 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Iggore Customize This !!!
Great Old One Joined: 01 Aug 2005 Total posts: 530 Location: Shmocation Age: 28 Gender: Unknown |
 Posted: 06-10-2006 22:41 Post subject: Cover her face? Taking or banning the Veil |
 |
|
|
Original title: Jack Straw against the muslim veil
Straw in eye of storm for asking Muslim women to remove veil
| Quote: | Jack Straw, leader of the House of Commons is in the eye of a storm today for suggesting to Muslim women to lift the veil during consultations at his constituency office.
Straw said that for the past year he had been asking women who visited his constituency office to remove their veils so that he could see them face-to-face.
Straw said he always made sure that he was accompanied by a female member of staff and so far no constituent had refused to lift her veil.
“The Muslim community does not need lessons in dress from Jack Straw,” said Nazreen Nawaz, of the radical Hizb ut-Tahrir organisation. “He has once again shown that for Cabinet ministers it is open season on Muslims and Islam.”
Sheikh Ibrahim Nogra, of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: “On the one hand he says this is a free country. On the other, he is denying that free choice to a woman who chooses to wear the veil. “Does Straw mean that people should give up certain cultural and religious customs and practices simply because a vast majority of the country do not share them ? |
Again, what is the justification behing the veil and the burqa? I know its a religious one, but what is it? For one does not simply chose to dress like this because it is practical and empowering. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| JamesWhitehead Piffle Prospector Joined: 02 Aug 2001 Total posts: 5779 Location: Manchester, UK Gender: Male |
| Posted: 06-10-2006 22:55 Post subject: |
|
|
|
I kept going to Jack Straw's surgery just to gaze lovingly on his nose and lips.
Who grassed me up?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ghostdog19 |
| Posted: 06-10-2006 23:00 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Quite a lot (but it should be pointed out not ALL) of Muslims believe that Islamic scripture requires a woman to dress modestly. It's called hijab but its open to interpretation and notably these are worn when in the presence of men other than those related. It's not the only religion to acknowledge such formality. Often when in greece or any of its greek island, greek orthodox monastaries require that women (often holiday makers with shoulders and ankles showing) are required to coverthemselves with a shawl when in the grounds or in churches (though I don't know of one that asks you cover your face but its a similar attitude to modesty and for similar reasons).
Generally the view is that this signifies oppression or coersion (spelling?). It would appear that there are areas where it is compulsory and mandatory to dress in such a manner, which I guess brings us back to the point about interpretation.
Jack Straw is not alone in his thinking and measures have been implemented before to remove the veil. In Turkey (a Muslim country), they are prohibited in official buildings such as Universities, government offices and schools.
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1153386329523
Last edited by ghostdog19 on 06-10-2006 23:03; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Iggore Customize This !!!
Great Old One Joined: 01 Aug 2005 Total posts: 530 Location: Shmocation Age: 28 Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 06-10-2006 23:03 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| But women dont need to be protected from men in this manner (or is it the other way around?), not in western societies. Certainly not to the extend of the burqa. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Rrose_Selavy Exquisite Elemental
Joined: 07 Jan 2003 Total posts: 1940 Location: Stranded in Sub-Atomica Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 06-10-2006 23:07 Post subject: |
|
|
|
This is one take on it:
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
Why Muslim women wear the veil
By Martin Asser
BBC News
Opinions vary on how far Muslim women must go to cover up
Muslim radio debate
The Koran, Islam's holy book and treated as the literal word of God, tells Muslims - men and women - to dress modestly.
Male modesty has been interpreted to be covering the area from above the navel to below the knee - and for women it is generally seen as covering everything except their face, hands and feet when in the presence of men they are not related or married to.
However, there has been much debate among Islamic scholars as to whether this goes far enough.
This has led to a distinction between the hijab (literally "covering up" in Arabic) and the niqab (meaning "full veil").
Hijab is a common sight among Muslim women, a scarf that covers their hair and neck.
Niqab consists of covering up completely, including gloves and a veil for the face - leaving just a slit for the eyes, or covering them too with transparent material.
Tell the faithful women to lower their gaze and guard their private parts and not display their beauty except what is apparent of it, and to extend their scarf to cover their bosom
Koran, 24:31 (English translation)
This form of dress is rarer, although it has been growing in recent years, and it is this which former UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw says he objects to at face-to-face meetings with his constituents.
Muslim scholars have debated whether it is obligatory to don the niqab, or whether it is just recommended without being obligatory.
There have also been more liberal interpretations which say the headscarf is unnecessary, as long as women maintain the sartorial modesty stipulated in the Koran.
Scholarly dispute
The holy text addresses "the faithful women" who are told to shield their private parts and not to display their adornment "except what is apparent of it".
Scholarly disputes revolve around what this last phrase means.
Does it refer to the outer surface of a woman's garments, necessitating that she cover every part of her body - ie don the full niqab?
