The Veil Issue, Once Again
Aparna Pande October 16, 2006
#24 Posted by harimau on October 20, 2006 6:15:30 pm
Women need the hijab/burqa to avoid being raped!
News item: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20646
[In Australia, Norway, Sweden and other Western nations, there is a distinct race-based crime in motion being ignored by the diversity police: Islamic men are raping Western women for ethnic reasons. We know this because the rapists have openly declared their sectarian motivations.
When a number of teenage Australian girls were subjected to hours of sexual degradation during a spate of gang rapes in Sydney that occurred between 1998 and 2002, the perpetrators of these assaults framed their rationale in ethnic terms. The young victims were informed that they were “sluts” and “Aussie pigs” while they were being hunted down and abused.
In Australia`s New South Wales Supreme Court in December 2005, a visiting Pakistani rapist testified that his victims had no right to say no, because they were not wearing a headscarf.]
News item: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20646
[In Australia, Norway, Sweden and other Western nations, there is a distinct race-based crime in motion being ignored by the diversity police: Islamic men are raping Western women for ethnic reasons. We know this because the rapists have openly declared their sectarian motivations.
When a number of teenage Australian girls were subjected to hours of sexual degradation during a spate of gang rapes in Sydney that occurred between 1998 and 2002, the perpetrators of these assaults framed their rationale in ethnic terms. The young victims were informed that they were “sluts” and “Aussie pigs” while they were being hunted down and abused.
In Australia`s New South Wales Supreme Court in December 2005, a visiting Pakistani rapist testified that his victims had no right to say no, because they were not wearing a headscarf.]
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#23 Posted by teshah on October 19, 2006 4:41:36 pm
Re: # 7
Ana
You raise a very pertinent question:
``Are women really any more protected under the veil than they are without?``
As I know from the experience of various women, the veil does not provide any protection; rather it works sometimes like a red-rag.
I know a middle aged lady using veil who had extraordinarily a body like a young girl. One day she came to our house without veil. My wife asked her why she had discarded her veil. She related her story, ``The other day when I was walking home from the bus-stop some young boys of the neighbourhood began to tease me . I usually did not care but that day they became too mischievous. So I removed my niqab to open my face. They recognised me at once and shamefully said, ``Sorry, Khala ji eh tussi o (Sorry, it is you Aunty)```. There are instances where brothers had happened unknowingly to tease their sisrers in veil. In fact, as Dr. Israr has been quoted to say, the veil is far from being a symbol of slavery of the women, but is worn to make them more seductive ( to create `chus` in his words).
Ana
You raise a very pertinent question:
``Are women really any more protected under the veil than they are without?``
As I know from the experience of various women, the veil does not provide any protection; rather it works sometimes like a red-rag.
I know a middle aged lady using veil who had extraordinarily a body like a young girl. One day she came to our house without veil. My wife asked her why she had discarded her veil. She related her story, ``The other day when I was walking home from the bus-stop some young boys of the neighbourhood began to tease me . I usually did not care but that day they became too mischievous. So I removed my niqab to open my face. They recognised me at once and shamefully said, ``Sorry, Khala ji eh tussi o (Sorry, it is you Aunty)```. There are instances where brothers had happened unknowingly to tease their sisrers in veil. In fact, as Dr. Israr has been quoted to say, the veil is far from being a symbol of slavery of the women, but is worn to make them more seductive ( to create `chus` in his words).
#22 Posted by smartsyco on October 19, 2006 5:02:36 am
a issue which is not issue ..... and is being used as issue ..... hahahah the way to fire up the muslims
#20 Posted by MantoLives on October 17, 2006 10:10:37 pm
saminasha,
How in the name of god did you leave out Fatima Mernissi from that list?
How in the name of god did you leave out Fatima Mernissi from that list?
#19 Posted by MantoLives on October 17, 2006 10:07:32 pm
teshah,
The prostitutes are not the most liberated women ... they are sadly the most exploited. They wear a Burqah in day time to hide ... like in the bible.
The truly liberated women....
a- educated women of Pakistan, doctors, fighter pilots, military women, educators, businesswomen... never wear the Burqah and very few wear the Hijab.
b- the rural women who work in the fields... never wear the burqah or the hijab.
The prostitutes are not the most liberated women ... they are sadly the most exploited. They wear a Burqah in day time to hide ... like in the bible.
The truly liberated women....
a- educated women of Pakistan, doctors, fighter pilots, military women, educators, businesswomen... never wear the Burqah and very few wear the Hijab.
b- the rural women who work in the fields... never wear the burqah or the hijab.
#18 Posted by Kamath on October 17, 2006 4:15:29 pm
Aparna Dear:
Your grandmother might have worn a veil for whatever the reasons might be. But using the words of Rushdie, I would say IT SUCKS! To me it as good as a spook wherein a beautiful human being is imprisoned by fanatical thugs. I wonder dear Allah wanted this crap in the first place.
Kamath
Your grandmother might have worn a veil for whatever the reasons might be. But using the words of Rushdie, I would say IT SUCKS! To me it as good as a spook wherein a beautiful human being is imprisoned by fanatical thugs. I wonder dear Allah wanted this crap in the first place.
Kamath
#17 Posted by teshah on October 16, 2006 8:54:19 pm
Re: # 1
I entirely agree with you dear Montolives. It is in fact moral, ethnic and gender apartheid. A question arises are all the men evil that women should veil themselves in a way that they see men but cannot be seen and recognised by men. It is not a question of freedom as proses and the actresses, the most liberated women in the Land of the pure, all wear burka when they go out.
I entirely agree with you dear Montolives. It is in fact moral, ethnic and gender apartheid. A question arises are all the men evil that women should veil themselves in a way that they see men but cannot be seen and recognised by men. It is not a question of freedom as proses and the actresses, the most liberated women in the Land of the pure, all wear burka when they go out.
