So banning the Burka - freeing women from opression or taking away free choice...?

The relevance is that the burkha is a symbol of segregation.

White elderly people are victims of the nuclear family and being squeezed out and not by their want to be separate.

The point is just because misguided and deluded women believe their oppression is a matter of their own expression and choice it does make it so. Society today has no place for a nicab or a burkha. The whole notion of covering up to please one's maker and shield men from their own lustful advances makes my teeth itch.

"Priests said buggering young boys was God's work, doesn't mean that it is so." I do not think thst is true at all, I think they new perfectly well what they were doing was wrong hence keeping it a secret/hidng it.

I have not left yet Sakura, but I do realise bit by bit that what I thought was feminism clearly is not quite correct and I do not think I can bring much to the debate anymore.

My understanding was that feminism aimed at giving women choice of what life they want to lead. Now after reading this thread and the other one Riven got me interested in, I feel the actual meaning is that if you do things according to your faith (without being bullied to do so even) and you do not earn squillions of money you cannot be a feminist.

I hear/read women on those thread telling me I should not live by rules imposed according to them by men (to me they are imposed by God, not by men but as said previously my choice not everybody's)yet they want to impose there ways on me. It seems that I am really letting the side down by having chosen not to work, while my children are not al of school age,and cover my head but until someone explains to me how I will feel happier following Xenia's and others way rather that the one I chose for myself I do not think I will adhere to the feminism much more.

My life has not been imposed to me by any human of the male species and I do not intend it to be imposed to me on by any woman either.

Priests said buggering young boys was God's work, doesn't mean that it is so.

It is a conveniently oppressive and misogynistic attire. All too often you see men and boys in shorts and t shirts and little girls, really young girls, and women covered up. Absolutely disgusting. Why would an eight year old need to be modest, it stinks of really vile connotations about the sexuality of young girls.

It's extremely funny to find a femininst thread full of a load of women debating the extent to which ridiculous clothing rules which are hardly if at all in the Koran and are imposed by men (and in some countries ordained by law without choice for the woman).

The reason we can condemn women who take the wrong interpretation is because the result of that stance is that they will find it harder to bef eminists. It is definitely harder to become british prime minster and wear the Burka. You'd trip up as you ran around, you couldn't easily play tennis with other world leaders in one etc etc. which illustrates how ridiculous the clothing rules are. They aren't even islamic in my view. It is very very much a feminist issue as is walking behind a man and needing the views of 2 women to count as one man in court. The Koran was trying to improve in its time and its day the rights of women, of everyone. Jesus was too - all equal, prostitute and non-prostitute, rich or poor, male or female. But men of the day subverted the word of God. All good women know this and all major religions have feminist movements within them and God if she/he exists is very much behind their cause.

Cote, if you're reading an interpretation of the Quran you're reading someone else's interpretation of the meaning of what is written. I dunno, you're multi-lingual right (I think), have you ever read a beautiful poem in your language only to read an english translation and it has lost it's meaning the nuance, altho you get what its about it's not the same?

The Quran instructs for women to cover their beauty, draw their outer cloaks to cover their torso and jewlery... now interpret that as you will.

I think it's two or three schools of thought interpret it as covering everything hence the niqab, and two rule that leaving the face and hands and feet exposed is fine.

Btw, I'm not claiming to be a Quranic expert or a scholar. I'm asking that we dont condemn eachothers decisions to dress how we feel is correct.
I've had people (I do not know form Adam) come up to me and tell me they have a mozlem friend who doesn't wear a hijab, so I'm just showing off, or actually I got up i nthe morning and decided on my clothing to specifically irritate that one person whom I had never seen before ever

posie - It is a religious issue because Muslim women who cover themselves say it is.

What you want to say is that Quran doesn't say to cover their faces, and I agree with you on that.

How many women that cover completely have non muslim friends?

fuzzy - Don't sidestep the issue.

You said Quran can be interpreted as telling women to cover their entire faces, like in a veil or a burqa. Then you insinuated that those of us who don't read it in its Arabic original are missing the real meaning.

