Burka

[mazHur]

@ Optimisticnad

you seem to have forget about the liberties granted to gays!! Are gays better than women, burqa-clad or other wise?? No.


@ JBI

<<<<<The Burka has only one effect - it denies a woman an identity outside of the realm of daughter, wife, and mother.>>>>>

Obviously you do not seem to have any idea about the status of women, on particular the one held by Islam.

Woman is a mother....she is superior to her son.(man)
Woman is sister.....may or may not be superior to her brother depending on her age and qualifications.
Father(man) is superior to his son (man) or daughter (woman)
Wife Woman) is equal to her husband (man) depending on character.
Husabnd (man) is superior to his wife (woman) depending on his character.

Islam grants the greatest respect and dignity to women so much so that she is not made a 'public commodity' to be seen and enjoyed by all!

<<<<<<<<<<<,,
You can't justify a practice just because it is widely practiced >>>>>>>>>>>..

If this is false, as you surmise, then your democracy is also a sham for being wide spread, all great religions of the world are sham because they are 'wide spread'; all doctrines, all schools of thought, beliefs, attitudes are fake because they are 'wide spread; all stars and galaxies and the cosmos are false because they are 'wide spread.

Conversely, all is sham that is not wide spread, eh?
You do not have a case!

I told you circumcision of women may be a custom in some African countries but it is not what Islam tells them to do. I never heard of it in India, Bangladesh and Pakistan.
I think it is also not practiced in the Far East or South East India.

You aspersions as to <<<<immigrants foregoing shunning their cultural identities, and taking the liberty of brutally sexually assaulting their daughters, and either preforming the procedure themselves, or shipping their daughters back to the mother country for a quicky, before marital age. >>>>>>is totally false, frivolous nonsense, skuttlebutting!

[JBI]

I told you circumcision of women may be a custom in some African countries but it is not what Islam tells them to do. I never heard of it in India, Bangladesh and Pakistan.
I think it is also not practiced in the Far East or South East India.

When did I say it was a Muslim custom? I said it was a traditional cultural practice, which it is in many parts of the world. It just so happens, for the most part, those countries, such as Egypt, which has a rate in the 90%s, happen to be predominantly Muslim.

As for your refuting of my notion about wide-spread practices and criticism, your argument lacks the logical coherency necessary for me to make a response, given that it is completely irrelevant, and uses a rhetoric gimmick of making the argument seem absurd as a purposeful way of sideswiping the major question.

Woman is a mother....she is superior to her son.(man)
Woman is sister.....may or may not be superior to her brother depending on her age and qualifications.
Father(man) is superior to his son (man) or daughter (woman)
Wife Woman) is equal to her husband (man) depending on character.
Husabnd (man) is superior to his wife (woman) depending on his character.

Good, thank you for clearing it up - woman is mother, sister, wife, but where is woman as woman? Where is woman as individual? Where is woman as something outside of these spheres? Who cares if scripture calls her equal, clearly the Burka is denying any sort of equality outside of these perimeters - she can be equal as wife, she can be equal as sister, and as mother, but what about as person? Or is she too impure to be anything but these things? Where is the personal identity? You deny the self, and then praise the decision.


Your post is quite absurd - you seem to be trying to contradict my arguments by offering me proofs as to how they are right - I know perfectly well about the position of women in Islam, and, as you quite simply put it, Mother, Sister, Daughter, Wife - the Burka protects all these things, perhaps, but what about something else? Could you go up to a human being, and reduce them to such fixes? Is that normal?

[Scheherazade]

F i n a l___W a r n i n g

Please do not discuss each other.

Posts containing personal/inflammatory comments will be deleted without any further notice.

[mazHur]

@ Optimisticnad

you seem to have forget about the liberties granted to gays!! Are gays better than women, burqa-clad or other wise?? No.


@ JBI

<<<<<The Burka has only one effect - it denies a woman an identity outside of the realm of daughter, wife, and mother.>>>>>

Obviously you do not seem to have any idea about the status of women, on particular the one held by Islam.

