To Hijab or not to Hijab

People still believe that the burka is a "tenet of the faith?" Sounds to me like Saudi Arabia Islam has a monopoly over Islamic discourse in the UK and France, and that's what it is really. I don't understand why this bothers the west so much, even now. Out of all the things that undermine (western) civilization, this is certainly not one of them. If anything, centuries of social discipline and modest practices are being undermined. All these headscarf fashion statements were revived by Muslim women feminist movements, she was practicing her agency by wearing it as a middle finger to liberal pan-Arab communists and westerners.

Silence the preachers and the only ones wearing headscarves in non-Muslim states will be the feminists. How exactly is it against the constitution and basic human rights? No common sense, just more hypocrisy.

"How exactly is it against the constitution and basic human rights? No common sense, just more hypocrisy." Quite easy. Constitution says all human beings are born and stay equal under the law. No discrimination will be done under race, sex and social origin. So, when a organisation, religious or not, is preaching female are not equal, they brake the law. When an organisation say to kill the gay, it is a call to murder, it is illegal, so it should be prosecuted. When a organisation is preaching that some human are superior to others, and the others should be either kill or enslave, this is against the Constitution and human rights.
Illegal organisation don't have right to recruit and to try to spread illegal behavior. Mafiosi can't advertise, can they?
So what is the hypocrisy? To pretend that to walk in a portable jail is a choice, or it is imposed by misogynistic culture? Or to pretend that they freely do the choice? Because funny enough, still waiting the massive exodus of the oppressed Muslim fleeing France after the law was adopted. And, France being the most Muslin populated country in Europe (in you don't include the entire Turkey within Europe), it looks like the Muslim quite appreciate to be protected against their extremists.
You can pretend they are dislike the law, the fact is they don't.

"Muslim women feminist movements" Contradiction in terms. The female voice in Al Quaida or talibans (or Sauddi Arabia, Qatar and others United Emirates) is nearly zero.
What is true in what you wrote is the movement of headscarf was against the tyrants supported by the foreign powers.
However, I wouldn't qualify the Shah of Iran as "liberal pan-Arab communists and westerners", for him not to be an Arab, nor a liberal or communist.

Funny enough, I once came across a headscarf-wearing woman who identified as "queer", "feminist", and Catholic. I asked her if she wore the headscarf as part of her queer identity, but she said that she simply obeyed the Biblical dictum that "all women have their heads covered". Now, this wasn't even as part of the Catholic policy on head coverings during church rites, but as a general practice in all settings for her.

And then there is of course the circus of Haredi (i.e. Jewish Ultra-Orthodox) feminism...

Sometimes, convoluted dissonance and grotesque sanctimony just go hand-in-hand. :shrug:

I am not defending whatever you perceive to be the organization of Islam in your home country, but the scarf has nothing to do with the abuses you bring up. You claim that it is an Islamic tenet, but this is incorrect and in reality it was only established in religious disciplines dating back to 300 years ago at the most - in neglected societies (Jerusalem, Egypt) under Ottoman rule. It's a relatively modern development of the dress code and you can see Iranian society saw through the bs with how many of their women dress today. This entire Islamic train of thought was founded by Abd Al Wahhab, in a place that is not and has never been the center of Islamic research (like Damascus, Baghdad, Persia, Egypt). You're probably tired of hearing this but all the backwards Muslims in your side of the world are a product of Salafist doctrines hardly representative of the religion, it is an extension of Islam no matter how much they claim to be an emulation of old Muslims of the Hijaz.

AQ, Taliban, Saudi Arabia are also a product of that. It is no secret that the matriarch of Qatar's Al Thani family has acted as a head of state on more than one occasion during the tenure of the previous emir, she also wears her scarf like a Persian or north African women so what does that tell you about the reality of an Arab-Islamic regime? Legitimacy of royals in the Gulf rests on the treatment of women, and that legitimacy is highly dependent on the authenticity of Saudi Arabia's Salafi movement.