Which is where I asked you to explain to us, assuming you do read Arabic, HOW the Sura Nur can POSSIBLY be interpreted as to mean "cover your entire faces".

And I ask it again now. If you can't answer, I assume you realize that such an interpretation is quite impossible rationally, and can only be evidence of a very active imagination.

Slug, you'd be surprised, I used to be related to one I'm friends with one as well.
I was taught by one, and I have a neighbour who is a female scholar.

Female scholars are approached all the time for rulings and problem solving, I think the Islamich shariah council has a female scholar too.

MY ex sister in law, teacher and neighbour all cover completely, my friend observes hijab, and I have no idea about the lady at the shariah council.

I want to study up to it as well.

"the instructions in the Quran are to cover with the outer clothing, the extent of covering is debated amongst scholars."

How many of these scholars are women?

No, no evidence that it's religious. People choose it, especially in this country, to shout out that they are religious but it is a cultural invention. It is divisive and segregating. How many people would approach a woman wearing a burkha to have a chat? That shield basically says non muslims, fuck off.

Cote, I've said the extent of the covering is debated, at no point havbe I ever said one thing is correct and another incorrect, the extent to which you cover or not is completely between you and your creator, nothing to do with me or my knowledge or lack thereof.

You clearly have your own strongly held views, I don't dispute them, I do think tho that unless one is a scholar one should refrain from condemning a Muslim from practicing their faith.

It is of course a religious matter, as the very English converts on this thread will no doubt say shortly.

This is an issue that makes me . The face covering is a cultural, not religious, matter. In modern day Britain there is no place for such things as Burkhas that inhibit integration.

Are you not going to explain, with your knowledge of Arabic, HOW the Surah Nur can POSSIBLY be "interpreted" to warrant covering up women's entire faces?

Cote, the instructions in the Quran are to cover with the outer clothing, the extent of covering is debated amongst scholars.

However, that does not mean a woman who covers completely due to what she believes to be the correct interpretation of the meaning is wrong. You can't go round saying well this is what I've read and my understanding is this and I'm right, it's fair enough for you, and IMHO it is perfectly correct for a woman who covers completely who has researched and arrived at her own conclusion. Providing she is practicing the niqab of her own free will.

You could have read the passage in Surah Nur and decided it is only attributable to the women directly related to the Prophet (pbuh), or that you dont need to wear anything if you're bald and dont wear valuables, or whatever, your interpretation does not make anothers incorrect.

I reckon the fact that so many Muslim women who practice hijab/niqab in the face of such outright hostility from non-muslims, we at the very least should give eachother a break.

I've never been remotely moved to ire over anothers clothing choices, altho I was a bit put out to see a chapp strolloing nekkid past Topshop one summers day (I could have done with some sort of warning, he was not a pretty sight!)

fuzzy - This thread is about the burqa, which does cover the face.

To the extent that anything can be "interpreted" if one is inclined to twist the meanings of words, I guess you can say that women who cover their faces (with veil or burqa) are doing what they think Quran is telling them to do. Try as I might, I can't see how those few sentences in the Quran can possibly be interpreted thus. Quran is very specific about what to do & what not to do, and if God wanted women to cover their cheeks, noses, eyes, etc He would have said so. Just as easily as he said to cover your bosoms.

I don't read Arabic, so yes, you could have an insight into the exact meaning of these words that I wouldn't. So please, do share. What exactly is God saying in the Quran that could possibly warrant covering up your entire face and even your eyes in a burqa?

OK, so supposing that I accept that women are wearing hijabs etc voluntarily:
They wear this garb because one man over a millenium ago said that his imaginary friend told him so.
This one man wrote down sexist rules that you consider still relevant, condone and live you life by.

As a feminist atheist I shall stop being worried that fellow women are being oppressed and, instead, conclude that you are deluded and irrational.

gorionine,
Don't leave! How boring it would be if we all had the same viewpoint.