine. There are many similarites, but also cultural differences. It's not rocket sicence.

Color of head scarves worn or food Muslims break their fast with does not mean that Islam is influenced by culture, though. It just means people wear different clothes and eat different foods. The religion itself if the practice - prayers (salat) have the very same words and body movements wherever you go, shahada is the same, you wash the same body parts in exact same order during wudu/abdest, call to prayer sounds the same, even greetings between Muslims are the same wherever you go.

I struggle to see this "huge" cultural influence on Islam. From where I sit, it looks like Turkish Muslims in Turkey, Algerians in France, Arabs in UK etc all practice Islam the same way.

yes, you are sort of right too MT.

in saudi, women are expected to cover their face and aren't permitted to drive: there are religious bindings, fatwas, which strive to implement this. BUT REALLY it is all about the way saudi culture works, and saudi scholars who issue these fatwas (about the driving and face veil) almost always state that these fatwas are for saudi alone,and are not compatible with musllims in other countries and cultures, and therefore irrelevent.

this is called FIQH which means the evolution of and varying interpretations of shariah.

So what are we saying, Muslims live with Islam differently depending on their indiginous culture, while also sticking to the same essential tenets. So it is and it isn't?

But as this thread tesitifies, some women in some cultures can chose to wear hijab, burka, etc, whilst other cannot. Some women are educated, some are denied an education. In some cultures they will be mutilated, in others not. In some they will be imprisoned for adultery, in others not. Some practice Shia, some Sunni - some Wahhabi sunni. These are all to some degree contingent on where you were born.

So on a macrolevel, one can recognise broad tropes within all Islamic cultures, but on a microlevel transmitted indigenous culture is assimilated. Therefore human culture does impact on Islam, as it does every possible phenomena.

The way muslims live across the globe, of course varies culture to culture. But the rules are the same, their manifestations of practice, are only cosmetically different.

What they have in common are their beliefs, and ahderence to the 5 pillars.

muslims fast in ramadan all over the globe. what they eat once they break the fast, depends on where they are, for example.

muslim women wear hijab all over the world. the colours and styles, vary according to where they are. the black burka has become more universal than the malay dress or the syrian manteau, for example, but generally, you can identify a womans country by her dress style. the 'rules' of hijab, largely speaking, remain the same across the globe.

so cote dazur, you are, in my opinion, essentially correct.

Give some examples of how "Islam is hugely influenced by culture", if it is that obvious.

As I asked and you ignored before is the Islam practiced by Turks and British converts any different? Is any of that any different than the Islam practiced by Arabs in the US?

Of cousre Islam is influenced by culture and it's practice varuously cultural. Thats not something you need to get from a higher authority.

And I do credit Hirsi Ali. You are getting dangeroulsy close to Dittanyland here.

I think that all religion is influenced by culture. Because they all have a degree of interpretation of sacred teachings don't they? How can you seperate those that interpret from their culture?

and actually <wracks brains> don't think I've ever called any post patronising up to now. Thats usually what I'm accused of! So dunno where you get the "This is how it always goes with you" from.

Anyway...hill of beans and all that

If you are quoting someone else's opinion, credit them. Otherwise it looks an awful lot like you are writing your own posts. Like here:

By monkeytrousers on Tue 30-Jun-09 15:44:51
Well Islam is hugely influenced by culture.

Hirsii Ali or MT? Looks like MT to me.

?

How can I be wrong about describing a what a person said accuratly?

The mistake you made is atributing Hirsi Ali's sentiments to me.

Other than that you've made some intersting posts

This is how it always goes with you. I show you where you are wrong or plain simple don't make sense and you call me 'patronising' hmm

FGM is not a part of Islam and after the dozen times I have corrected you on this, it would be a relief if you would kindly stop saying so. Hirsii Ali might think it is, but then again, she thinks she is an atheist Muslim, so I wouldn't think she is an authority on the subject. It was an African practice from BEFORE they converted to Islam, which persisted AFTER they converted to Islam, obviously not something they learned FROM Islam.

And what else do you have to say Islam is "hugely affected by culture"? HUGELY, no less hmm

Is the Islam practiced by Turks and British converts any different? Is any of that any different than the Islam practiced by Arabs in the US?

Cote, please stop being so patronising. Just because I chose not to answer your cynical questions does not mean I'm ignorant.

I am not asserting that one can be a Muslim if you do not believe in god - I am just saying that Hirsi Ali says she is.

And I'm wrong about Islamic culture? Then why in all discussions about FGM is differing cultures in the interpretation of Islam always invoked?

I have not read all the posts but answering the OP
I firmly believe that its not acceptable to 'ban' any garment just because it may be forced on some women. What about the ones who wear it out of personal choice?
And going from one extreme to another it is going from a one man telling his wife or female family members to wear a burka to the govt telling tham that the CANNOT wear it weather they want to or not.

MT - I know this is a subject you like because you are always posting on these Islam threads, but honestly and without meaning to upset you, you don't really know much about this religion.

"Muslim" means "one who submits to God". It is daft, or seriously ignorant at the very least, to think you can be Muslim without believing in God.

Even putting aside the meaning of the word, you can only be Muslim by believing (1) God is the only deity and (2) Mohammad is his prophet. That is what you say when you convert to Islam. You cannot call yourself Muslim by any stretch of the imagination if you cannot bring yourself to say this.

And you are wrong when when you say "Islam is hugely influenced by culture". Its main denominations are quite incredibly uniform throughout the world.

Bleh, the 'science is so much better' was just a side thing with CoteDAzur, but I do prefer science (or the logical principles) as a guide to decisions over random associations and imaginings.

kathyis6incheshigh, not read it, but it makes sense to me. I don't see why we have to get involved in people's religions, but we tend to get sucked in when they claim that the thing we are discussing is required by it.

I'd much prefer that we stick to what people do and leave them to sort out how to reconcile it with their beliefs.

CoteDAzur, I believe there are at least two catogories of 'writings' but I can't remember what they are called now. You probably know better than I do. One is probably Hadith.

Well Islam is hugely influenced by culture. I think she is invoking that when she calls herself it. AFter all, she was mutilated becaise of the culture and not Islam by some accounts.

'The "defense" would be that that it is not in the Quran. And if it is not in the Quran, it is not really part of Islam, since Quran says it is all you need to know (or some such). The rest is interpretation, hearsay, window dressing, politics, cultural influence, etc.'

I agree.

You didn't answer. Do you know what Muslim means?

Google it.

I'm not arguing either. Just telling it as it is.

I'm just staing what she says Cote. I can't argue with it.

Again, she can say whatever she wants and obviously does, but if she doesn't believe in God, she is not Muslim.

I know you are a fan of hers, but that is nonsense.

Do you even know what "Muslim" means?

She says it's part of her cultural identity, not her spiritual identity.

monkeytrousers - She can call herself Nefertiti if she likes, but if she doesn't believe in God, she is not Muslim.

onagar - Which "other writings"?

Out of interest Onagar, what do you mean "science is so much better". Is that because Science is more certain?

Onagar, have you read Identity and Violence by Amartya Sen?
He talks about this issue of people outside a religion (eg the British govt) trying to engage with the religion by trying to work out what the religion is like (eg is Islam a 'peaceful religion' or not?) and concludes it is a waste of time - his argument is that we should be focusing instead on how individuals should act as citizens. We might take this to mean, for example, that instead of getting involved in the argument about whether the burqa is a religious issue or not (which Muslims disagree about) we should be focusing on whether or not everyone in a society should be allowed to go around with their face covered up if they want.

One of Sen's main points is that everybody not only has a number of different identities (eg Muslim/teacher/mother) but also decides how much weight we attach to different identities. V interesting & sensible book I thought.

No, because if somone says they are Muslim then even if they do things which go against the teachings we would say that their actions go against the teachings. We would not say that they were not Muslims.

Just asking anyone..

Well Hirsi Ali still calls herself a Muslim, even though she does not believe in god.

A lot of Islam is enshrined in local culture and tribalism, the Hadith, so looking to the Quran doesn't help - unless you are a Wahhabist, which all the terorists appear to be.

Would you say the Sunnah is just as important?

Actually NOT just the Quran which is why I was avoiding the word. There are other writings that are as I understand it interpretations and definitions of what the Quran says.

Where does this get us. Can we then line up those people claiming to be muslims, but who oppress women and do other non-islamic things and strip them of the title?

They will continue to call themselves muslims and claim it's part of their religion. We will criticise and other muslims will tell us once again that it doesn't say that in the manual.

No wonder we don't get anywhere.

"Whenever there is criticism of muslim practices the defense is that it doesn't say that in some particular book."

Not "some particular book" but THE book: Quran, I believe is what they are saying. It is not as if there are a zillion books. Or even a few. There is one.

The "defense" would be that that it is not in the Quran. And if it is not in the Quran, it is not really part of Islam, since Quran says it is all you need to know (or some such). The rest is interpretation, hearsay, window dressing, politics, cultural influence, etc.