You are wrong especially about the United Arab Emirates, because in exchange for its backing of Saudi Arabia in pretty much everything and the submission of territory about a decade ago, they have been able to ignore judgements from Salafi clergy. Here are positions held by women who appear on media regularly:

Minister of Foreign Trade
CEOs of a number of companies in Abu Dhabi and Dubai, too many to name
Minister of State
FNC (federal national council) members

Not to mention the journalists and actresses that are driving the longbeards in Saudi Arabia mad.

I meant pan-Arabists mainly in Egypt and Syria, they were liberal by middle east standards. Headscarves were viewed as an outrage in the 60s, the reaction by Arab regimes and education institutions on many occasions rivaled the west's reaction to it.

@Montmorency
Who cares if she's a fool? Let her subscribe to as many things as she wants. Maybe we should slap vegans too.

I'm always happy to get in on a good vegan slapping.

BTW Who the heck cares about the head scarf? It's the face veil and the full on burka that people get unnerved at.

"You claim that it is an Islamic tenet" Not my claim, their claim. When a school forbids a headscarf, Imams claim it is islamophobia. Islam-ophobia, not whahabismophobia, or fashionophobia.
And who do you think finances the Mosque and the Muslim Clergy in France? Saudis', Quataris' and others do. They pay preachers of their interpretation f the Koran, and they preach that women are lesser than man, can't walk without a male from their family, shouldn't drive or work etc. Not my clam, their claim.
And the French Government do nothing because, errrr, oil. And there are allies against the monster these countries created with our help and ours eyes looking somewhere else.

"Minister of Foreign Trade
CEOs of a number of companies in Abu Dhabi and Dubai, too many to name
Minister of State
FNC (federal national council) members" Token parts. What the place of women in theses societies: Zero. Can they vote: No.
I saw an interview of a Iranian Woman who has a official post in the Iranian Government. But in Iranian justice system you need 3 women to counterbalance 1 man. In case of rape, that can be difficult.

I still don't see why to prosecute preachers making speeches against human rights, calling for murders and discrimination, promoting violence and illegal activities is not done, under the pretext it is done by religions.

That's what I'm saying. Saudi Arabia and Qatar (lesser extent) are Wahhabi states. Banning the headscarf (the hijab) is Islamophobic yes. No harm in it and not a symbol of discrimination in a global standard, just France apparently.

As for token parts, I don't know what you mean? Most men can't vote either, in fact only a small portion do in the country. These preachers preach these things because they are from places like Pakistan and were educated where - surprise surprise Saudi friggin Arabia. There's a clear distinction here between the organization of Islam you referred to before and the preachers preaching you once again bring up, which is weird that you brought up since you seem to know the difference between the two. So surely the violation of your constitution and human rights standards stems from the preachers and their financiers?

The only discrimination taking place is divorce process, and even that depends entirely on the comparative status of the couple. If dude is more powerful, he's favored naturally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HitWithThe5

That's what I'm saying. Saudi Arabia and Qatar (lesser extent) are Wahhabi states. Banning the headscarf (the hijab) is Islamophobic yes. No harm in it and not a symbol of discrimination in a global standard, just France apparently.

As for token parts, I don't know what you mean? Most men can't vote either, in fact only a small portion do in the country. These preachers preach these things because they are from places like Pakistan and were educated where - surprise surprise Saudi friggin Arabia. There's a clear distinction here between the organization of Islam you referred to before and the preachers preaching you once again bring up, which is weird that you brought up since you seem to know the difference between the two. So surely the violation of your constitution and human rights standards stems from the preachers and their financiers?

The only discrimination taking place is divorce process, and even that depends entirely on the comparative status of the couple. If dude is more powerful, he's favored naturally.

---

We should ban nonsense like the burka that interferes with the wellbeing of the general population. And any other cultural features that do the same. And anything else that is morally repugnant (such as FGM). If Islam mandates that sort of thing, fine. Let them practise it in countries that are historically Muslim. Not Britain.

Ban the burqa, niqab, jilbab, fgm or whatever. No reason to ban the hijab, does not interfere with the well being of the general population just like a Sikh's turban doesn't. Harmless.

