On the Hijab and human faces.

I think that the covering of hair by women is linked to the fact that for whatever reason* women tend to have long hair and men don't. And that long hair is seems to be regarded as sexually alluring in a way that short hair isn't.

*try explaining to a child why (in the main) women have longer hair than men - it's bloody hard!

What I am cautious of is ignoring the patriarchal rituals that white women perform while telling Muslim women that they are oppressed because they wear head-dress.

Are you kidding? This is the feminism section, there are loads of threads criticising patriarchal rituals like changing your name, sacrificing your career etc etc.

When we are being told we can no longer define the word woman without including men, women’s rights the world over are looking pretty shit.
I agree, parts of the world are certainly way behind but women telling other women they are offended by their dress sense and questioning why they are acquiescing to their particular patriarchy only serves to divide not join together women of different faiths/ ethnicities. I’m not saying there shouldn’t be a debate but it needs to be done in a spirit of tolerance not hostility.

What I am cautious of is ignoring the patriarchal rituals that white women perform while telling Muslim women that they are oppressed because they wear head-dress.

Seriously? There's no doubt that there's still some way to go in terms of women's rights in the west but are we saying that this stuff is as bad as what happens in women in some parts of the world?

Women are killed by their families because of honour. Women are killed by their families because they're not dressing right. The difference is that they live in places where this is condoned within the societies they live in and in some cases by the laws of those lands.

Fair enough, Floral. It is a difficult and sensitive issue. But debate is good, I agree.

What I am cautious of is ignoring the patriarchal rituals that white women perform while telling Muslim women that they are oppressed because they wear head-dress.

Fair enough. I don't think that was intended by the op - but the whole discussion gets polarised by the assumption that this is what ops like this are 'really' about. It is a sensitive issue, but it must not be above feminist analysis.

Definitely, WeRiseUp. I think the whole institution of marriage is quite troubling when I start to analyse it (lucky I'm not married, eh?). What I am cautious of is ignoring the patriarchal rituals that white women perform while telling Muslim women that they are oppressed because they wear head-dress.

Didn‘t read the whole thread so I apologize if I am repetitive.

I have read reports from french banlieus, where a girl‘s best protection against rape is wearing the head scarf. Similarly, I have heard from women from Egypt and Syria, who have said it is some protection against harrassment. So, I can see in the context of an environment, where you are treated as a ‚whore‘ wirhout head scarf, that wearing a headscarf ‚empowers‘ and ‚frees‘ you. Even though, objectively, you have submitted to some batshit crazy logic of unreformed patriarchy.
That is also why I do not think there is a point in chiding women for wearing the head scarf as ‚not feminist‘ and whatnot. They act in a context and that context won‘t go away, just because they decide so. The women are not the problem, the bigoted men who basically enforce this by their actions are.

They are indeed rooted in inequality and patriarchy but taking part in them today doesn’t mean that the person is necessarily oppressed.

It is worth analysing these things from a feminist position though. Thinking it through. What is this ritual you are acting out? Could it be contributing towards class oppression, even if you don't feel oppressed yourself as an individual? For example, the honeymoon is a symbol of kidnapping that men would do in order to 'get' a wife. In some countries girls are still forced to marry their abductor/rapist because it is too 'shameful' to have been penetrated by a man. Better to get raped by them every day for the rest of her life than bring 'shame' upon her family and not marry him.

It is one of many arms length 'oppression rituals' whuch help to normalise actual oppression. For example BDSM. People who are highly privileged play act at slavery, torture and rape for kicks. By fighting to normalise this ritualised oppression they can normalise and make actual oppression invisible. For example, young women are trafficked into prostitution and filmed being sexually tortutured to supply a demand created by the privileged BDSM market.

It is all worth analysing and unpicking.

I do agree with debate but many Muslim women have publicly taken offence and raised the problem of white women attempting to speak for them or telling them that their viewpoint on why they dress as they do must be born out of oppression. Nothing is simple I guess.

LordProf I suspect that is due to increased immigration in those 30 years, meaning that you’re more likely to see Muslim children. Muslims are still a small minority of the population in this country though. Over 80% of the population is white.

I live in London and it’s common enough. I moved here 30 years ago and it was rare back then. Your really only see the old ladies with their gold bird like masks. You would never see a child with a headscarf either.

All the Christian women who promised to obey their husbands before God must believe in it, surely, because why else say it?

The difference is that one is part of a traditional vow, the other is a direct response to a survey. Furthermore, the Church of England has recognised the potentially negative connotations of 'obey' and has officially stated that it may be omitted from the vows.

The point was driven home to me last year by an exceptionally intelligent young lady (by which I mean, exceptionally intelligent by any standard, rather than suggesting it's unusual for women to be intelligent, before anyone gets their hackles up) who I worked with. Her grandparents are from a non-Arab, Islamic nation and, when discussing her options for career advancement, she mentioned that she wasn't interested in gaining additional education/qualifications because doing so would have likely meant working in another city, where there are more openings at that level.

She went on to explain that her parents had strictly forbidden her from working away from her home city because they wouldn't be able to supervise who she had contact with outside of working hours. What really disturbed me was how comfortable she was with this, despite being otherwise extremely outspoken, she took this limitation as absolutely non-negotiable.

Later in the day, after discussing this with her (she was happy to explain the situation), I was taken aside by our (at the time) resident hard leftist who warned me against 'imposing my culture on others' and threatened to report me for violation of the corporate diversity and equality policy. Being threatened into silence for trying to help another woman improve her career prospects by the same person who'd months earlier been pushing for a company-wide increase in maternity leave was probably one of the most baffling things I've been confronted with.

FloralBunting well you got an opinion from someone with direct experience of it.

I agree there should be discussion but I think an insistence that you are correct, an unwillingness to listen to Muslim women who are telling you their reasons for wearing it, and claiming that similar practices in religions which are predominantly white are a totally different thing, isn’t going to be very fruitful. No woman should be oppressed or coerced into wearing it, but I don’t think it’s quite as simple as saying that wearing it must mean oppression. I could say the same for practices such as getting one’s father to give one away at a wedding. They are indeed rooted in inequality and patriarchy but taking part in them today doesn’t mean that the person is necessarily oppressed.

The reason why you see them in Harrods etc is that they are likely to be wealthy tourists who are not resident here. I go to London frequently (not to Harrods), and a full niqab is a rare sight

I go to London frequently too and it is not a rare sight. I mentioned those areas as it is seems incongruous there but those are certainly not the only parts of London I am in.

what’s the solution then?

Foster a situation where calm, non-reactive discussion and analysis of all feminist issues- including patriarchal religion, traditions, other cultural practices, capitalism, etc, etc, can occur- without branding anyone with an opinion of having some hidden agenda.

Sighs - they always attack the religiously clothed women don’t they? More so than men.

Okay WeRiseUp what’s the solution then?

LordProf no, it isn’t. Not by a long shot. In fact wearing one opens women up to abuse from randoms. I saw a man verbally abuse a woman on the bus telling her to ‘go home’. My friend has also seen a hijab-clad woman get spat at.

Also claiming you are being 'infantalised' by people who point out the injust indignity of your need to acquiesce to your low status, is a fairly standard and predicable retort.

Banning is not the answer. Hopefully with time people will see it for what it is and stop wearing them.

The point I am trying to make is that sexism and exploitation happens everywhere, regardless of religion or race. We choose to see it as particularly bad where the culture is different to our own, which allows us to avoid looking at our own behaviour.