You can also say "I don't agree with Wahhabi interpretation" or "I'm not Shia but Sunni" etc.

And yes science is so much better

Oh I'm not even saying don't interpret. (after all it's not as though there are any real facts to go on) Just that people should be aware that if they all use the same word to describe themselves than a criticism may not really be directed at them.

To a certain extent christianity calls the different interpretations quite different things so it's possible to be clearer and say "I don't agree with 7th day adventist baptists of the 1920 reformed church" but even that fails since within that everyone has their own ideas.

Whenever there is criticism of muslim practices the defense is that it doesn't say that in some particular book. That gets us nowhere in talking about it since many are acting on some other interpretation.

How can you not interpret, though? Christianity, for example, is based on texts that were written a long time after Christ died. Bible is a collection of stories, with little idea about who wrote them and why.

Islam is more resistant to interpretation, since Quran is believed to be written by God himself. But since so much of its practice is based on the Hadith, there is again room for interpretation.

If you prefer immutable fact, forget religion and find solace in science. That's what I do wink

I just said this applies to all religions so it's a waste of time to say "but that applies to christianity too"

I'm not sure how else to put it. People defend religions when they are criticised on the basis of how THEY intrepret their religion, but the people criticising are probably refering to some who interpret it quite differently. Can you not see the problem there?

If someone says for example "but muslims oppress women" it's pointless to tell them that the holy writings say that it wrong if thousands or millions of muslims have a different view of what those writings mean.

If you want a christian example it would be daft if I said I don't agree with the Jehovah's Witnesses view on blood transfusions and you said "but the bible doesn't say you can't do blood transfusions" because most christians are not going by the bible and Jehovah's Witnesses really do exist.

I'm not sure there is one hmm

And if someone says "I hate Christianity", you could ask "Do you hate Evangelists, Protestants, Anglicans, Jehovah's Witnesses... etc etc".

What is your point?

Well you probably can't prevent anyone doing evil in it's name, but I suppose if someone says "I hate the muslim religion" you have to ask "which interpretation do you hate?"

Actually, what is happening in Islam is that the progressives are interpreting and the fundamentalists are agreeing with you that a religion should stay fixed in time and should never be interpreted. That Holy Book should be obeyed literally.

The Bible literally tells all Christians to kill any and all witches. Yet I don't see public executions of Wicca practicioners going on in the EU, so there must be some interpretation going on there.

Well I don't know what the solution to that it. I mean Islam is a huge faith covering all different countries and cultures and has obviously absorbed aspects of other cultures and been adapted somewhat. The core belief that there is only one God and that the Prophet (pbuh) was His Messenger is the same everywhere though.

Because people interpret their religion their own way this can lead to difficult situations and this applies to all religions.

X says "black people/gays/women/whatever are inferior according to my religion!"

I say 'That's a vile religion then" and along comes Y who says "no our religion is wonderful. It doesn't say that black people/gays/women/whatever are inferior"

I feel like saying "well don't call it by the same name then"

If your religion allows anyone to interpret it any way they please and use the same name for it then you must expect that name to be tarnished. You can't expect us to be impressed that on paper your religion is pure and innocent if many of the actual people practicing it are doing something quite different.

Well, the history I studied was mostly that of the Ottoman Empire so I'm not that great on European history, either smile

polemic - Why are you surprised there are different interpretations of Islam? Are you not familiar with the different interpretations of Christianity?

Athene - The Quran is as "fixed" as it gets. Muslims believe it is the literal word of God, descended page by page to Mohammad who was illiterate and couldn't have written it himself.

Oh, and even as a Christian, I'm not in favour of a Pope figure.

I think a lot of the bible can also be left to interpretation. For example, some people think that because Christs disciple were all men that therefore it is the will of God that Bishops should be all men. I, personally, feel that is a bit of a stretch and do not support that view.

I didn't actually. I remember the Rennaissance and reformation cos I did A level history. But when the European Dark Ages was, we studied Arab and muslim civillasation which was in its golden age.
<prods brain cells from 25 years ago grin

)

By Riven on Tue 30-Jun-09 09:27:53
"I don't see lack of religion as enlightenment"

Not 'enlightenment' but 'Enlightenment'. As in, that period of history. It is not my fault that the end of the Dark Ages is called Enlightenment.

But you knew that, right?

I can see nothing offensive about the 5 pillars, but do all muslims agree that only the five pillars are the only aspect of islam which is fixed?

Aren't there occassions when men and women are separated? When is this?

polemic - all religions have their different interpretations within them. HUmans would argue about anything!

No-one makes up rules. People look at the teachings - the Quran and Hadith - and try to come to a concensus on different issues. It is a shame that at this point in history the Saudi-financed Wahhabi influence is the post prominent.

I actually think that is the beauty of it. And I think you could say the same for any religion.

"Can I just say, as a Muslim, that, according to my interpretation there are many issues in Islam that are not fixed and are open to interpretation, and many quotes that need to be seen in context."

This is part of the problem. How are non-Muslims supposed to come to a sensible, considered opinion if even Muslims themselves don't know.
Why doesn't some central 'Pope' figure proclaim what is or isn't right. Or would that just be too easy and straightforward. hmm

I'm not sure how you can call it a religion if everyone goes around making up their own rules.

So, men should wear a burqa too? I'm a tad skeptical about "most laws are the same". Which ones are not?

(Incidentally I'm sure my spelling is appalling. Plese feel free to tell me the correct spellings of Burqa, Quran, etc.)

Can I just say, as a Muslim, that, according to my interpretation there are many issues in Islam that are not fixed and are open to interpretation, and many quotes that need to be seen in context.

My view is that the five pillars are fixed and everything else is up for discussion. There are four different Orthodox schools of law within Sunn Islam and even within those there are difference of opinion. I believe that there is room for differing views and indeed in many ways my practices differ from those of Muslim friends.

If I had a daughter I would teach her that Islam does give her equal rights - to an education, to choose who to marry, to divorce if she wishes, to own her own property and to dress how she chooses within the range of modesty.

Sharia law is not fixed and some of it is cultural based unfortunately.
Most rules are the same for both men and women. Worship god, be modest in dress and demenour, donlt lie or steal, don't kill etc etc. All the usual.
There are addtional rules for men about supporting their families.
physical violence towards a spouse is not actually allowed though, even when the husband is being a twunt. And a lot of the rules are 'guidelines' to help you live a better life and there's no punishment associated with not doing it. Women's dress is one case of that. The Qu'ran asks both women and men to dress modestly but there's no punishment for not doing so. No earthly/sharia punishment that is.
But again, what the Qu'ran sets out as Islamic and what hapens in real life are not always the same.

Okay, I'm no expert on any religeous book -- bible, Quran, etc. But I am definitly under the impression that Islam has one set of rules for women and another for men. Is this wrong? Are all these rules cultural and not religeous? Is sharia law not founded in Islam? Can a woman kick her husband in the nuts if he misbehaves and suffer the same punishment which he would receive if he kicked her (with the same force)?

I cannot understand treating the sexes differently. There is no such thing as separate but equal because separate is inherently unequal.

I wonder what the legal position would be of a nursary that let a masked person (no way to be sure it's a woman let alone the mother) take a child?

We know the burqa has been used as a disguise by men so it's hardly a great leap and it defeats CCTV too.

I'm pretty sure they have rules about letting people in a bank wearing a mask.

But there are people in Europe for whom religion does rule their lives. Not just Muslims but Hindus, Sikhs etc.

Just because the continent of Europe has had the Enlightenment and is no longer dictated by the perceived demands of religion to the same extent, does this mean that nobody is allowed to?

The Enlightenment was based on the notion that the perfect society could be built on common sense and tolerance. That soon disappeared with the horrors of the French Revolution and Romanticism.

Mutual religious tolerance is a solution.

I don't see lack of religion as enlightenment of course. And having walked down the high street a bit more secular covering is called for. To me, dressing wihtout everything on show = dignity.

Riven - There was a time when Europeans thought covering up maximum skin was required by religion, which was taken very seriously indeed. This was the Dark Ages, or Middle Ages, if you prefer that term. "The Age of Faith", as it's often called.

The point is that following Enlightenment (~ 17th century) Europe has moved on from that mentality where religion rules daily life and covering up one's skin is considered essential for religious reasons.

Surely, Islam will also have its own Enlightenment at some point in the future and I do understand that this is not a process that can be rushed, but it is highly unreasonable to expect the West to be OK with a mentality that they have shed centuries ago, with considerable human cost.

I did. It was a very long time ago, though.

Back in school, as a teenager. 20+ years ago. We had 1 hour/week of Religion (mandatory - gah! I wanted to be Jewish. They spent that hour in the library). We weren't instructed to read any of the books, but I read them out of sheer boredom, starting with the Quran, just so I would have ammo to pick apart the idiotic ramblings of the teacher.

"everyone should dress as they like"

is really not the same as saying everyone can do what they like with their bodies. hmm

And female circumcision is done to women, not by themselves. Often they have no choice. Also, it is a permanent procedure. Wearing clothes is simply not permanent and is therefore not comparable in the least.