Or does it give an exemption referring to the face and the hands, as well as conventional female ornaments such as kohl, rings, bracelets and make-up?
The latter interpretation has been adopted by some of the most prominent scholars from Islamic history, such as Abu Jafar al-Tabari, who favour the hijab option.
There are additional Koranic instructions - seen as ambiguous and therefore much debated - for women to draw the "khimar" (or scarf) to cover the "jayb" (or bosom/upper chest), and for "the wives and daughters of the Prophet and the women of the believers to draw their "jalabib" (or cloaks) close round them".
Religious and cultural traditions vary across the Muslim world, stretching from Indonesia to Morocco.
But it may also be left to the Muslim woman to decide for herself, whether she wants to cover up fully with the niqab, as an expression of her faith and Islamic identity, or not.
In countries such as France and Turkey, where there are legal curbs on religious dress, it becomes a matter of women's human rights to wear what they want.
But at the same time the niqab is such a powerful statement that more liberal Muslims sometimes can be heard objecting to it, especially in more developed societies, where women have fought long and hard to shake off restrictions seen as outdated and imposed by men.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/middle_east/5411320.stm
Published: 2006/10/05 20:01:19 GMT
© BBC MMVI |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ghostdog19 |
| Posted: 06-10-2006 23:07 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Iggore wrote: | | But women dont need to be protected from men in this manner (or is it the other way around?), not in western societies. Certainly not to the extend of the burqa. |
But, the reason for it has to do with interpration of scripture. What your saying, much as I agree with you, doesn't have anything to do with scripture. I've since added a link to my post, follow that and have a read and see what you think of that.
EDIT: I've added it here, it's with regard to the headscarf ban in Turkey...
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1153386329523 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rynner Location: Still above sea level Gender: Male |
| Posted: 06-10-2006 23:51 Post subject: |
|
|
|
This too is interesting in this context:
| Quote: | http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/5413808.stm
Morocco moves to drop headscarf
By Richard Hamilton
BBC News, Rabat
Morocco is making major changes to religious education, in particular regarding whether young girls should wear headscarves.
A picture of a mother and her daughter wearing headscarves is being removed from the latest editions of a text book.
A verse from the Koran that says girls should don veils has already been taken out of the books.
Other Arab countries have made similar changes, worrying that the veil could be used as a symbol of extremism.
Trust
There are few things that have become such obvious and controversial symbols of Islamic identity as the headscarf.
But until now it has not been a controversial issue in Morocco.
On Avenue Mohammed V, the main avenue in central Rabat, older women in particular can be seen wearing traditional long robes with full headscarves.
But younger women wear everything from that to more modern clothes such as trainers, jeans and T-shirts, with nothing on their heads - except perhaps some expensive designer sunglasses.
The variety of clothes and head dresses seems to reflect the fact that Morocco is seen as a liberal country with some pro-western leanings.
But for some more conservative people this latest move is an underhand way of undermining Morocco's Islamic roots.
Abdelkarim El Houichre from the Association of Teachers of Islamic Education does not trust the government's motives:
"I think there is pressure coming from the United States, which believes that teaching about traditional Islam and teaching girls to wear headscarves will somehow encourage extremism and terrorism," he says.
"But I think Islamic education has to be kept within mainstream teaching in our schools because that way we can control it. If we deny it to them in school then they will only go and find out more outside of school and they are more likely to fall into the wrong hands."
Dilemma
In the current climate, the Moroccan government is worried about anything that might fan the flames of Islamic fundamentalism and says it does not want the headscarf to become a rallying cry for extreme organisations.
Education ministry official Aboulkacem Samir says the headscarf has political overtones:
"This issue isn't really about religion, its about politics," he says.
"The headscarf for women is a political symbol, in the same way as the beard is for men. But we in the ministry must be very careful that the books are fair to all Moroccans and do not represent just one political faction."
Across the Arab world the headscarf issue seems to be gathering momentum.
In Tunisia for example, young women who wear veils say they have been harassed by the authorities who are forcing the girls to remove their veils at schools and universities.
The veil is perhaps a microcosm of a much broader dilemma - should Arab countries in north Africa turn towards secular democracies or to more traditional Islamist countries for their guidance and inspiration?
Morocco is treading a fine line between these competing influences and the headscarf might just be something that trips it up.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JamesWhitehead Piffle Prospector Joined: 02 Aug 2001 Total posts: 5779 Location: Manchester, UK Gender: Male |
| Posted: 07-10-2006 00:27 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Muslim girls in Manchester schools commonly wear headscarves with a damask Ralph Lauren motif.
Now that does make me scratch my head! 
PS: According to the Leader in The Grauniad, Jack Straw is a man of intelligence and discretion.
Are they quoting him accurately when they put the following howler in his mouth?