Woman is a mother....she is superior to her son.(man)
Woman is sister.....may or may not be superior to her brother depending on her age and qualifications.
Father(man) is superior to his son (man) or daughter (woman)
Wife Woman) is equal to her husband (man) depending on character.
Husabnd (man) is superior to his wife (woman) depending on his character.

Islam grants the greatest respect and dignity to women so much so that she is not made a 'public commodity' to be seen and enjoyed by all!

<<<<<<<<<<<,,
You can't justify a practice just because it is widely practiced >>>>>>>>>>>..

If this is false, as you surmise, then your democracy is also a sham for being wide spread, all great religions of the world are sham because they are 'wide spread'; all doctrines, all schools of thought, beliefs, attitudes are fake because they are 'wide spread; all stars and galaxies and the cosmos are false because they are 'wide spread.

Conversely, all is sham that is not wide spread, eh?
You do not have a case!

I told you circumcision of women may be a custom in some African countries but it is not what Islam tells them to do. I never heard of it in India, Bangladesh and Pakistan.
I think it is also not practiced in the Far East or South East India.

You aspersions as to <<<<immigrants foregoing shunning their cultural identities, and taking the liberty of brutally sexually assaulting their daughters, and either preforming the procedure themselves, or shipping their daughters back to the mother country for a quicky, before marital age. >>>>>>is totally false, frivolous nonsense, skuttlebutting!

PS: sorry I have to clarify that all human beings are equal, including women.

[Gladys]

So this discussion is merely based on what goes on in some Muslim-dominated societies. ... The saddest part with this discussion is that non-Muslim Westerners (not all of them) are always debating out from a premise that are based on their cultural background.

Of course, we all accept that coercion to wear the burka is abhorent, but even as a Westerner, the anti-Muslim bias - a cultural blindness - in many of the posts is blatant. We should see that the West's perspective is just one among many.

From thesouthasianidea.wordpress.com/2009/08/13/burqa-principle-prejudice-and-preference/:

...Bertrand Russell’s observations on the tyranny of the majority (from Political Ideals, 1917) where he discusses “matters of passionate interest to certain sections of the community, but of very little interest to the great majority. If they are decided according to the wishes of the numerical majority, the intense desires of a minority will be overborne by the very slight and uninformed whims of the indifferent remainder…. The tyranny of the majority is a very real danger.

Good, thank you for clearing it up - woman is mother, sister, wife, but where is woman as woman? Where is woman as individual? Where is woman as something outside of these spheres?

While I understand your 21st century Western perspective, JBI, I know that other perspectives, perhaps more valid, are also held. And worldwide, this Western perspective is probably in the minority.

Bottom line: we tolerate pink hair and tattoo, piercings left right and centre which I personally find distasteful, youth gang in hoodies, practically nude twelve year olds....and we're up in arms about the burka? Where is tolerance here? Young girls parading half naked, no one bats an eye, two women walking down the road in a burka - oh no! panic button..

As you suggest, Optimisticnad, a subtle double-standard is evident in those that would ban the burka outright. Nevertheless, I would argue that in selected situations, of employment and otherwise, the wearing of a burka may well be prohibited.

[JBI]

While I understand your 21st century Western perspective, JBI, I know that other perspectives, perhaps more valid, are also held. And worldwide, this Western perspective is probably in the minority.

That doesn't justify it, and, quite simply, if a family is wanting to become part of the West, as immigrants are want (just take a look at Europe in general as an example), then why should the West put up with something that goes against it? Who is fighting for the rights of the home team here? If they don't want to remove it, what business does someone have going into a country where it is deemed abhorrent?


But I have said it before, the most vocal criticism against the Burka comes not from Western countries, but from Muslims themselves - the bulk of the public planning to have it stopped as a cultural practice is not restricted to just a Western perspective - Turkey is a good example, of a country in transition in that regard - but even from within the most traditional areas, one constantly hears a voice going against such practices - to what extent then can we accept this as only a Western bigoted downplay on Muslims? Is nit now Muslims selling themselves out to the West to? Fannon would argued it could at times be seen that way, but what if it is something else that is the cause, perhaps a general want of progress, of better life.

[Scheherazade]

JBI> What is your definition of a country? And nation?