If women are forced to wear clothes they don't want to wear, then that is one issue.

But to force people not to wear clothes they might want to wear is rather dictatorial.

What if I just fancied wearing a bedsheet one day - eccentric yes, but really, who on earth are you (collective you meaning government, people etc) to tell me not to wear what I want? If that's what I want?

I find facial piercings and crocs deeply offensive but I'd defend to the hilt a persons right to wear them. If they wanted to.

I think if you start beefing about what people wear to the extent that you want to ban certain clothes, then you don't have enough to do in your own life.

I have monkeytrousers grin

perhaps you could explain what you meant by dark ages and 'emlightenment' then. Because I don't understand.

The west only became the West after the enlightenment Cote.

Hands up who's read the whole of the old testament?

<hands staying firmly down here>

I don't think you understood what I meant re Dark Ages and Enlightenment. Pollution and wars totally irrelevant.

I was actually talking about the Lot story in the Bible - despite some funny stuff in the Quran about men being superior to women and how to slap your wife lightly etc, there is nothing as bad there as the Lot story in the Bible.

The story of Lot appears in the bible as well and is a story of pre-muslim/pre-christian times that is making a teaching point.

I have read that women over 18 in western countries can have their genitals mutilitated in cosmetic surgery to make them appear more attractive. I think thats wrong too but its not banned.

And I am seriously LOL at 'enlightenment'. I think we're all still in the Dark Ages with the wars, violence, pollution.

I really don't see why peple get so upset with what a woman chooses to wear.

What I meant by that last sentence was that the days when we thought showing skin was sinful are way gone.

"everyone should dress as they like"

This is like saying "everyone should do whatever they want to their body" and yet we forbid female circumcision. We would continue to forbid female circumcision even if it were practiced on 18 year old girls. Because that is just not who we are in the West. It is a question of mentality, and not just a simple surgical removal of unwanted skin.

Similarly, we don't appreciate burqas and I for one would applaud if France were to forbid them. Because this is not a simple issue of "everyone should dress as they like". It is a question of mentality.

The west has already survived its Dark Ages and gone through Enlightenment.

Having said that, nothing in the Quran as egregious as Lot pimping out his virgin daughters to soldiers at his door AND being called a "virtuous man" in the eyes of God smile

"Women are equal in it, before God"

Men are more equal than women, though smile

It has been a long time since I read the Quran, but the impression I got was not one of gender equality.

Same in the West? Now Riven. Please.

Have you actually read the Qu'ran? Women are equal in it, before God and have many many rights.
Unfortunately in real life this doesn't happen. Same in the west too you know.

I'm sorry. Was just poking fun in that one post.

I am interested actually. I can't really get my head round the desire to be treated as a lesser sex when you have the choice to be an equal one.

I do, however, believe everyone should have the freedom to dress as they like -- within reason. And women who WANT to wear a burkha (burqa?) should be allowed to do so. As many people have pointed out there are far more offensive things to wear. Although I do still find it creepy and deceitful if someone does not want to show his/her face to me.

sorry, i thought you were genuinely interested and was trying to find references and the articles for you

As it appears you would prefer to take the p*ss i wont bother

But since each woman in Islam is really only worth one quarter of a man isn't that a one to one ratio?

This times article (2004) talks about 14,000 white British converts based on census figures

There are some mentions of 'for every man who converts 4 women convert' on other sites but as yet i cant find the reference for this

Athene- there a quite high numbers of white women converting to Islam as in they are the largest demographic group of converts but i dont think it is a terrible high number overall, i might search for a figure but i think i heard the figures on radio 4 but cant remember which prog it was, possibly womens hour

I thought he was considering banning it.

Hang on a minute, is Sarkozy actually proposing to ban it? I thought he just made a statement that "it wasn't welcome in France".

Or have I missed something? blush

onagar I actually agree, it needn't demand more special treatment or respect.

I don't sympathise with burkha wearers who wear it and complain about looks/treatment, even sometimes discrimination.

I wear the basic hijab and have come to terms with the fact that I will almost always be treated differently. But it is my choice to wear it and must face the consequences.

As long as it doesn't confer special rights. Like the right to pass through customs with your face covered or the right to ignore dress codes if working then I wouldn't ban it.

But the rest of us may have our own opinion of it and act accordingly. If I saw someone waddling along in a couple of cardboxes with holes cut in them I'd have the right to think that was ridiculous. If people starting wearing batman masks to cover their faces I'd have the right to think that was creepy and steer clear of them. (Especially if there were groups of them like with the hoodies)

If as has been suggested it's just a free personal choice then it demands no more special treatment or respect than any other clothing choice.

That is a very good point Blu, I would like to see what would happen if this issue was taken to a Court of Human Rights.

All the arguments against the burqa - it gives people the heebie jeebies, people thinking it's offensive, oppressive (even when the woman chooses to wear it), dangerous, unhealthy - would not withstand the argument that it is a woman's right to choose what to wear.

"what i wonder is if muslim woman have it so bad then why are non muslim woman converting to islam at alarming rates"

Really, are women converting to Islam at alrming rates? Now that is "alarm"ing!

And back in France, presumably any woman who was not allowed out without full covering would simply adopt a long cloak, balaclava and hoodie in order to maintain some life outside the front door, and women who choose full covering will just do the same.

Then what will Sarkozy ban?

It is unpolicable, and therefore a bad law.

May I just point out that I have been living in the South of France for almost a decade and have not seen any burqas to date. Not one.

leningrad, it is ABSOLUTELY a feminist choice, for the muslim women i know that don the burkha. And none of these women particularly want/expect their daughters to follow suit. Most of them actually go through a bit of discouragement from the men in their lives- I know my dh doesn't even like it when I wear a black hijab because it may 'create unecessary barriers'. I know LOTS of native english white women who are converts to Islam and are not married (so no husbands to blame) who have far far stricter views on hijab than I do. It is the same in France.

Am a bit

at the idea that having a driver and wearing a mini skirt under a shroud somehow makes women better off under a saudi style govt.

If you are happy with having no vote, no voice in life decisions, not being able to have control over where you go and who you meet, not being allowed to have normal social interactions with male friends, having to be careful about who you speak to in case you are thought of as being adulterous, and being punished appropriately, being blamed for complicity in rape, having no control over your children, only being allowed to work in restriced areas, being legally a child, always having to be under the protection of a male and subsequently being at the mercy of their whims, being beaten for showing a bit of hair or an ankle in public then fine. If you really really think it is worth giving up all the freedoms that I take for granted just so a man won't look at your legs (and don't kid youself darling, they'll look at them burka or not) then Ihope you enjoy your prison.

Personally I'll take freedom of movement, the and the illusion of equality any day. Blokes can whistle at me all they like, they are risking a swift, hard object connecting with their soft and tender parts if they do, but somehow I think it's a better way of addressing male sexual violence than covering up and running away from it.

But is the choice a feminist one? Is it about saying 'I am free and equal to all around me and whilst this is the right choice for me, I do not want or expect anyone else to make this choice and am happy for my daughters not to?'

Yes, there are women who do chose, but there are lots in Europe who do not.

we were talking about France and the UK Onager. Of course there are women forced into the burqa in Afghanistan. But we've invaded them to bring enlightenment right?
Here in the west there are women who choose the burqa or niqab or hijab and abaya.

"Those muslim women who DO view it as a symbol of oppression wouldn't touch one with a bargepole"

That's great. So there are no women whatsoever doing things against their will anywhere in the muslim world. That's wonderful news and a wonderful achievement.

I find it laughable that people who don't wear the burkha, or mix with burkhwa wearers, actually think they can account for them and their intentions.

It has nothing to do with reclaiming symbols of oppression. The burkha is just not a symbol of oppression for mainstream muslim women and it never has been.

Those muslim women who DO view it as a symbol of oppression wouldn't touch one with a bargepole.

Okay - sorry if I come over a bit blunt sometimes. Speed posting! smile

Sorry, didn't mean to quote you out of context, just trying to respond to you asking me what 'jury's out' meant.

ERm, excuse me - I said "even if"

MT, you said, "Muslim women are experimenting with reclaiming the sympbol of past oppression on their own terms - just as black people did with the word 'nigger' - it's part of a process of enlightenment towards emancipation."

And I was just pointing out that not everyone agrees that appropriating symbols of oppression and reclaiming or subverting them is the right approach. 'Jury's out' is just a figure of speech.

I really don't get it when people say we live in a 'patriachal' world as if it wasn't also matriachal.

"I find the society that says it's ok to completely cover one sex whilst the other is uncovered, offensive. If both sexes were the same, fine, but they're not."

Im not sure what society you mean here.

What do you mean the jury's out? There's not going to be any ruling on this. Some people find it helpful, others don't. It's not a 'good' or 'bad' issue. It just is.

However offensive people find the hijab, or the society which tells people to wear it - which incidentally I don't believe is a part of Islamic teachings - the intent to offend is not there.