I know nobody brought up the hijab but I thought this was banned in France as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HitWithThe5

Ban the burqa, niqab, jilbab, fgm or whatever. No reason to ban the hijab, does not interfere with the well being of the general population just like a Sikh's turban doesn't. Harmless.

---

I have no idea what the other garments are. But stuff that covers the face is a no-no. Balaclava helmets aren't too popular nowadays either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

I have no idea what the other garments are. But stuff that covers the face is a no-no. Balaclava helmets aren't too popular nowadays either.

---

Hijjab is just a headscarve that covers the hair.

"I know nobody brought up the hijab but I thought this was banned in France as well." Only in public places: The scarf is banned for civil servants, as we have a law separating state and religions. No civil servant is allowed to wear (obvious) religious symbols. You can wear a small cross, David star, hand of Fatima or the little bird for the Protestants (as they were banned to wear a Cross by the Catholic Kings of France, they took a bird as symbol, and it stays).
Burkas are banned.
I think they banned in Belgium as well.

"Banning the headscarf (the hijab) is Islamophobic yes" But, but, you just said it is not a Islamic tenets.:dizzy2:

I have no problem in "fear of Islam" (which what Islamophobia means. Arachnophobia doesn't mean you hate spiders, but you have a fear form spiders).
Islam is a frightening religion, based on racism, discrimination and violent expansion.
Well, it is more a Islamo-allergy than phobia in my case. Or a religions-allergy as I put all religions in the same bag, at least the mono-theistic ones. My knowledge of polytheistic ones is quite limited... Toooooo many of them.

"Most men can't vote either":laugh4:.True enough. They are dictatorships.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brenus

"[B]"Banning the headscarf (the hijab) is Islamophobic yes" But, but, you just said it is not a Islamic tenets.:dizzy2:

---

It's not. Necklaces, prayer beads, tattoos. A trend that keeps changing depending on where you are. Bumper sticker.

Burkas are insane, most countries in the middle east realize this. Can't wear one if you want to be taken seriously.

Quote:

---

Burkas are insane, most countries in the middle east realize this. Can't wear one if you want to be taken seriously.

---

That is arguably why they make women wear them.

"It's not." So banning them is not to be islamophobic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

That is arguably why they make women wear them.

---

Obviously, for the few that do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brenus

"It's not." So banning them is not to be islamophobic.

---

If I'm a baker and I refuse to make a gay couple cake for their wedding, I'm a homophobe. If I force a tranny to take off a wig I'm transphobic. It's simple, doesn't have to be a tenet to be a popular contemporary component of the religion.

"It's simple, doesn't have to be a tenet to be a popular contemporary component of the religion." So, the hidjab is part of the Islamic Faith, or a symbol of it, or a component of it. Then, when the law forbid to show your religion in your place of work, being a civil servant, banning it it lawful or in neutral places as schools. His piece of clothing is a symbol of a religion. Do we agree?

Your laws are your laws, entirely up to the French if most of them want this. But to say that the hijab itself is a violation of human rights or promotes gender discrimination is wrong. I know many are simply born Muslims, wearing that has become more and more a cultural thing rather than a symbol of piety. The reason it's always associated with the religion is because it is still viewed as a strange thing. Islam had been somewhat synonymous with that culture and is essentially its foundation but that is slowly changing, although treating it as merely a religious symbol with no place in secular society is stripping people away from personal preference and their character.

"But to say that the hijab itself is a violation of human rights or promotes gender discrimination is wrong." Never said that. I said it for the Burka. However. the hidjab is part of a uniform imposed by a religion that advocate for gender discrimination, racism and violence. And as part of a religious uniform, it is rightly banned from schools, and all administrations where religious neutrality is part of the job.

"I know many are simply born Muslims" I did as well, in France. And the actual return (relatively) is not due to freedom of choices but by fear of reprisal by extremist nuts.
Again, there is NO massive exodus of the oppressed Muslim masses from France.
France, as recent events proved it, Charly Hebdo and the train, are seen by the Muslim religious extremists, and rightly so, as the idea to fight, intimidate and destroy. The danger for these extremists is not the "christian" countries but the ones with no god, as it can give idea to their masses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brenus

However. the hidjab is part of a uniform imposed by a religion that advocate for gender discrimination, racism and violence. And as part of a religious uniform, it is rightly banned from schools, and all administrations where religious neutrality is part of the job.