All people living in the same country need to share same religious beliefs to be part of that nation?

[mazHur]

In 1969 I visted Kabul and found all Afghan women, muslims or non-muslims, there clad in shirt/blouse and skirt in compliance to an Imperial edict by the then King of Afghanistan, Zahir Shah. As soon as the King was overthrown the same women switched over to their national dress of shalwar-qameez and burqa! This shows that any attempt to bring a 'forced cultural change' is not effective at all!

Burqa faded out in urban Pakistan some 20 years ago but the trend for it has mysteriously picked up again! I recall people deeming a burqa clad women as whores or women of dubious character...rightfully or wrongfully. But nowadays the burqa is regarded as a symbol of chastity by the same people who shunned it! What brought this change has yet to be studied. Educated women are opting for it in greater numbers voluntarily as compared to women in rural or backward areas where women is bound to cover herself from the imperatives of prevailing environment there. Since men are responsible for the safety and security of women in Islam (there is no 'genuine Islamic state' in the world to take up this responsibility....and even if it there like Saudi Arabia it stands second) their women have to take 'precautionary' measures to conceal their charm lest trouble starts. Feuds over women inherently extend to generations in a feudal society and there is hardly any end to blood shed.thus in a weak state women feel secure by wearing burqa or anything of the sort to stay away from sowing the seeds of a vendetta. Moreover, in tribal areas girls are wedded at an early age so that the responsibility passes on to her husband and kinsmen.

The reverence given to the status of women is also evident in Baluchistan where the bloodiest feud would come to an end if any woman from the opposing groups steps in and asks for 'ceasefire'! Of course no one would listen to a man!

[blazeofglory]

I think Burka is something that degrades womanhood or it belittles their existences.

I think Islam is a great religion, and represents a great mass of people and it engendered great art, literature and music. I am really moved by Sufism for it was through Islam it got its birth and culminated in something that is above religious divisions.

But when it comes to belittling womanhood with a Burka I feel really sad and it is something subdues humanity. '

It is of course fundamentalism, and fundamentalists are also simple humans and I feel equanimity. These fundamentalists need to be pitied fr they were programmed or indoctrinated.

Free will ? No it does not work mostly. We are victims and we cannot undo anything. We are specs blown by the wind of time and space.

I really am against Burka with due respect for Islam.

[JBI]

JBI> What is your definition of a country? And nation?

All people living in the same country need to share same religious beliefs to be part of that nation?

There are countries that describe themselves as Muslim countries - is it wrong now to call them that? Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, essentially all of the middle east (Israel included) - those are all States with a State religion in place - it is no crime to call them what they describe themselves as.

Likewise, Canada, virtually all of Europe, and the vast Majority of Asia, China included, are secular countries. Why then should their citizens not recognize the secular values of their society.

I don't like nation labels, as you know, but nationalism is totally tied to this issue - it has been since the early 20th century, with the fall of the Ottomans.


As many of you know, I am somewhat of a Canadian Nationalist (if such a thing isn't an oxymoron), and am prudent in my desire to establish Canada as an entity beyond a curiosity, or "America's Hat". But that has nothing to do with my moral responsibility, and I willingly criticize my country when I do not agree with policy, as is normal in a democracy. There is no reason why self determination, and a sense of self cannot be cultivated within the sphere of secularism, and acceptance.

In 1969 I visted Kabul and found all Afghan women, muslims or non-muslims, there clad in shirt/blouse and skirt in compliance to an Imperial edict by the then King of Afghanistan, Zahir Shah. As soon as the King was overthrown the same women switched over to their national dress of shalwar-qameez and burqa! This shows that any attempt to bring a 'forced cultural change' is not effective at all!

