Let Women Speak Free Your Face Event

[IwantToRetire]

We will all walk to Speakers' Corner at 2.00 and read out the testimonies of women who speak about the niqab. I have something visual planned so we can elevate the voices of women who exist in a fabric prison, often, of their familys construction.

On the day I will hand out copies of testimonies for women to read at the heart of Speakers' Corner. We need as many women as possible to attend. This is your chance to show you care.

From https://www.letwomenspeak.org/event-details/let-women-speak-london-free-your-face-2025-06-29-13-00

Had not heard about this, but now there are a number of responses to the event such as this one:

In Keen’s , Muslim women are portrayed as passive, voiceless, and trapped by family, culture, and male insecurity. The veil is a “fabric prison,” and the women behind it are posited as unable to speak, act, or even “feel sunlight on their skin” without male permission. Their desires, commitments, and beliefs are never considered on their own terms. Instead, they are rendered legible through the eyes, imagination and political desire of Kellie-Jay.

The few “testimonies” —attributed to women in the Middle East—were anonymous, unverified, and clearly cherry-picked. It’s hard to believe that Keen’s public pronouncements on “Islamism” elicit nothing but thank-yous and confessions of helplessness. Of course, as an activist and propagandist, she’s under no obligation to include
counterarguments or opposing views.These testimonies function as a moral shield, allowing Keen and Let Women Speak to deflect critique with the familiar refrain: “These aren’t my words…” Indeed, her X/Twitter feed is awash with anonymized grateful wards, caged in fabric. These women are cast as mute victims—unable to interpret or change their own lives—and, by implication, grateful and dependent on these liberated English roses to speak for them.

https://morbidsymptom.substack.com/p/veilface?

DM coverage https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14858363/Moment-womens-rights-campaigners-Niqab-veil-free-face-London-protest.html

(Sorry if there is a thread about this already but couldn't find anything. If there is one please post link. Thanks.)

Do you think it's possible to address "some men' without specifying which religion, which controlling behaviour in which circumstances?
Sounds like whataboutery to me. This thread is about the niqab and giving a voice to women. I still don't understand why you think women are not entitled to that voice.
Yes there are other kinds of anti women rules etc in religions but I can't think of more egregious ones than in Islam and Sharia law.

Some men use religious reasons for terrorism. It may be only some men but every single one of us lives with the terror. That's why it's called terrorism. Their religious beliefs have them inflict terror on us. The same men and the same religion terrorises women with these prisons on their person.

We can all see what this terrorism looks like.

There's nothing irrational or phobic about fearing this terror.

The 7/7 bombers holy beliefs are the same holy beliefs that trap women in these individual prisons.

I feel that terror every time I get on the Jubilee line, get on a plane and every time I see these prisons on women.

Calling me racist is nothing.

No I meant to write non-atheist, apologies. What I meant was the UK (IMO) is becoming ever less tolerant of religions they see as and races they see as “foreign”.

I know it’s the law to wear a burka in Iran and Afghanistan. Is it the law anywhere else?

Today in parliament.
"I asked the Secretary of State for Justice - Shabana Mahmood - to condemn a Muslim matchmaking website that enables men to search for “virgin brides” seeking “under 35 shy untouched spouses” or a second or third wife. Judge her response for yourself. There is absolutely no place in Britain for this."

https://x.com/SarahForRuncorn/status/1942562390240903672?t=3na4rOdPtuXMRyRGJbEY0A&s=09

Khadija Khan gives an excellent interview.

We talked about a UK-based website that gives Muslim men instructions on how to procure virgin wives and beat them into obedience. We are living in precarious times…

https://x.com/GBNEWS/status/1941855905118879776?t=S-YeXnnVCvDP8WfAJMIbEA&s=09

I can't say off the top of my head but you can look it up. I know there are an increasing number of Islamic countries who have banned it.
But if a country is secular in terms of it's laws it doesn't mean women have a free choice and are not coerced by religious leaders and family members.

Is it? What's your basis for this assertion?

A man has just been jailed for setting fire to a Koran. The new Hate Crime Act in Scotland extended to conversations in the home. One could say the UK is becoming less tolerant of criticism of religion.

Do you take up the problem of religious men controlling women with those religious men who control women?

Would they listen to you or allow you to say it?

You don't need to put foreign in quotation marks.

They are foreign by definition.

of, from, in, or characteristic of a country or language other than one's own.
"foreign currency"

Islam is foreign to the British Isles.

What exactly should we be tolerating that we don't? Practices such as polygamy, FGM, muta marriages, honour killings. Please be specific - what do you want me to tolerate you don't think I do.

@TomeTome It’s about how SOME men use religion to control women

...and the particular control we are talking about today is the niqab and the burka. Now describe to us which men are placing women in a fabric prison without using words that describe their ethnicity or religion. Impossible, isn't it?

The grooming/rape gangs scandal has taught us that if you cannot describe where the problem might originate, then you cannot begin to solve it.