I remember when I went to Egypt once and some friends knew a very strict Muslim man who did not speak to women other than family. I did not know this and went to shake his hand and say hello. He was completely flummoxed, looked down, and said hello but seemed very uncomfortable.

I didn't for a moment think that he was being rude because I accepted that his cultural code was different to mine. In his own way, he was being respectful by not trying to make eye contact.

So I would just like to clear up this mistaken impression that burqa-wearers are in any way trying to cause offence. They live by a different code.

The argument that as they are living in France they should abide by French norms goes against the principle of freedom of expression and belief IMO.

I didn't find that article sour mt, a bit hackneyed maybem can't believe we'res till discussing wolf-whistling in 2009.

We live in a patriarchal world where we're so busy arguing amongst ourselves about what is and isn't OK, that we forget about the big issues; freedom, education and opportunity.

WRT this earlier: "I don't find veiled women offensive. The system that decree's it is, even if Muslim women are experimenting with reclaiming the sympbol of past oppression on their own terms - just as black people did with the word 'nigger' - it's part of a process of enlightenment towards emancipation."

I don't find the women offensive, I find the society that says it's ok to completely cover one sex whilst the other is uncovered, offensive. If both sexes were the same, fine, but they're not.

And the jury's out on minority groups reclaiming terms/symbols of oppression, some are very against it. I reclaim some in the LGBT world, but not others, and would prefer that none of it was necessary really.

Heres a bit of a sour article which illustrates what I was saying earlier women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/ariel_leve/article6544023.ece Want to be notice, but not invisible - what do you do? Blame the patiriachy.

hi

no she wouldnt or shouldnt back away from you and should reply to ur quesion even if she doesnt mix with men

saudi is one of the worst countries for human rights but we arent discussing that are we we're talking about the woman and thier lifestyles

personnel ambition, every saud woman i have ever met has either been a working surgeon/dr or lawyer its like in egypt your either an accountant or dr

anyway i think originally we were discussing the banning of the burkha ???

well i'm not a fan of the saudi lifestyle , i can confirm that saudi women seem to have it all.

on my road there are THRRE saudi families.
Each of the women have had 3-4 children each. They are all here on government grants to complete their education and they have big paypackets which include covering costs for childcare. Their husbands are all house husbands except for one of them as they have a nanny and he goes to college to learn english. One of them is doing a masters in maths, one in biology, and don't know about the other one but she is on her phD.

they all wear burkhas.

i'm actually envious of them hmm

oh and they are quite proud and fierce about wearing their burkhas. i mildly suggested to one of them that maybe she would find her uni ed. easier if she took her burkha off and she nearly bit my head off!

she would probaby tell you Onager. Unless she didn't know. What she wouldn't do is want to socialise with you because genarlly in islam men and women socialise seperately.
DH interacts with my muslim female friends.

>>as a veiled woman we dont wear a veil to make ourselves unapproachable and am sure that once you have interacted with a muslim woman you'll see that they are as normal and talkative as anyone else>>

Bearing in mind that I'm a man are we sure that would work out ok?

If I'm in a shop and ask a wearer of the burqa if he/she knows where the gardarning section is will I get a reply or will she back away feeling defiled?

Gilded cages. It is a good life, as long as you don't have any personal ambition.

Who is facilitating this indolent lifestyle? These people

Doesn't look so good for them, does it? Not to mention widespread child trafficking and slavery.

All Saudis should be covering their heads - in shame.

I watched the big question. Thought the girl wearing the burqa only reinforced my view that covering the face has no place in our society. visual communication is an integral part of communication in our society. You could should respect by covering hair, but face and hands hmm

, dictated by men, not likely to be to do with male oppression. Less is more apparently. Dont you think more men probably wonder what she looks like under the burqa?

did ayone else watch this debated on the 'Big Questions' prog?

Sorry, but none of that convinces me that they have a better life1 Because they have swimming pools and plastic sugery.
I'd trade that for freedom.

The women are better off than us in Saudi because they have more gold, plastic surgery and beauty specialists? Jeez how shallow are you?

I objected to the 'foreigners' thing cos many covered muslim women are english. It was an assumption that all muslims are from ethnic minorities in this country. They aren't.

As for Saudi and Saudi life - you seem (puddin that is) to be confusing rich lifestyles with perfect lifestyles. I have saudi friends and while many are stunningly rich, a fair few are unhappy with the lack of rights for women.

security not securtity lol

my sp is awful sorry

HI

how do saudi woman have it better than us

ok, well generally saudi Arabia is a very wealthy oil rich country most Saudi's are very wealthy, the poverty in saudi usually isnt saudi poverty but immigrants from pakistan or sudan etc

the saudi woman lifestyle is almost like a hollywood lifestyle, they get free education this includes university and they get large government benefits

when i was there, in my own ignorance i met a group of saudi woman and i decided to 'educate' them in thier islam and i said to them ' you know islam doesnt say that woman cant drive, why do u allow this aw to exist (this law has since been changed apparently) they're response 'sister, thank you for ur advice but we dont need to drive, we have drivers to do this for us' fair enough so you see sometimes things arent always as they seem

when i went shopping they hav a whole new spin on hijab, in fact they are extremly glamourous i think they eve have hijab fashion shows and i noticed this alot, in the gold market the guy was telling my dh that in one night a typical saudi woman will spend over 8000 riyals on gold, they have beaches just for woman, parks just for woman, health spas just for woman

equal pay, woman in englad dont even get equal pay and we have an equal pay act, they get long maternity leave huge doweries from prospective husbands and i mean huge

i cant really describe to u how they live or what they do from day to day, nearly all of them have maids, and over 80% of saudi households have an indoor swimming pool, my friend who lives there assured me of this fact while showing me hers lol

th clothes, the make up, the gold, the plastic surgery which is really common over there, the career oppertunities for woman

am not saying its a perfect society, as its not an islamic state and its monarch uses islam to front its human rights crimes, but i think one thing it is known for is the oppression of woman, those woman arent oppressed they are spoilt and when one of them comes along and writes a book about how they are forced to cover blah blah, because i have been there and moved freely over there as a woman, i sort just roll my eyes and say 'another bored, spoilt saudi kid looking attention' am sorry but thats how it is to me

dont believe everything the media spin to you

a saudi woman once told me that i needed to modernise my hair and referred me to a beauty specialist, i was on a religious pilgrimage and tried to tell her i wasnt thinking of my hair she didnt seem to get this, and saudi police woman and securtity officers are scary lol they took my phone

i could go on and on about saudi but i have blabbed enough

night all

'everyone keeps pointing to saudi as if its a representation of muslim woman as a whole well actually believe me on this one they have it better over there than we will ever have it over here in britain and ireland'

I was just wondering if you could explain how

hi

as a veiled woman we dont wear a veil to make ourselves unapproachable and am sure that once you have interacted with a muslim woman you'll see that they are as normal and talkative as anyone else

preception is in the mind not in the clothes

give it a go next time you see a veiled woman, just ask her why does she cover, dont hold me responsible for the answer as like i sid its a personnel thing for each woman but at least it helps open the lines of communication which of course is a two way thing but shouldnt be based on dress

You just don't draw the prophet M iof you don't want death threats you mean?

Tolerance Cote, is a two-way street.

Yes, liberal values are stupid you're right, of course.

Onager, they might wear it to discourage people from talking to them, but I doubt many wear them so's not to be looked at. Quite the opposite. Gives them an edge of mystery that no amount of western fashion can have.

Lenin, the discussion is just beginning. The end is not written. This is one stragtgy of many.

I don't find veiled women offensive. The system that decree's it is, even if Muslim women are experimenting with reclaiming the sympbol of past oppression on their own terms - just as black people did with the word 'nigger' - it's part of a process of enlightenment towards emancipation.

I agree with you on your last point.

I know no-one had said to ban them, yet, mt. Just saying that I think the argument has to be won in other ways, if it comes to it. Just decreeing something like this rarely has the desired effect, although it has worked where 'safety' is concerned: motorbike helmets etc

So, what does underpin all this is the question? If as a white, Western non-Muslim woman, I say I find women being totally covered offensive, in terms of being symbolic of oppression, I'll be told I don't know what I'm talking about, and it's often a choice other women make.

If I'm quiet, I'm colluding with something that I would not want to see forced upon future generations of women.

oh I see you do think that, Riven. So I was right the first time.

No the 'foreigners keep away' was an analogy, but someone (I 'think' it was you, Riven, but I can't swear to it) said that if muslim women wanted to wear something to discourage non-muslim men from speaking to them that was their right.

Cote - I might be mixing up my posters here - but I thought you were a bloke? In which case, do you have an awful lot of experience trying to walk in 5" heels and pointy toes? or is that me making sexist assumptions. Have you tried running for a train in them?

surely thats their right?

I find burquas offensive. I see it as someone saying "I want no or as little interaction with you as possible".

