women wearing burqa, this riles me

[southeastastra]

i am sorry to be saying this as i know we should all be equal and embrace diversity but when i see women dressed in this it raises my hackles and i want to get out and rant at them. i can't just think it's okay in the western world.

am i allowed this view on mn?

I'm not prepared to look up and repeat a list of types of face-covering just because you like to nit-pick over words, Fifth. When I say 'covered', please infer 'having the face fully or partially concealed for reasons of modesty'.

Ok, that's fair enough. I think you need to be aware that the word 'covered' applies to women choosing to cover using any type of covering. It's not a case of me nit-picking. Everyone I know uses the word in this way and I wrongly assumed that this would be common knowledge. I misunderstood your comment for that reason.

In that case, I fail to understand why this thread has made you feel less well-disposed to women who cover their faces. Is it because I was pissed off with you and you assumed that my being defensive must mean that I am a woman who covers her face? Does the knowledge that I am not (I'm neither muslim nor religious) make any difference?

It would be more interesting to hear informed feedback & opinions on the concepts of 'modesty', etc, and thoughts on that from perspectives of both feminism and social integration. Posters fulminating without debate are as bad as the OP.

As a feminist, I dislike what I understand to be burqa - baggy top-to-toe robes, with or without face covering - when it's worn for reasons of 'modesty'. This doesn't mean I dislike all big robes, which are often worn for assorted reasons; I mistrust the underlying concepts as others and I have already explained. Those concepts are what the thread's been trying to discuss, I believe.

Face covering is additionally problematic because of the social affront it presents to Europeans. It's both a feminist issue (men don't hide their faces) and a cultural one (alienates wearers from the rest of society.)

Plenty of posters have given you that feedback, you have just chosen to ignore it. Mumof5boys, CrescentMoon, GoshAnne, just to name a few.

I am not fulminating without debate. I repeat, the last few post I made to you have been angry because you were displaying ignorance and I allowed it to get to me. But if you look at my previous posts I have been trying to debate this topic in a respectful manner.

I am interested in why the western perception of feminism is seen as the only type of feminism by so many women on this thread. I have been told that a woman can choose to cover if she pleases, but if she does she is not a feminist. There are covered muslim women who refer to themselves as feminists and are active in the struggle to gain equality for all women. You (collective..) say they are not feminists because they cover. Their covering is for the satisfaction of men because they need to hide their sexuality. They disagree. You say they are wrong.
I'm not going to repeat the arguments for their disagreement as they have been mentioned (and ignored) countless times on this thread.

So my question to you is will muslim women (covered muslim women) ever be accepted by you as feminists?

It's hard to get past, isn't it. I can't speak for all feminists, of any creed or nationality. My understanding, as a feminist, hasn't really moved on from what I posted a while back - I feel it's similar (NOT the same) as body waxing. If you do it knowing you're complying with unreasonable patriarchal expectations, that is 'performing femininity', then you're a feminist compromising with the patriarchal world. If you don't see beyond your feeling that it makes you 'better', that is denying the influence of patriarchy, your choice is not feminist.

While I understand that many people feel their religious customs are a different thing from political feminism, I can't agree and perhaps that is the stumbling block. Most religions are anti-feminist in some ways; I have no idea how observers square that with their political beliefs tbh.

... actually, no, I might take that last bit back. There are ways of being jewish, christian, hindu, muslem, without succumbing to imposed gender constructs or limiting one's interactions with the world at large.

Perhaps a covered muslim woman is denying the inequalities imposed by her religion, or at least choosing to propagate them. I guess I would have a problem with that. I dunno ... and have been so wrapped up in this, I've forgotten to make a cake for guests arriving at five! Argh

Face covering is additionally problematic because of the social affront it presents to Europeans.

'some' Europeans, please. There are valid questions about 'modesty' and certainly of coercion/social conditioning of women (in all sorts of ways, not just this one specific to some Muslim women) but face covering of itself does not affront all Europeans.

Most religions are anti-feminist in some ways; I have no idea how observers square that with their political beliefs tbh.

Different people will prioritise differently. For many, religion will trump any thought of even equality, let alone feminist ideals. It's not black and white - there's a continuum. To take a Christian example as I'm more culturally familiar with it) from 'surrendered wife' through to would-be-bishops (or fully gender-equal already in a few churches eg quakers and URC).

It does occur to me tangentially thinking about that, that women laity in the CofE who voted against women bishops are more worthy of feminist criticism than a woman who chooses to cover herself... but we can't tell who they are in the supermarket queue, and that's 'our' patriarchal culture at work.

'In my perception, we dislike or mistrust the covering of muslim women because it represents a set of beliefs we've worked hard to throw off in our pursuit of individual freedoms & social equalities.'