"I felt uncomfortable about talking to someone 'face to face' who I could not see." 
I should note that Straw's comments are about the full, face-obscuring kit, not the simple hijab or headscarf. Reports of Ralph Lauren niqabs awaited.
Last edited by JamesWhitehead on 07-10-2006 01:01; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pietro_Mercurios Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 07-10-2006 00:43 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Get yer gubs out fur the lads, girls!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Iggore Customize This !!!
Great Old One Joined: 01 Aug 2005 Total posts: 530 Location: Shmocation Age: 28 Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 07-10-2006 02:07 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ghostdog19 wrote: | | Iggore wrote: | | But women dont need to be protected from men in this manner (or is it the other way around?), not in western societies. Certainly not to the extend of the burqa. |
But, the reason for it has to do with interpration of scripture. What your saying, much as I agree with you, doesn't have anything to do with scripture. I've since added a link to my post, follow that and have a read and see what you think of that.
EDIT: I've added it here, it's with regard to the headscarf ban in Turkey...
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1153386329523 |
The ban of the headscarf seems like a futile battle in a war for secularisation where there are more important ones to be fought. Also, someone could ask if its legitimate for a government to force such changes. But when you realise that opponents are fighting to live according to an even less legitimate religous system, well then, those mesures seems necessary.
And concerning the burqa, and the headscarve, from what I understand, the reason behind it is to protect women from men's lustful, uncontrolable urges. So, basically, the whole concept that justify the burqa insist on creating a separation between males and females that is based on an insulting sexiste beliefs that is offensive to males and highly restraining on women.
Why is there a debate on this again? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zarathustraspake Great Old One Joined: 15 Dec 2005 Total posts: 405 Location: Cardiff Age: 37 Gender: Male |
| Posted: 07-10-2006 08:32 Post subject: |
|
|
|
An amusing over-reaction on the subject from George Galloway:
| Quote: |
http://www.respectcoalition.org/?ite=1190
"Who does Jack Straw think he is to tell his female constituents that he would prefer they disrobe before they meet him," says Respect MP George Galloway. "For that is what this amounts to. It is a male politician telling women to wear less. When put like that, there's no one who would be considered part of the civilised political spectrum who would have anything but contempt for Straw. |
Hmmm, something of an exaggeration, George. It's not as if he's asking them to turn up to his surgery in fishnets and a body stocking.
Also rather ironic, since George Galloway is himself a notorious womaniser. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pietro_Mercurios Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 07-10-2006 08:46 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| zarathustraspake wrote: | ...
Also rather ironic, since George Galloway is himself a notorious womaniser. |
Allegedly |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ghostdog19 |
| Posted: 07-10-2006 08:51 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Iggore wrote: | | Why is there a debate on this again? |
Probably because Jack Straw isn't a Muslim, telling a Muslim how they should conduct themselves regardless of their faith. The problem I have with what he had to say was that he says "she looked relieved", I'm not entirely certain what to make of him asking her to remove it in the first place, part of me there simply thinks his entitled to suggest it and should be entitled to suggest it but to then skew this by some vague justification... well. If she'd "said" she was relieved, that'd be a different story, and all the more news worthy I would imagine. Jack Straw's opinion on the matter however is not only misguided (he's not an idiot, he surely knew what he was asking her to do), but also misguiding. You'll get no end of people saying 'they're relieved' just because Jack Straw said 'she looked relieved', a lot of people who aren't able to differentuate and thus the story gets distorted and so on. It's not very intelligent reporting and probably should be lumped along side stories like "they want us to get rid of churches on ordanance survey maps" and "they want us to stop eating hot cross buns". More media cooking pot crap. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pietro_Mercurios Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 07-10-2006 08:56 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Iggore wrote: | ... Also, someone could ask if its legitimate for a government to force such changes. But when you realise that opponents are fighting to live according to an even less legitimate religous system, well then, those mesures seems necessary.
... |
One day, historians will look back and be amazed that apparently intelligent people in the supposedly civilized West could be so easily whipped up into such a self righteous, froth mouthed, xenophobic frenzy over other people's belief systems.
Some of us are old enough to remember the vast amounts of exaggerated, unmitigated, twaddle espoused about Communism, during the Cold War. Now, here we are again, being goaded on to charge an even more unlikely set of windmills, by people like Jack Straw, who really ought to know better.
Why are more and more Muslim women taking the veil? Because more and more non-Muslim's are staring at them in the street. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflovestone Paddington - peace be upon Him
Great Old One Joined: 02 Sep 2006 Total posts: 1348 Age: 45 Gender: Male |
| Posted: 07-10-2006 09:29 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| JamesWhitehead wrote: | Muslim girls in Manchester schools commonly wear headscarves with a damask Ralph Lauren motif.
Now that does make me scratch my head!
|
It's things like this that really make me wonder about how selective the dislike for western culture actually is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