It does not mean "foreigners keep away" - can I recommend that you read a book called "Orientalism" by Edward Said.

err, some burqa weares are english. So it would hardly be 'foreigners keep away'

"garment is offensive if the wearer intends it to be offensive"

I can't read the minds of those wearing the burqa, but it was said on here that part of the point was to discourage contact with people/non-muslim men. If that is the case then I'd take offense at someone wearing a sign saying "foreigners keep away!"

Quattro - Jimmy Choos make a funny noise when you walk but they are extremely comfortable. Maybe you should go up a size.

Why don't my italics work?

"If people find it offensive it says more about their own prejudices than anything else."

Are we talking about burqua here or portraits of Mohammad?

Uh, OK.

One could argue that any kind of clothing is oppression, for both men and women. Adam and Eve were nekked, but we are <all> oppressed becasue we <all> conform to cultural expectations; of modesty, of attractiveness, or whatever.

That do?

grin

puddinmama, Quattrocento was being sarcastic when she that wearing a burqa was "reprehensible" - she was commenting on the hypocrisy of judging the two different types of "oppression".

I would say that a garment is offensive if the wearer intends it to be offensive, which I don't think is the case with burqa-wearers. If people find it offensive it says more about their own prejudices than anything else.

Again, "satirical cartoon, which has grown with democracy" has nothing to do with it. It could have been a portrait, a painting on a canvas, or a stick figure. You just don't draw Prophet Mohammad if you care at all about seriously pissing off all Muslims everywhere.

Freedom of speech is neither here nor there. Wave a red flag in front of a bull, then whine when it attacks, calling the bull primitive and feeing all smug and superior because you have the freedom to wave any flag you want. Why? It is just stupid.

monkeytrousers - Actually, a fatwa is not a legal ruling. It doesn't come out of a courtroom. It is an opinion issued by a scholar.

It is not every day that a fatwa is issued concerning a person living in a country where Muslims are a minority. Burqas are not even an essential part of Muslim faith, so are hardly a topic that would draw great criticism from hardline places like Iran etc. It is ridiculous to assume that Muslim women appearing on a TV talk show in the UK on burqas face fatwas that amount to death penalties. I don't live in the UK, but even I have seen quite a few Muslim women voicing their opinion on your TV. None had scholars asking for their head hmm

just say something random and see what happens grin

<is confused>

<awaits further instructions>

grin

Pudding, we obviouly disagree - lets just agree to disagree.

You are not under attack here.

Lenin, nothing has been banned. Why is this such a hard idea to get through? Its a political strategy to spark debate.

PornC - throw one into the pot to start us off! grin

noidea. am an idle slattern who has been at home 17 years

But surely most occupations have some sort of dress code?

I don't read them but I probably wouldn't work somewhere where I was told how to dress. I'd feel uncomfortable.

I don't know. Would it be similar to the old BA chestnut?

What does happen with workplace dress codes? I assume they don't apply to burqas because it is not a 'choice' in the usual sense of the word?

So, do you consider fashion magazines oppression Riven? Or workplace dress codes for example?

oppression is when someone else tells me what to wear.

Feminist statement or not, banning things is rarely the way forward. I know this is just about having the debate rather than it being a foregone conclusion and the more these things are discussed, the better.

What would particularly put me off banning is the idea that a women might then be 'forbidden' from leaving the home, as it's been argued girls have been withdrawn from education. It's getting to the root of that ability/mentality in a community that is the underlying issue.

But what comes first?

How are we defining oppression?

hi the burkha doesnt always have to be black, i think thats a cultural thing as is the actual design of the burkha

what i want to know from quattrocento is what is an unoppressed woman, as am obviously reprehensible for buying into my own oppression by covering my body

please would like to know

Why does a burqua always have to be black?

"I have never seen a woman 'hobble' about in high heels, in fact, they all seem to be walking fine and very confidently."

We obviously move in different circles. Was with a colleague the other day who was unable to walk from Kings Cross to Euston because of her heels. Farking ridiculous. Clearly is crippling. But if western women buy into their own oppression, I guess that's okay? If muslim women buy into their own oppression then it's obviously very reprehensible ...

Complete double standard IMO

hi

the burkha is a sign of woman lowering themselves hello so is playboy lets get rid of them

what is it that u want me to give u example of as seriously i'd be glad to, your counter arguements to my points dont seem to address my main points which are that well woman should be free to choose what they want to wear or not and that is a feminist arguement right there

the burkha symbolises oppression to sarkozy well thats cuz he's a man isn't omg a covered woman we have to do something here thats just unnatural lol ridiculous

so ur telling me no woman has ever been forced to wear a bikini, do u know how many woman are trafficked yearly for the sex industry, and well muslim woman arent forced to cover either they choose to those that are forced because of culture are the minority

also the bikini issue, i was simply making a point to u in that not most people 'feel' anything wrong with me covering and at times admire it thats the response which i have gotten to my hijab but u cannot deny that alot of woman do feel pressue with the bikini summer months or one holidays etc, yes its there self esteem issues and thier insecurities but these issues seem to be on the increase

and yes society does have its problems which i live in and am a part of so i wouldnt call my society malign, but again to repeat there are bigger problems that we need to address other than woman who cover themselves with a burkha

so are we not an image driven society, heres an idea go switch ur telly on and stick on nickelodeon, i rest my case

First off "The problem of the burka is not a religious problem. This is an issue of a woman's freedom and dignity. This is not a religious symbol. It is a sign of subservience; it is a sign of lowering. I want to say solemnly, the burka is not welcome in France," Sarkozy

I think this is an explicitly feminist statement. Well done Sarkozy.

I've clicked on the 'blogoshere' link that the author says was offensive and found nothing at all offensive in it, which is odd.

Second, when she writes, " An inquiry on burqas wouldn’t last two seconds in the UK because the multicultural model here is more or less happy to accommodate a nation made of many identities who actively claim their differences."

This is simply not true. The debate as we see here, is just as vital.

And she criticises the debate for having an anglo-centric perspective. It is actually and anglo-islamic perspective. Its cultural reletivism at its most pernicious to think a Western country can't disscuss its own needs in a debate about national identity.

"And while I’m sure many politicians will use the platform to spout racist and sexist nonsense" too cynical for me. Almost a self fulfiilling prophecy.

I would like to see the debate free of the 'postmodern' gaze to be honest.

Good info on this here:

www.thefword.org.uk/blog/2009/06/a_few_words_abo

My main concern is that any dress 'laws' are never imposed on me. I know we're not allowed to wander around naked in the UK in public, and that's ok by me, but I'm not forced to dress any particular way and I want it to stay like like for all.

So, that brings me down on the side of freedom of choice, despite the fact I don't like seeing women fully-covered. That choice needs large doses of freedom, education and opportunity so all women to make their own fully-independent decisions.

I don't think it's the responsibility of women to cover up or change in order to prevent unwelcome attention from men. Men are capable of seeing if their attention is welcome or not and it is their responsibility to act appropriately.

OK. Was going to need to rack brain. Phew!

<goes off to rack brain for document I'm writing instead>

Puds

But it's a bit rhetorical.

Are you asking for examples from me or puddin?

Well give me some examples.

If I see a woman covering herself I don't automatically feel that something is not right actually.

The comments that some women wish they could cover up so as not to have to worry about the bikini thing just demonstrate that some women are insecure about how they will be judged physically - that isn't a tyranny, it's a bit annoying - or dispiriting - but bloody hell, life does that to us sometimes. Are we saying that as women we should not have to endure any arkward moments in life? Life is full of them. Getting old and less attractive as a huge one, but it isn't one we can legislate for.

And who is forced to wear a bikini if they don't want to? There are many many alternatives to bikinis. What they mean is that they are pissed off they can't compete. So they drop out of thte game. It happens to us all, but it only reinforces how much appearance matters to us on a very fundamental level.

And if it's just an image concerned society, and you aren't saying it's malign, then what is the problem?? You said there was something "wrong" with image based society. Isn't that another word for malign? These are your words. Define your terms, if not.

The oppression of women by religion - any religion - is a huge issue for a free society.

The point of liberal democracy is that no one makes those decisions, but freedom of choice, freedom of speech, etc is to be lobbied and fought for.

hi

i agree with u porncocktail, what could be offensive to one person could be perfectly acceptable to others

who's gonna make them decision

Moffat, you said that women people should be allowed to wear what they want, provided it isn't dangerous or offensive.

That's the crux of this debate imo. What is offensive and who gets to decide what is and what isn't?

hi

woman being judged by thier appearence has proven deadly and history testifies to that

so if u see a woman covering herself, you automatically feel that something is not right, ok and who is we, you and who else, as i have had at least 10 comments from woman on how they wish they could be a muslim woman for the summer so as they didnt have to worry about the whole tanning, bikini body thing thats seems to have become what summer is all about for some woman, but obviously i dont take them serious but still they think it dont they

i said image concerned society not malign

please do not put words into my mouth,

i was basically pointing out that we should be more concerned with solving the bigger problems that society has and not the big scary issue of woman who dont show thier legs and cover from head to toe

culture emanates from our minds hmmm, we need a good few sociologists on here to discuss that one, i dont 'feel' or 'know' that to be the case but dont know to much about the subject as a whole

It's not that we 'think' it at all though - we feel it - before we've even had a chance to think about it. Good thing is thinking comes pretty quickly after and we can then chose from a lot of possible responses.