I am no longer scared of the -phobia or the -ism words. I stand for women's rights. All UK women, of all ethnicities and beliefs.

https://theweek.com/60339/things-women-cant-do-in-saudi-arabia

Bit hard to find info on Saudi's rules for clothing. There's this:

'The black abaya (a full-length loose fitting robe) and niqab (full-face veil) were once emblematic of the restrictions placed on Saudi Arabian women, and those who strayed from this dress code were subject to harassment from religious police. However, Crown Prince bin Salman has repeatedly emphasised that the abaya and head coverings are not mandatory. In a 2018 interview with US news programme "60 Minutes", he said that Saudi men and women alike should wear "decent, respectful clothing" in accordance with cultural and religious norms, but that, beyond that, clothing choice was "entirely left for women". That perspective is reflected in a public decency law introduced in 2019, which requires "modest" dress for both sexes but only specifies “loose clothing” that covers both elbows and ankles.
The vast majority of Saudi women continue to wear the abaya and a head covering. Patterns and colours are becoming a more common sight, as are open abayas over the top of Western-style clothing.
Footwear choices are "generally unrestricted", said Fact Crescendo, and "make-up is widely accepted, with an emphasis on subtle, sophisticated looks".
There is, however, "no verifiable evidence" from official Saudi government sources, news outlets, or bin Salman himself about a further relaxation of clothing rules for women, despite claims that "have circulated about a new announcement in 2025".'

This would probably have more value if there were actual muslim women involved.

That photo really is “eeeesh”.

Oh I see it was organised by Posie Parker….

I think there is a way of Western Feminists to support muslim women’s rights activists (both those who are Western and also outside the West.)

White Saviourism is not the way to do it though.

And what is this?????

It’s not the law to wear the Burkha in Iran.

Posie Parker isn't a "western feminist".

I think this is true but specifically very intolerant of Islam and any presentation of Islam specifically.

Which I find weirdly has the opposite effect. A lot of muslim women I was raised with and know I find are turning more to their faith as they feel more underattack.

One of my close friends is muslim and one of 6 (4 girls). Growing up none of the daughters wore hijab (my friend’s mom did). Now 3/4 have chosen to.)

My post called her a feminist? I would not call her something she herself says she is not.

I was pre-empting those who accuse those who abhor White Saviour tactics of not caring about non-white women.

I am sure many of the women in this event think of themselves as saviours of poor oppressed muslim women but this really is not the way to do it.

And what is this?????

Is that a genuine question or just another opportunity to show disdain for white women?

There's an ongoing discussion on X about being English.

The purpose of your search is to smear English people as racist for the discussion.

It's part of the islamophobia and racist combination commonly use to vilify normal white people in the British Isles.

White saviourism is another smear. We could consider that racist but the racist word is now so debased by its use to protect child rapists it should be beneath any decent person's dignity to use it.

Why would you think me questioning her tweets are about “showing disdain for white women”?

Unless you think to be a white woman is to think “London no longer feels like London, Paris no longer feels like Paris, Edinburgh feels like Edinburgh” (and the huge massive dogwhistle therein.)

I did not “search” for those tweets. They were literally linked in the thread? I could not have searched them as I refuse to use Apartheid Clyde’s platform.

Women are not required to cover their face in Iran.

Also the issue is not her highlighting other women’s issues. It’s the complete lack of representation from the women she claims to be championing.

This response sums it up perfectly:

This display wasn’t about solidarity with Muslim women. It was a parade of moral self-congratulation—a cathartic, theatrical venting of cultural anxieties and a displacement of contradictions onto the figure of the veiled Muslim woman. Once again, women are pressured to conform to dominant Western norms of intelligibility. The fantasy that Muslim women must be rescued—unveiled—to reflect the English (or French, or American) idealised image of itself is not new. Veilface is a Orientalist reboot.
Let Women Speak’s Selective Hearing and Veil Fetish

Let Women Speak claims to stand for women’s rights and free speech. But when it comes to Muslim women, they have a serious selective hearing problem. There is no meaningful attempt to understand veiling as a complex, situated practice—one that can be religious, cultural, political, familial, or personal. Nor is there any effort to recognise British Muslims, including the minuscule number who wear the niqab, as part of the national fabric. Instead, the veil is held up as a visual marker of irredeemable otherness—a threat to the imagined moral and cultural coherence of England. Muslim women are no monolith. The meaning of the veil has a diverse geography and history.2 There is no consensus, no lock-step behaviour, no uniformity in the practice—whether in the UK or anywhere else.

Islamophobia exists. Men who attack and rip the hijab off muslim women are absolutely islamophobic.

Maybe it's the disdainful things you write.

I have not written any “disdainful things” towards white women.

Criticising white saviourism is not criticising white women (or men) as a collective.

The Muslim women who are messaging KJK seem happy that she is broadcasting their messages.