Thank you for your detailed explanation Garlic but essentially you have just shown exactly what I am talking about. YOU have a problem with modesty because of your own cultural baggage. I appreciate that you have explained the nitty gritty of it so I can better understand where your coming from but just because thats where your coming from doesnt mean thats where I am coming from or other muslim women are coming from. Your perceive things in one way based on your experiences/history/culture and others perceive things in another way and that is fine. The problem is when you are trying to shove your way of thinking down someone elses throat and say that everyone should think as you do as Fifth mentioned in one of her posts.

You talk about getting rid of shame as being something positive but isnt the lack of shame - to be shameless - negative. Particularly when it causes you to not give a damn about how your actions impact others. The Prophet Muhammed, peace be upon him, said:

‘Among the early prophetic teachings that have reached people is this: if you do not feel shame, do what you wish.’ ”

Many of our problems with anti social behaviour in this country (e.g. binge drinking, football hooliganism, drunken fights and vomiting in the street) are in part due to this lack of shame. I was reading in the news earlier this week about the problems with anti-social behaviour they were having in Sandbanks, Dorset an area with homes valued in the millions. Every weekend residents are forced to vacate their homes due to homes there being rented out for wild parties.

'a warm weekend means booming music, naked butlers, prostitutes and young men funnelling vodka down their necks. The residents cower inside. The first of those that dare to emerge in the morning gingerly remove rude inflatables lashed to their railings.'

www.telegraph.co.uk/property/10755038/Sandbanks-locals-arent-enjoying-the-loud-party-houses.html

I think that was the point Cote was trying to make earlier about lack of shame and its results. That is not to say that this sort of behaviour doesnt go on in other parts of the world but that it doesnt occur openly because shame (and its effect on moderating your behaviour) is not absent.

Furthermore the lack of honour in society is also not a positive thing in my opinion. Especially if it means you live in fear of being taken advantage of or ripped off. The banking crisis could also be linked to the fact that some bankers did not have the honour or decency to think about how their greed would harm others. My DH used to work in retail as a teenager and he told me about how so many of his colleagues used to steal hundreds of pounds from the till because they could get away with it. The practice was so widespread where he worked that he was actually looked on suspiciously because he didnt engage in that behaviour. There are countries in the world where you can leave your belongings somewhere and find it again days later. This is the result of people having honour.

My point in the examples above is that honour and shame are not negative qualities in themselves but if taken to an extreme in particular if you link your shame and honour to others they can be harmful. In the same way in this society modesty is also seen as a virtue when you are modest about your achievements. For example most people would consider it crass to boast about your wealth, intellect or worldly possessions. So I dont understand why for some reason when it comes to how you look we are encouraged to instead 'flaunt it if you've got it'. I wonder why there is a difference in attitude to modesty in the way you conduct yourself and modesty in the way that you look. Pride and showing off is seen as something negative in many cultures particularly when you are showing off about something you havent really worked for e.g. the beauty your are born with. I read a treatsie once by a medieval muslim scholar called Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi (who by the way was from medieval muslim spain so was a European), which made me laugh. He said if you are proud of your strength know that the mule, the donkey and the bull are stronger than you. If you feel vain about your speed at running know the dog and hare surpass you in this field (paraphrased)... 'pride is like a trunk; its branches are presumptousness, haughtiness, arrogance and superiority'. In Islam we are told that whoever has an ounce of pride in their heart will not enter paradise. The reason as explained by Ibn Hazm above is that pride leads on to other negative characteristics. We dont link self esteem or self confidence to pride as those are internal qualities and are not visible. Someone might give the impression of being confident but might really be very insecure. Pride is something you show.

In Islam, modesty is considered a very important part of faith. The Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) stated that: “Faith consists of more than 70 branches, and Haya (modesty) is a part of faith.” (Bukhari).

Thats why I reject your other comment that 'muslem women prize 'modesty' in fear of shame'. We dont. Modesty is not linked to shame its linked to piety and to faith. This is the problem with trying to understand religion from a materialistic viewpoint. Modesty is a virtue in and of itself in Islam not because it brings about shame. The Prophet Muhammed PBUH said: “Modesty is part of faith.” "Modesty does not bring anything but goodness.” [ Hadiths of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH recorded by al-Bukhari and Muslim].

Modesty is about so much more than just the physical act of covering up or dressing modestly. The ultimate form of modesty in Islam is to have modesty with God. I was researching a bit about the Islamic viewpoint on modesty and I was struck by the lack of reference to physical modesty. Take for example this.

'Haya (Arabic word for modesty) or Modesty is a special inner quality of the heart, which creates the shrinking of the soul from foul conduct, and helps a person abandon and shun all types of evils and vices. An individual who possesses this quality of Haya, it is obvious that s/he will carry out all the good actions ordered by Allah, because it is a sin not to obey our creator. Similarly, s/he will abstain from carrying out all those actions which Allah has prohibited, because this is rendered a wickedness and disobedience to the Almighty Allah. Hence, modesty is such a branch which is a stepping stone in acquiring other branches of faith. This characteristic of Haya prevents one from behaving wrongly towards others, and encourages others to behave in a righteous manner towards you'.