Judging is deadly? Now there's an argument with an excuded middle if ever there was one. It's also essential to our survival.

How many women have died trying to abolish judging by appearances? As if such a thing could be possible and if it was enforced, would be a tyranny in itself. People would fight and die for the right to judge by appearances then.

And what is the malign image driven society? Where does culture emanate? From our minds. What we see around us are tangible expressions of human nature. Fpr better or worse.

hi

i meant to say am not trying to be cheeky sorry lol blush

thanks

hi

whats wrong with judging by appearences? pretty much everything if your a woman, infact its almost deadly for us and history testifies to that, the scary thing is that woman now think that, well this is how it should be, actually no it isnt how it should be at all, how many woman have fought, died, protested etc to try and abolish it and along comes the modern 21st century woman with lines like 'well whats wrong with it'

AtheneNoctua- ok i was thinking about this why would i want to cover, well this is how i feel comfortable and i see huge benefit of it for me especially in todays society more now than ever before, if you dont think that there isnt something wrong with the image driven society we live in the two word for you head, sand, and am trying to be cheeky but we do have big problems right now but again the attention shouldnt be automatically on women who refuse to take part and cover themselves the attention should be directed at trying to fix society as it is now, eating disorders up in young men by 30% so i hardly think that woman not showing a bit of skin is an issue of great concern, but like i said the media have made it more than what it actually is.

a muslim woman chooses yes choose, in the majority of cases to cover why should that irk you so much as for those girls who are forced well we are dealing with that from within our own community as well, maybe we should start going into other communities and trying to sort out thier problems

everyone keeps pointing to saudi as if its a representation of muslim woman as a whole well actually believe me on this one they have it better over there than we will ever have it over here in britain and ireland again its a media machine and if u wanted to wear a mini skirt etc u probably could just not in mecca or medinah near the sacred mosques but again ur not gonna believe me are u, believe what the media wants u to believe

inheritance why does a girl get 1/3 and the boy 2/3 well because in islam any money that a woman owns is her own she isnt responsible for supporting her household the husband is so the boy gets more because he will usually have responsibilities even if he isnt married he might have a mother or sisters to support

can a man manipulate a woman into not working well yes of course but non muslim men will try this one and all this isn't a muslim problem its a man problem and has no basis in actual islam

the two female witnesses thats an easy one, this is to protect women through the ages as remember woman used to be burned at the stake as witches and yes now in modern times the two female witnesses might not be considered as necessary, but thats only a very recent thing before any woman testifying could be written of as a liar and thrown into jail or killed so two witnesses adds more protection, remember islam is for all times not just now it certainly has nothing to do with the woman being less than a man or her word being worth less again fiction that people would like to believe, i should know I'm an actual muslim

but anyhow, what i wonder is if muslim woman have it so bad then why are non muslim woman converting to islam at alarming rates, i u say because they have married muslim men then am gonna laugh u off the forum look to america and this one will be proven again as fiction

our community isnt perfect but this isnt the religion itself its the people within it so dont judge islam but what people who call themselves muslims do, if the majority of murderers are white christians we arent gonna come along and say all christians are murderers etc as again its the people not the religion who are to blame.

for the girl who got a fright at clarks, tell u what i got a fright last week when i took my kids to the park by what i saw there but am never gonna tell u by who or what as again it had nothing to do with the person who scared me and how they were dressed but had everything to do with my own ignorance or narrow mind which i hope has been corrected since

take care

yes absolutely mt, and that is where I think education has a huge part to play - but that is a whole other debate.

and it's a huge issue for women who cannot chose but also live in liberal democracy. The message that they do have rights in the wider socisty is a very important one to get to them.

Moffat, I don't agree with enforcing such a law. But I do agree with asking the question if it motivates debate.

It's all about sex! Always is!

Maybe part of it is that a face covering actually levels the playing field for many women - especially plain ones. Al you really need is a nice pair of eyes to get noticed - and their is special attention placed on eye makeup for some isn't there?

I don't see very many birkas and when I do they are usually on married women - women who are removing themselves from compatition.

Also, even though the coverings are meant to make you invisible to men, in western culture they make one even more noticable. And that's what everyone is trying to do basically, in all cultures - be noticed above others.

So from that perspective it can give a Muslim woman who choses to wear a face covering the advantage of drawing looks from others, getting attention, when without the veil she would blend in and perhaps be 'invisible'.

To me the whole issue just boils down to:

What give one human being the right to tell another human being what to wear, as long as what they are wearing is not dangerous or offensive?

I don't like the burqa either, it just looks odd and out of place and I see it more as about making a point than about modesty (for those women who wear it from free will), but these are all subjective opinions. I think the sign of a mature and tolerant society is one that recognises which battles to pick. This just seems like a non-issue.

"But the cultural expectation of Western women to remove body hair"

Female body hair removal is common to many cultures - it is not particularly Western.

The essential problem here is that veil/burqa/niqab wearers present themselves as a hegemony with privileged views on covering up and associated issues, whereas those who don't cover or who aren't Muslim are considered to hold opinions that are invalid. A bit like the way early feminists rejected men's views wholesale, on the grounds that men were not party to the same understanding of the female condition as women (not a million miles from the 'all men are rapists' argument). I think this sort of thinking divisive and harmful, and I have to work hard not to confront veiled women with what I consider to be the error of their ways.

go france..!

agree with all monkeytrousers posts

<<swoon>>

What's wrong with judging on appearances? It's part of human nature. We all, men, women, peahens, judge on appearances.

Some women can opt out of that, as can some men - we can opt out of any high pressure competition if we want. Women who do that aren't judged on their appearance anyway, as are men. They become 'invisible', certainly to the young around them. But then that's another gripe, isn't it. Don't want to compete but don't want to be invisible. It's a trade off. Life is full of them.

but the thing is that if Western women want to "oppress themselves" in these ways and collude in judging on appearances - and of course the women who do all these things wouldn't call it oppression - then if some women want to opt out of all that and not be judged at all on appearance, we might call it oppression but if it is their free choice then who is to judge really?

But the cultural expectation of Western women to remove body hair doesn't make the burqa OK. Two wrongs don't make a right and all that.

If that's oppression then it's women oppressing themselves. We are not passive agents in liculture. We create the culture around us.

I have never seen a woman 'hobble' about in high heels, in fact, they all seem to be walking fine and very confidently.

And it's not just the meeja that would rip them apart, it's the women who buy those magazines.

This is a fact of life. Women compete with one another on looks, they always have done and always will do. It might piss us off when we get older, but that's very different from it being 'oppression'.

Those same presenters never minded being chosen for their aesthetic qualities over plainer rivals in their prime, did they? I don't hear Anna Ford saying she will give her wages back because she was supporting a system of oppression for women when she was chosen for her looks (among other qualities).

And men can't 'dress and they please' - their are dress codes for men, just not high heels (though inserts and cuban heels are an option).

Are transsexuals and cross dressers oppressed when they put on high heels. They are transexual becasue they specifically want to put them on. To compete in a feminine arena.

Yes, there is definitely a very oppressive cultural expectation on women to worry about their looks - dye grey hair, to buy loads of "make me look younger" cosmetics and potions, to have all sorts of cosmetic surgery/boob jobs/liposuction, young girls becoming anorexic from this obsession with being thin, not to mention the fact that women are used in advertising to sell everything from men's aftershave to airlines to cars.

but if you wanted to enter certain professins, you'd be expected to wear heels. There isn't a great deal of choice. But men can dress as they please. As always.

And, as you say, here in the UK we can dress as we choose. So burqas are as acceptable as hot pants.

Thing is, I don't like high heels, so I don't wear them. That's fine in the UK where I can dress as I choose (bar nudity). But if I lived in a Muslim country, I would be forced to adopt a certain dress code.

quite moffat. Its just opression in another form. If the women did come on looking normal and comfortable and, heavens forbid, an extra pound or two, they'd be riped aprat by the meeja. They always look horribly uncomfortable to me and sandals with heels have the veins and tendons standing out and looking hideous.

To get anywhere women have to look a certain way. Tanned, thin, made up and with skimpy clothes (and young. Look at news presenters who are female being dropped once they reach a certain age). Every bit as oppressive as being told what to wear in a covering up form.
Part of the laughter at Susan Doyle was because she looked like an every day comfortable person. She doesn't look happy now with her plucked brows and new hairstyle and new clothes. But she is being moulded into looking a certain way, a way that is considered 'acceptable' for women to look.
And don't get me started about shaving!