---

It does not deal with racism. Even though it advocates for these other things you mentioned it does not impose any dress codes (not on men or women) even though it inspired the forms of the veil and has these problems. In fact, it's imposed by a bedouin samurai mentality towards women.

Even if it’s inspired by the religion why would it make a difference what that religion promotes, the fact that it is inspired by a religion is why it’s banned. Banning a cultural attire in school that is inspired by Islam is a restriction on the freedom of an individual. The ban is an obstacle to independence, identity, and free-thinking. This is a discriminatory uniform education environment and shows a lack of regard for the alternative perceptions or potential developments of the veil. Why should schools enforce non-religion on a personal level? As long as it doesn’t go beyond the personal, there’s no harm in it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HitWithThe5

Your laws are your laws, entirely up to the French if most of them want this. But to say that the hijab itself is a violation of human rights or promotes gender discrimination is wrong. I know many are simply born Muslims, wearing that has become more and more a cultural thing rather than a symbol of piety. The reason it's always associated with the religion is because it is still viewed as a strange thing. Islam had been somewhat synonymous with that culture and is essentially its foundation but that is slowly changing, although treating it as merely a religious symbol with no place in secular society is stripping people away from personal preference and their character.

---

France does not allow Religion in public - the end.

In any case, the Hijab is actually a Byzantine garment originally, or closely derived thereof with roots in Pagan Rome.

Given that many Muslim women who wear it also wear strappy shoes, lipstick and even show their ankles it can't be an issue of modesty.

The Hijab is a way to say "look at me, I'm Muslim, I'm different" and France doesn't allow people to be different, you have to be French.

Me - I think a lot of girls wear it today so Muslim boys won't think they're Christians or Jews, so they feel safer.

There’s no absolute. It can be modesty, national pride for some, or just fashion. From what i’ve seen some Muslim girls have begun to replace them with hats and beanies, it’s the idea not the veil itself. You can’t ban a mentality and that’s why it’s foolish to ban it in schools because you are placing restrictions on freedoms.

Quote:

---

The Hijab is a way to say "look at me, I'm Muslim, I'm different" and France doesn't allow people to be different, you have to be French.

---

So uniformity and nationalism in schools and campus? More like this is a violation of human rights and constitution just as much as religion is. Bigotry on both accounts, it’s also religious discrimination. Islam is not universally understood among muslims to have the authority to interfere with national pride or identity. Presenting the ban with the reason that what the dress represents is in violation of France's standards as Brenus sees it is contradictory, and i doubt the ban was imposed for that reason.

Quote:

---

Me - I think a lot of girls wear it today so Muslim boys won't think they're Christians or Jews, so they feel safer.

---

and a lot of people are learning to get the sand out of their vags. Societal/family pressure is irrelevant to the cloth itself and its widespread voluntary uses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HitWithThe5

There’s no absolute. It can be modesty, national pride for some, or just fashion. From what i’ve seen some Muslim girls have begun to replace them with hats and beanies, it’s the idea not the veil itself. You can’t ban a mentality and that’s why it’s foolish to ban it in schools because you are placing restrictions on freedoms.

So uniformity and nationalism in schools and campus? More like this is a violation of human rights and constitution just as much as religion is. Bigotry on both accounts, it’s also religious discrimination. Islam is not universally understood among muslims to have the authority to interfere with national pride or identity. Presenting the ban with the reason that what the dress represents is in violation of France's standards as Brenus sees it is contradictory, and i doubt the ban was imposed for that reason.

and a lot of people are learning to get the sand out of their vags. Societal/family pressure is irrelevant to the cloth itself and its widespread voluntary uses.

---

When in Rome, do as the Romans do. Or get out. Considering how Britons and other westerners have been treated in the hellhole called the middle east, I think we're justified in insisting on our standards being followed here. Or more relevantly, given how some of these transplanted middle easterners have insisted on their right to impose their standards here, I think we're right in insisting on our standards being followed.