Burqa faded out in urban Pakistan some 20 years ago but the trend for it has mysteriously picked up again! I recall people deeming a burqa clad women as whores or women of dubious character...rightfully or wrongfully. But nowadays the burqa is regarded as a symbol of chastity by the same people who shunned it! What brought this change has yet to be studied. Educated women are opting for it in greater numbers voluntarily as compared to women in rural or backward areas where women is bound to cover herself from the imperatives of prevailing environment there. Since men are responsible for the safety and security of women in Islam (there is no 'genuine Islamic state' in the world to take up this responsibility....and even if it there like Saudi Arabia it stands second) their women have to take 'precautionary' measures to conceal their charm lest trouble starts. Feuds over women inherently extend to generations in a feudal society and there is hardly any end to blood shed.thus in a weak state women feel secure by wearing burqa or anything of the sort to stay away from sowing the seeds of a vendetta. Moreover, in tribal areas girls are wedded at an early age so that the responsibility passes on to her husband and kinsmen.

The reverence given to the status of women is also evident in Baluchistan where the bloodiest feud would come to an end if any woman from the opposing groups steps in and asks for 'ceasefire'! Of course no one would listen to a man!

It is actually quite possible to bring a force cultural change, and quite easier than one suspects - foot binding was abolished in essentially one generation, Martin Luther shook the church's foundation to the core, and destroyed it - social change can happen quickly.

As for these proofs, I thank you for the support to my arguments. Women needing to conceal their charms and be married off early lest they start a feud is clearly backward beyond belief by my reckoning, and I challenge any woman here to state that they would support their current country becoming culturally like that, where women are married off at a very young age, and denied exposure to anyone who isn't their husband. I stand by, and await someone to say, and justify, why this is somehow tolerable, and to say that they, as a woman keep in mind, that they believe this system is not only justifiable, but is one in which they would like to live.

[mazHur]

JBI> What is your definition of a country? And nation?

All people living in the same country need to share same religious beliefs to be part of that nation?

You cannot compare the culture of the rich countries with those of poor countries. Both types of cultures have their own implications, socially, anthropologically and economically. Can someone in America or the West imagine to live in a place where families live under one dollar a day ??

If you study the social and cultural history of the West or the Americas you will be shocked to see how they used to live. It took centuries to bring a social change...whereas places like Pakistan have a short history of 62 years, out of which 33 years went to Martial Laws!

Notwithstanding above, veiling has minimal concern with society or culture and perhaps this is the reason that educated and civilized Muslim women in the West are fastly opting for some sort of 'veiling, be it hijab, naqab, scarf or burqa. By suppressing their rights I think we would be entering yet another age of social and psychological oppression to women for ages to come.


As for Shehrzade's question, <<<<<<<<,
All people living in the same country need to share same religious beliefs to be part of that nation?<<<<<<<<<<<<<my answer is No. People in a country can share different beliefs and faiths and yet try to live in harmony as far as possible. Have a look at India where multi-religious population exists.....generally peacefully allowing grievances and fights to occasion at times. Why?? Simply because of unfortunate manifest
'loathings' by some for others

<<<<<What is your definition of a country? And nation?<<<<<<<<<

I do not think religions goes in the making of a nation in a territorial premise. Pakistan was created in the name of a separate homeland for Muslims of India and originally consisted on East Pakistan (present Bangla Desh) and West Pakistan (athe existing Pakistan) . This ideology failed in 1972 only after 22 years of its creation! Apart from other reasons, the underlying reasons were language, ethnic , cultural, social and economic differences and (alleged) oppression of one by the other wing.

Situations may be different elsewhere but this is what actually happened is recorded by modern history!

[bigben]

Wearing the burkha or the yamalke or a pectoral cross is simply none of my damn business. Nor is it the schools business or the state's business (as in France). Tax supported religious symbols are banned in the USA. Personal symbols are not.

Of course, I think it's demeaning to women. It's still none of my business.

If you're going to walk around naked, I'll be right over.

[mazHur]

If you're going to walk around naked, I'll be right over.

If 'walking around naked' was a universal custom I would. Because it isn't I doubt if you will be able to do that in places other than the West. Even there people will watch you with awe!

[blazeofglory]

Women with a Burka on are really suppressed. No educated persons think this is right. If they do I think they are oppressors.

[mazHur]

@ Blaze

It's really not like that.
Veiling with a burqa, hijab, scarf or a gown is a woman's choice to dress up, why should someone have objection to her 'natural' right to choose?
Of course, enforcing burqa or scarf on women isn't fair....as done in some Middle Eastern Kingdoms through the instrument of regal edicts.