It's quite disturbing watching women hobble around in extremely high heels. Another thing I find odd (yes I know I might be rambling) is when you watch things like the Oscars or whatever and the women are wearing tight, fitted, cleavage displaying, sometimes short, or strapless or one shouldered dresses etc and the men totally covered in their suits with hair looking natural and not plastered in artificial colours on their faces.

Even on The Apprentice, the women would be plastered with make-up and wearing really tight (particularly Yasmina) dresses and the men looked quite comfortable.

I cant tell the difference between jimmychoo shoes and any other shoes. They all look like ugly high heels to me. You end up seeing all the bones and tendons.

Immigration is a legitimate political issue. Relegating it to the sidelines as a 'far right' issue will only mean the middle ground is not explored. It is essential that liberals grasp the pros and the cons of immigration. Nature abhors a vaccum and if patriotic liberals don't fill it right wing extreamints will.

It is also a canny political move for the reasons I stated earilr. It insipres debate. Debate that might reach and plant a seed in the minds of women living under strict Sharia in communities in Europe. That they do have rights here. That they have a voice.

Jimmy Choos = foodbinding. Don't think so somehow.

you have to shave arms now? Really?

The more I think about this the more uncomfortable I feel

Yes burkhas are obnoxious for all sorts of reasons.

But have any of you ever tried to walk in a pair of Jimmy Choos? It's a western equivalent of footbinding. Hobbling and disabling women for what?

political as in playing to the anti-immigrant brigade?

What if it's not narrow minded? What if it's political and pretty canny at that

Just thought I'd throw in this quote from Obama's Cairo speech:

"it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practising religion as they see fit - for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear", - he just seems so enlightened and inclusive compared to narrow-mindedness and insularity of Sarkozy. I know who I'd rather have as a Head of State.

Also, it just occured to me, as I was looking at my arms and thinking I need to defuzz them, that Western culture also oppresses women with this requirement to remove facial/body hair, which is actually completely natural but look at the huge industry that it has become.

Cote, fatwa's a rulings of law as I'm sure you know. They happen every day - they might not all make the papers of course.

Regardless of how offensive the cartoons were, the right to offend is part of free speech - and especially by satirical cartoon, which has grown with democracy.

Athene said 'When I see a woman covered up I think "You poor thing. You don't have to do that here.'

I like covering and I'm an English convert to Islam. I don't see why people have a problem with it. I don't walk around and think 'you poor thing, you don't have to look like that' when I see half naked women.

I haven't read Rushdie's book but apparently it was singularly offensive for some reason. You have to admit that it is not every day, nor even ever year or decade, that fatwas are issued against books.

re "one drew a cartoon" - It wasn't the cartoons (i.e. making fun bit) but the facial depiction of Prophet Mohammad that caused the uproar. No Muslim, man or woman, would ever publish such a drawing, if only out of respect for those who believe.

If the Danish paper's editor knew just how offensive it was to draw Mohammad, I believe they wouldn't have published that particular cartoon. As for those who made this a freedom of speech issue, and published and republished it around the world to show support for that Danish paper - it was deliberate provocation. Quite unnecessary and juvenile, imho.

Remember I find all religion equally silly so none of what I have said above is a defense of Islam or its quirks. What I am trying to say is that there is a method to their madness - fatwas are reserved for particularly egregious offenses, and a woman voicing her opinion on the burqa debate in the UK is hardly the pinnacle of insult to Islam.

Also remember that the vast majority of Muslims on earth don't wear the burqa, so it is not like a pillar of Islam.

just cos its happens in practice does not mean its Islamic. The Qu'ran clearly states women have a right to education/work and their own money.

"A man has to provide for his wife and children, any money he earns has to be used to food/clothe/house them, any money a woman earns is hers as her personla wealth it does not have to be used in the same way, obv if she is so inclined she may do so but there is no compulsion to"

There is something inherently wrong about this statement. Firstly, as head of the household, an Islamic man has the right to compel his wife not to work (don't scoff, I've seen many examples of this in practise) So the iddea that a man is compelled to provide and a woman's money is her own is just baloney. Legally, within Islam, a woman has half the inheritance rights of her brothers, her word is worth half that of a man's in court, and legally speaking, she is always under the protection of a man, be it her father, brother or husband. What this means in practise is legally she is a child, unable to make decisions for herself. Hell, even within divorce, depending on which school of fique you adhere to, a woman has can only divorce her husband under strict criteria (adultery for example) or has no rights at all to divorce, whereas a man can just say "I divorce you" three times and the job is done.

Hardly an equal relationship is it? The reason a man has to provide for his wife and children is because they are his property. And we all know of men who are compelled to pay for their children by either legal or moral means, but still manage to skip out of the obligation.

Anyone who thinks this represents an equitable balance of power is just kidding herself.

One wrote a book and one drew a cartoon. I didn't check their gender. Are you saying this would NOT have happened if they had been female?

Seems like splitting hairs.

Like I keep saying I don't think it would happen in this case, but the past can't be rewritten to say it never happened.

None are women whose only 'crime' is to have voiced opinions on TV.

Both of those were applied to people in non islamic countries.

Cotedazur, I did say I didn't think it likely it would happen in this situation, but you can hardly dismiss it when it's actually happened

BBC News Cartoons

BBC News Salman Rushdie

Some people here don't seem to understand that France is a secular country (unlike UK, where state actually has a religion) and hijab is indeed banned in schools and public office, as are all other public displays of religious affiliation.

Perhaps because I grew up in a secular country myself, this doesn't feel odd to me at all.

If you are so adamant about your rights to wear miniskirts and drive cars, you probably shouldn't live in Saudi Arabia. Similarly, if you care so much about wearing a burqa, France is probably not the best place for you. Even before this burqa debate, your life in France would have been severely limited in a burqa, especially re education.

I like covering up AtheneNoctua I wear a headscarf but no face veil, but tbh I dont go round declaring I like doing this as I assume people would take that as a given as i am clearly doing it

The 'faith' reason is a biggy, i dress like this as i believe that it will bring me reward in the hereafter

It makes a special bond/relationship between my husband and i as he knows that the effort i make with my appearance is for his benefit and his eyes only, although i appear smart in public for my own self esteem and pride i (try) to look beautiful for him

By the same token, i expect him to dress modestly, the least amount of clothing i would want him to wear in public is a vest top and over the knee shorts, I would be unhappy with him wearing less as it makes me uncomfortable

I do think that the hijab provides me with some form of protection, at least within this soceity, I dont get builders shouting at me or comments from men which i did get before i wore my hijab

puddin, I am interested in you perspective. I don't understand the desire to cover yourself up. If someone tried to put a heaqdscarf or a burkha on me I would rip it off in defiance. When I see a woman covered up I think "You poor thing. You don't have to do that here." I was once in a Clarks in Dublin and looked at the person who was close enough to bump into me. It was a head to toe sheet of black, and it scared. I this sort of scream/yelp thing and then was embarrased and put the shoe down and walked out of the store. I wonder what she made of my reaction?

Anyway, you are not the first person who has ever told me that you like covering up and I do believe you should have the right to dress as you wish. So, please, show me your perspective. Why do you like covering up? I am obviously born and bred western (non-muslim) girl. So, I'd like to learn your view.

It is actually a pretty 'daft notion'. I am technically Muslim, having been born in a Muslim country, although I have never believed in God - I started out an atheist as a child and am more of an agnostic these days. I have always been very vocal of these views and especially my earlier contempt of all religions. And nobody killed me for it. I wasn't even a little bit stoned, if you can believe it smile

I certainly got no 'fatwa'.

These extreme reactions to outspoken women happen in only a few places on earth, not in all Muslim countries, and certainly not in European countries with Muslim minorities. Saying so is not only 'daft' but also underlines a severe misunderstanding of the concept of 'fatwa'.

Im slow to join the debate but there was a point raised a page or two back that i must answer, regarding islamic 'human rights' that arent regardeed as such in the west

A man has to provide for his wife and children, any money he earns has to be used to food/clothe/house them, any money a woman earns is hers as her personla wealth it does not have to be used in the same way, obv if she is so inclined she may do so but there is no compulsion to

People often talk about the four wifes thing,but if used correctly can provide for the woman, the man gets tired of his wife and wants a younger model, you read the threads on here all the time, he tends to bugger off and not pay child support, the islamic family model would allow the man a second wife but he would still have the responsibility to provide for the first and treat the equally in this provision

If the woman wanted to be divorced and remarried to another man this is also acceptable, divorce isnt seen as breaking a union made by God as in Christianity,

This is the islamic solution to prevent single woman with kids to look after being trapped on benefits because her ex refuses to pay her maintainence

With regard to the burqa, personally i follow the rulings that you should cover your body (to wrists and ankles) and hair/chest/ears with a headscarf, i think that wearing a face veil would not promote a positive portrayal of islam in western soceity

However i wouldnt back moves to ban it as i would worry that slowly slowly my rights a citizen were being eroded, what would be the next step...banning hijab in schools,.......banning hijab?