In Soviet Britain, you only wear tracksuits and dinner jackets.

Deal with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

When in Rome, do as the Romans do. Or get out. Considering how Britons and other westerners have been treated in the hellhole called the middle east, I think we're justified in insisting on our standards being followed here. Or more relevantly, given how some of these transplanted middle easterners have insisted on their right to impose their standards here, I think we're right in insisting on our standards being followed.

---

Sorry to say that that is a yuppy attitude considering the generalizations and value judgements. Britains and westerners have been treated with the utmost respect in the wealthy or functioning states of the middle east. They receive higher wages, religious adherence is never enforced (can eat publicly in Ramadan, don't have to adhere to overly modest dress codes and can wear miniskirts, and their religious holidays are observed). Christmas is also celebrated regularly in a number of Arab countries. The middle east is not a total hellhole fortunately, there is light in the pit.

There is a lack of cultural mutual respect and it's because of the conflict the west has with the worst of the middle east. This puts the progressive parts of it in a situation where it is wrongly disrespected despite the display of improving tolerance. I just want to make clear that I'm not against "do as the Romans do" but no need to go full totalitarian on it, the lack of respect for ethnic origins is unreal, and quite arrogant for harmless cultural features. A total shutting down of a different culture shows that same lack of respect, perpetuates hate and exclusivity. You know as well as I do they will never be truly French, so how are they to advance in your society without a marginal and compatible source of self-esteem...?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

The Hijab is a way to say "look at me, I'm Muslim, I'm different" and France doesn't allow people to be different, you have to be French.

---

Why not ban goth and satanist clothing in schools then and punks and all the other people who dress distinctly to look different?

I actually think that hijabs can actually look very nice, that may also be a reason why some girls wear them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HitWithThe5

Sorry to say that that is a yuppy attitude considering the generalizations and value judgements. Britains and westerners have been treated with the utmost respect in the wealthy or functioning states of the middle east. They receive higher wages, religious adherence is never enforced (can eat publicly in Ramadan, don't have to adhere to overly modest dress codes and can wear miniskirts, and their religious holidays are observed). Christmas is also celebrated regularly in a number of Arab countries. The middle east is not a total hellhole fortunately, there is light in the pit.

There is a lack of cultural mutual respect and it's because of the conflict the west has with the worst of the middle east. This puts the progressive parts of it in a situation where it is wrongly disrespected despite the display of improving tolerance. I just want to make clear that I'm not against "do as the Romans do" but no need to go full totalitarian on it, the lack of respect for ethnic origins is unreal, and quite arrogant for harmless cultural features. A total shutting down of a different culture shows that same lack of respect, perpetuates hate and exclusivity. You know as well as I do they will never be truly French, so how are they to advance in your society without a marginal and compatible source of self-esteem...?

---

Liberal democracies have certain fundamental decencies that allow for a fair bit of individuality. British culture doesn't demand much for an individual to be regarded as British. It doesn't even make the demand, although I think it should, that a UK citizen should think of themselves as British over some other entity. Just about the only thing it does demand is that any individual should respect others. Even this minimal requirement is failed by those idiots who bring their form of extreme Islam here. Muslim culture is welcome as another eating culture, and source of harmless cultural quirks. Just like any other culture. It's not welcome as an alternative state.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Given that many Muslim women who wear it also wear strappy shoes, lipstick and even show their ankles it can't be an issue of modesty.

---

Modesty doesn't necessarily entail covering head to toe. The Mormon religion has strict modesty standards but lipstick, strappy shoes, and showing your ankles- wearing knee length shorts even, is acceptable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Muslim culture is welcome as another eating culture, and source of harmless cultural quirks. Just like any other culture. It's not welcome as an alternative state.

---

The hijab fits under the category of those harmless cultural quirks, not a representation of the desire to build a state or an opposing identity that trumps nationalism. Maajid Nawaz is a Muslim Brit but I'm sure he values his nationality first and foremost.

Might as well get bent out of shape by an Amish beard as a Muslim hijab.