In this way physical modesty with people for muslims both men and women is a sort of training for spiritual modesty with God.

The perspective you have and we have is completely different also because of our associations with religion. For this I will quote my friend Crescentmoon as I need to get back to real life now but will post again later.

^there is a hostility against religion in western feminists because of the Judeo Christian background that they lived in and the religious cultural battles that had to take place to achieve rights for women in the West. and that hostility is carried to islam. but the Old and New testament stance on women was historically very different to the islamic stance. we have battles with our patriarchy but for different reasons.

as christianity and judaism shouldnt be lumped in with islam for the issues muslim women face, so its unfair to lump islam in with those religions. as a woman educated in my religion i appreciate what Muhammad (pbuh) tried to do even though people changed or ignored his teachings on the rights of women afterwards.

in islam women were not taught that Eve was the one who ate the apple and tempted Adam and caused the fall of Man - so that was not held over women's heads for centuries as western women had to fight against.

and therefore we dont have that greivance against religion as western feminists have.

islam came and destroyed primogeniture and wherever islam spread women were able to inherit from their families unlike in christendom where women only got that right in the 19th century. the problem of eldest son taking all the wealth was still a problem and a theme in Jane Austen's England 1200 years after muslim women were able to have that right.

so we dont have that grievance against religion that western feminists have.

on marrying a christian woman's property became her husbands, and even her identity changed with the history of the whole surname changing. so western feminists had to fight centuries and won it relatively recently for women to have that right to have financial control of their affairs. something which muhammad specifically stipulated muslim women had the right to do with their own wealth and their own property. so muslim women automatically kept their property and wealth after marriage.

so we do not have that greivance against religion that western feminists have.

women were given the right to divorce by the Quran unlike in christendom where women had to fight for the right until the 19th century. not just divorce but the right to spousal maintenance is also mentioned in the Quran. a book whose origins in the 7th century. so the right to leave an unhappy marriage wasnt forbidden by God as in Christian Europe. and the Quran even talked of the rights of women to have alimony if they were divorced for no reason.

muhammad (pbuh) obliged men not women to give dowry which in western europe was an obligation on women and their families to provide for marriage. it is still a problem in many parts of non muslim asia - as peaceful made the point of in her post about asian muslims and culture of the subcontinent. and its a big reason for female infanticide in India and China.

then the Quran specifically prohibits female infanticide - you will say why does it even need to say that. but this is because it was a huge social problem of that time in that society EVEN THEN and islam sought to abolish it amongst the pagans of arabia. but those passages are just as relevant to south asian and far eastern muslims as it is now...

then muhammad (pbuh) spoke of the blessing of having daughters and promised paradise to one who raises and is good to his daughters - its not even mentioned for sons because the social problem of that time, as in europe for so many centuries and still existent across much of the world was that sons were favoured and cherished and daughters were treated badly. again i can call on religious literature to support that and all the points up above i mentioned.

so we do not have that greivance against our religion that western feminists might have.

300 years after islam it was being discussed in europe whether women had souls, the Quran stated men and women and their good and evil acts had the same status and same reward.

in the hadith literature there are several hadith where Muhammad spoke out against wife beating, and those hadith are what muslim domestic violence campaigners and imams in their friday sermons cite when talking about domestic violence in the muslim community.^

Great posts, peaceful.

As an atheist woman (and, I think, feminist, but I'm not so sure anymore...), my knowledge on the historical position of women in Islam is minimal. Your posts were very interesting and informative for someone who supports women in practicing their faith and traditions, so they must be even more informative for those who don't.

By the way the first paragraph was mine everything else is Crescent. Last thing I wanted to pick up on is this:

One thing that really, really bugs me here is that if I visit a predominantly muslim country, I cover. Yet muslims in this secular country seem to resent being asked to observe our cultural habits, at least in as far as dropping the dress code we find upsetting.

The reason we resent it is because we are not visitors. We live here. When are you going to stop treating us as if we are badly behaved guests that you are hosting and start accepting us as part of this society whose cultural habits are just as much a part of the UK as any other British citizens. By the way who defines what the cultural habits or customs are of the UK because Im sure that the UK society is not monolithic and that the values important to people can differ depending on class, region, political leaning (i.e. right or left), religiosity or lack of it, age, gender etc.

I am a white British atheist. If I go to predominantly muslim countries I cover up more. I am amazed at the amount of people that don't.

Britain is no longer a single faith country. We are multi cultural and multi religion. Why would you tell/ask someone to stop observing their religion or culture.