The argument that 'they choose to live in our country and should therefore acclimatise' is flawed also, im a british convert to islam so have nowhere else to go just so i could dress conservatively, and with regard to those who have immigrated, are children of immigrants i think that we are forgetting the role of empire and the present day effects of that in determining why people do want to come and live here

As for women who are being abused/oppresed i do think that providing support for them is aproriate:

The muslim womans helpline is one such project, it is a number that woman who are in these can of situations can phone and get practical advice from people who are understanding of their situation and pressures the may face, providing the with both the option of practical help (not turning up with a clipboard) and arming them with islamic knowledge so that they can not be told that the oppression/abuse is allowed in islam by those harming them

Womans aid also has some refuges which are designated for asian/black women so that women who do need to leave a domestic situation have somewhere to go to that they feel is safe for them and they wouldnt be criticised for staying in by their commmunity

I'm not sure a fatwa would be declared against a muslim woman saying on TV that the burqa was wrong, but it's not a daft notion is it. We do have religious murder (sometimes called honour killings) here and I seem to remember a lot of stuff about having to protect people who wrote books or drew cartoons.

I wish clothes were just clothes, but they are not. A union flag worn as clothing is a symbol. So is a swastika. Anyone remember 'blackshirts' on the streets of London

In a sane world I could go for a walk naked on a day like today and not feel so sticky, but it wouldn't be perceived as just keeping cool by any woman I met.

Also I seem to recall that when Jack Straw asked to speak face to face with a woman it was called an insult to Islam. So even muslims don't think it's just an article of clothing, but a uniform/symbol.

hi

burkha, scarf, abaya

just clothes at the end of the day

in what way are they not the same a burkha to me a muslim woman is just an all in one but it covers all of you

advantages to me, well i dont ever have to fix it, or pin it and am always covered when i go out

disadvantage, covers my face which i dont do, and looks a bit baggy on it what i do have is a nice chocolate brown all in one that shows my face so its like a burkha with a hole in it lol

i think my main point is here that its clothes end off and why should france decide for me how i should dress

fatwa, well a fatwa is a legal ruling much like a court ruling but the general fatwas that go around well, they are much to be ignored and most muslim woman do as the scholars who release them usually dont have islamic knowledge to prove thier rulings, as obviously they cant. thing is we dont have priesthood in islam, but the scholars are those people well who know more than me on islamic issues, but still i can choose whether or not to follow thier advice, the reason why we have different opinions or fatwas is as a mercy to us as something that i might like to do well someone else might not want to so they will be able to choose what they want to.

am just trying to give u a practicing muslim womans preception on this thats all, i mentioned above more has been made out of a style of dress which gives to me a clear message about our so called 'free' society, thats all

Puddin..... we are discussing the burkha not a head scarf and large dress. The two are not remotely the same nor do they carry the same connotations.

Fatwa in the UK against Muslim women who talk on TV? hmm

hi

quickly sorry

there are no islamic states today in the modern world, if there was one they would be leading the way in human right and even out do the un, saudi arabia is a monarch state and uses islam as an umbrella for thier dictatorship

egypt-so called democratic state

the same with countries that are populated my muslims, they arent Islamic states

hi

I havent read through this whole thread as yet, its late now and will get round to it tomorrow

but anyways

am a muslim woman, born here in northern ireland, and yes i cover , not my face but i wear a headscarf and an over dress like a cloak or baggy dress

if me covering is a sign that I am opressed as in if i do not show myself then am automatically opressing myself then there is something wrong with this society, if we preach democracy here in the uk as does france then they need to follow it through, no one should ever be forced to dress or undress in any way by the authorities and the same goes for a muslim woman, imagine if france came along and said ok now every woman must wear thier skirt above thier knees the whole world would be outraged right, so its sort of the same, if a muslim woman wants to cover so what let her its her bloody choice dont make a bigger issue out of a dress

now am not ignoring the woman who are forced by thier culture or traditions, but although u might not believe me they are the minority well of course ur not gonna believe me, the media would never allow u too, but people like me speak to these girls and make them aware of thier choices and as well educate the older generations etc u get the point right

but what about me, i choose to cover myself, why should a man come along and uncover me why should he make that choice for me,
you can call it was u want oppression, suppression, extremism, fundalmentalism, tell me religion forces me, or a muslim man is behind it all, but at the end of the day, its just a dress, thats it, make it what u want, but to me it isnt a big deal its just my choice.

thats really all i have to say on the issue, as am sorry there isnt really an issue here, france has made an issue out of nothing but by doing so they have taken away a womans choice, what choices next are they going to take.

Well exactly. Women who do come out in public risk deadly fatwah. That's why this debate has to keep raging in the hope that it will 'trickle down' or inflict a daft forced move which reveals the real motives of the religious 'patriachy'.

Don't ya think?

Well exactly Fairy Nuff- funny they couldn't find any women with opinions eh?

mrsruffalo - I saw the 'discussion' on newsnight. The only notable thing was that it was three MEN discussing it...

oh, I realise now. I had one back in the 80's in Greenham common days. Hadn't noticed they were now a fashion item.

scarf actually..and one that symbolises resistance to many freedom fighters world wide and terrorism to others..depends on what side of the fence you are standing

A Palestinian scalf Riven. One (im ashamed to say) considered wearing on campus.

they (we) are arn't we? Good call I say Sarky

I think it's just a statement Dittany.

You thought they would have realised that having two women battle it out might be more relevent eh?

The little ladies don't need to be worrying their heads about something like this. It should be for the men to decide.

Has Sarkozy actually said he's going to pass a law does anyone know, or was this just a statement on the issue?

Anyone see this discussed on Newsnight?
Not as interesting as our discussion of course,and not a woman's point of view to be heard.

Yes, that is something: if it is banned, wearing it becomes a symbol of defiance and rebellion. If it is "normalised" it loses it's political potency.

A good example is the keffiyah. Until about February this year, you could pretty much guarantee that an individual wearing a keffiyah was doing so as a political statement. However, they are so ubiquitous now (and available from Claire's accessories with a delightful heart motif) that they have lost their potency.

thing is, you try and ban something and it will become a symbol of the wests oppression of Islam whatever you intend.
Best to let things die a death all by themselevs.

I don't like those things maybe it's me being ignorant but there is something very sinister about them... just creepy.

To me it's like a portable prison in which Islamic woman must live as they are told to do so, no choice, no freedom nothing!

They should be done away with noone should be forced to wear something which to me is a sign of being dominated. Yes there probably are a few who want wear them but surely it should be a choice and not a requirement?!

So yes I think that when they leave their country they should be removed without fear, personally I would like to see a ban on them outwith Islamic states but that is probably just as bad as making them wear them I guess.

One point that Sarkozy raised is that it is not a religious a requirement. It's a cultural import. He hasn't said that covering your head or dressing modestly (which is required under Islamic law) is not welcome in France; the burqa is.

Saira Khan supports Sarkozy

Or she could have just worn non-skimpy clothes. Very odd to claim that the only alternative to skimpiness is a burkha.

There is a middle ground between burkas and bikinis. Men seem to manage to dress after that fashion every day of the year.

Some hilarious posts here. For example;
"Sarkozy's comments are just another example of the cultural imperialism that Europeans like to inflict on anyone different."

Er, well, he is talking about France, the european country of which he is president.

And this;
"I could see it being quite freeing wearing a burka. I used to feel more oppressed wearing skimpy cloths, because thats what I felt I had to do to get a man."

Really? Couldn't you rely on personality?
I'm sure most of us haven't worn skimpy clothes to catch a man, a ridiculous notion

"did the US sign the Human Rights Act?"

Since it was Mrs Roosevelt's project, it not surprising that Mr Roosevelt signed up to it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights

did the US sight the Human Rights Act?

I actually believe if you want to be a member of the UN you should have to sign the bill on universal human rights.

Riven, I said a picture of Allah since many/most muslims regard this as an unacceptable image/symbol and many wouldn't care about my human right to wear what I want.

"societally approved restrictions and mutilations, like piercings, tattoos and high heels."

Eh?

These are decorations not mutilations and heels enhance ones height. They aren't analgous to foot binding.

Islamic states abstained from sighning the UN declaration of Human Rights

Someone said earlier that putting on a burqa makes you invisible: but surely not in a non-Muslim dominated area? In many areas of London, if you see someone wearing a burqa you notice them. I imagine in say, Saudi Arabia, were most women are wearing burqas you wouldn't, but it's definitely not the case in Britain, and not in France either.

I think one of the main issues is that there is such a difference between what is required of men and what is required of women. There is a family near me, where the father and son happily run around in shorts and a t-shirt while the wife is fully covered up in a burqa. Why the inequality? It goes so fundamentally against what Western culture has been trying to achieve (equal treatment of the sexes). How far Western culture has gone in achieving this, is a whole other debate.

Mumsnet Talk

Mumsnet latest

Mumsnet TV

Useful tools

Tip of the day

Quote of the week

Recipe of the week

Follow mumsnet on...

Mumsnet Talk

Sarkozy says the burqa is 'not welcome' in France