Although an athiest I do enjoy hearing about different religions and visiting religious buildings. The whole concept to me is fascinating. Maybe because I'm an athiest I don't have hang ups about other peoples beliefs.

Surely by now most people will embrace different cultures and stop trying to dictate what others do or think.

For those Muslim women on this thread that choose to cover be assured that not everyone thinks you are wrong for following your faith in the way you choose.

Wow, thanks for all these posts! I haven't read them all yet - guests just gone, cake-fed by the Co-op.

'some' Europeans, please - Yes, sorry.

I've got some heavy-duty catching up to do here. Before reading you all, I'm thinking that maybe I do have a problem with Islam and therefore with its outer manifestation in the covering of women. I manage not to be bothered about more laid-back branches of the faith but, being honest with myself, I am fearful about the spread of sharia (hope I've used the right word ... about increasing adoption of more fundamental rules & customs, which I can't help but perceive as rolling 'fairness' - towards women in particular - back a thousand years.)

I'm just getting my thoughts down here. I really do appreciate the replies, and am sure I'm learning something :) Clearly the faithful and I will never agree on certain basic matters, as I'm an atheist by birth and by choice, but there are cultural clashes between 'east' and 'west' which bear as much examination as we can stand, I think!

Following crescent's info about women's rights of inheritance under sharia, I had a quick look and realised a quick look is never going to do it! Blimey, those laws are complicated - Wikipedia says the inheritance laws were instrumental in the development of algebra

I've just read this: "The Quran does not expressly state the share of the male agnate [this means descended from the male] relatives as such, although it does enact that the share of the male is twice that of a female" ... followed by: "By specifying clear cut entitlement and specific shares of female relatives, Islam not only elevated the position of women but simultaneously safeguarded their social and economic interests as long ago as 1400 years."

I'd say fair enough to that last. We certainly had shite inheritance laws while under Church rule. Few Brits these days realise that we are fortunate in being free to leave what we like to whom we like; it's more common for countries to have laws specifying how an estate must be divided, and I confess to knowing little about them.

bold fail, sorry

Wow- a new sort of moderation........

now I am curious...

"One thing that really, really bugs me here is that if I visit a predominantly muslim country, I cover. Yet muslims in this secular country seem to resent being asked to observe our cultural habits, at least in as far as dropping the dress code we find upsetting."

I think think this is an utterly outrageous statement- on several different levels.

How did MNHQ know they needed to hide that post without looking at it?

Strange days

I understand why that comment provoked anger. I apologise for the offence I caused and am thinking on it.

The comment was made by someone trolling the entire site starting stupid threads, bumping old ones with silly comments and other nonsense.

It's not MNHQ being super sensitive over Muslamic issues

My final post on this thread I think...

I disagree with covering; and I use the term as IHaveAFifthSense defines it. What impact does this have on my life? Very little. My disagreements do not prevent me from making and maintaining friendships with women who cover, and I do not judge them to be lesser than me. We simply make different choices. I am surrounded by women who cover, and I hardly notice. What impact does my disagreement have on the lives of Muslim women who cover? Whilst it should have no impact all all, we do live in an Islamaphobic society and it has a significant one. It contributes to those wishing to legislate against the niqab (and the hijab, in some circumstances) and leads to women having to justify their decision to cover on an almost continual basis. I do not have to justify my choices in such a way; this means debate is unequal.

What I would like to see is a culture in which covering and modesty could be debated with both sides coming from a position of equality, if that's not a complete misnomer; and we are not there yet. Discrimination towards women who cover is rife in the UK, and I have no wish to contribute to it any further.

Yet I cannot agree with the reasons for covering. I want to live in a society where there are things I disagree with, as I see that as the mark of a civilised democracy; yet I cannot agree with the reasons Muslim women choose to cover their hair and/or face. Agreement is not support. I support Muslim women's choice to cover and be free from discrimination. I have not yet heard a reason for covering which I can agree with. Perhaps if I do so, I may choose to cover my own hair or face. And if women who cover are convinced by my reasoning, they may stop covering. In between, hopefully there will be a constructive discourse; unfortunately, mistrust and anger fuel much of the viewpoints and this is hard to have in the current political climate.

In terms of feminism, I maintain that covering for reasons of modesty can never be a feminist act. This does not mean that women who commit non feminist acts cannot be feminists. Feminist theory, whilst flexible, does have constructs; not everything can be feminist; but for a woman to be a feminist, she does not have to commit only feminist acts, but must recognise which acts are a product of a patriarchal society. Arguing that the rights of men must be attended to before considering the rights of women is also anti-feminist.

Thank you to those who have taken the time to explain their viewpoints, this has been an interesting thread. I have been both disappointed and pleased that nobody has put forth a reason for young girls wearing hijab.

The thread hasn't changed my mind, but it has been interesting nonetheless.