#16 Posted by mohar11 on October 16, 2006 7:53:18 pm
Re: # 1 YLH
[...Muslims believe ... that Burqah has nothing to do with Islam...]
Muslims also believe that they get 72 huris and 65 gilmans if they suicide-bomb a bunch of infidels... you can believe what you want - reality is what it is... :)
[...Muslims believe ... that Burqah has nothing to do with Islam...]
Muslims also believe that they get 72 huris and 65 gilmans if they suicide-bomb a bunch of infidels... you can believe what you want - reality is what it is... :)
#15 Posted by okhla99 on October 16, 2006 7:43:35 pm
Young school children in Britain (at least first few days in school) should be exposed to at least four different teachers every day for varying durations :
1. Burqa clad ``Bhoot``.
2. Turban and Sword wielding Sikh ``Shaitan``.
3. Painted Forehead wala naked dhoti clad South Indian ``Nangoo``.
4. Red Bearded topi wala Maulvi ``Osama``.
I wonder what percentage would even cross primary level.
After all there is spice in variety. freedom of religion. Blah. Blah. Blah.
In public, please dress the way the local customs dictate. Do not offend public sensibilities unnecessarily.
#14 Posted by saminasha2 on October 16, 2006 7:26:05 pm
Re: # 13
actually, the statement about the veil being involuntary is untrue and you know it. why cant anyone be bothered to explicate a feminist reading of the veil?
actually, the statement about the veil being involuntary is untrue and you know it. why cant anyone be bothered to explicate a feminist reading of the veil?
#13 Posted by harimau on October 16, 2006 4:47:40 pm
Ms. Pande,
As others have pointed out, Hindu women (and those only in the North which was under Muslim rule for 1000 years) cover only their heads, not their faces.
There is a difference between draping the end of the sari on the top of one`s head and using a shuttlecock burqa. You really can`t justify a woman looking like one of those figures in a PacMan game.
There is nothing voluntary about the Islamic veil. If it were, their swimming pools wouldn`t be segregated. Women in bikinis would be appearing in beaches alongside men in Speedos. So long as that doesn`t happen, the veil is a symbol of oppression of women, nothing more, nothing less.
PS. Women in South India do not cover their heads with their saris. So don`t tell us that covering the woman`s head is the cultural norm for Hindus also... it is for only the North Indians who have been terrorized by Islamic thugs.
As others have pointed out, Hindu women (and those only in the North which was under Muslim rule for 1000 years) cover only their heads, not their faces.
There is a difference between draping the end of the sari on the top of one`s head and using a shuttlecock burqa. You really can`t justify a woman looking like one of those figures in a PacMan game.
There is nothing voluntary about the Islamic veil. If it were, their swimming pools wouldn`t be segregated. Women in bikinis would be appearing in beaches alongside men in Speedos. So long as that doesn`t happen, the veil is a symbol of oppression of women, nothing more, nothing less.
PS. Women in South India do not cover their heads with their saris. So don`t tell us that covering the woman`s head is the cultural norm for Hindus also... it is for only the North Indians who have been terrorized by Islamic thugs.
#12 Posted by Salim_Chauhan on October 16, 2006 1:02:52 pm
Aparna,
A very thoughtful and interesting perspective - especially the part about Hindu women covering their heads. The reason that many Muslims, including some supportive men, are against the hijab, niqab, and burka is that we seem to be losing ground that was covered a long long time ago. From the 20s through most of the 70s, Muslims have been constantly modernizing and uplifting the educational, social, and legal positions of our women. All of a sudden, just like the assaults on airplanes, trains, and tall buildings, there is a segment of Soodi-financed misanthropes who want to push us all the way back to the time when Muslims started borrowing these stupid garments from the Christians. If the Crusades gave silk, Damascus steel, medicine, and science to Europeans, they gave the veil, celibacy, and wholesale slaughter to Muslims. The silver lining is that we never learned to uses the Christians` complicated chastity belts. :)
A very thoughtful and interesting perspective - especially the part about Hindu women covering their heads. The reason that many Muslims, including some supportive men, are against the hijab, niqab, and burka is that we seem to be losing ground that was covered a long long time ago. From the 20s through most of the 70s, Muslims have been constantly modernizing and uplifting the educational, social, and legal positions of our women. All of a sudden, just like the assaults on airplanes, trains, and tall buildings, there is a segment of Soodi-financed misanthropes who want to push us all the way back to the time when Muslims started borrowing these stupid garments from the Christians. If the Crusades gave silk, Damascus steel, medicine, and science to Europeans, they gave the veil, celibacy, and wholesale slaughter to Muslims. The silver lining is that we never learned to uses the Christians` complicated chastity belts. :)
#11 Posted by saminasha2 on October 16, 2006 12:09:41 pm
Ms Pande,
Are you characterizing the muslim woman to which you refer displaying ``childlike innocence``, as someone who cannot articulate and deconstruct her own reality?
Could you not have been bothered reading Leila Ahmed`s, Farzaneh Milani, Zineb Sedira, Majida Khattari, Emily Jacir, Shadafarin Ghadirian, Koroush Adim, and Jananne Al-Ani in order a more authentic, nuanced and honest (for you) interrogation of the veil?
I find that lack of these basic conventions offensive.
Are you characterizing the muslim woman to which you refer displaying ``childlike innocence``, as someone who cannot articulate and deconstruct her own reality?
Could you not have been bothered reading Leila Ahmed`s, Farzaneh Milani, Zineb Sedira, Majida Khattari, Emily Jacir, Shadafarin Ghadirian, Koroush Adim, and Jananne Al-Ani in order a more authentic, nuanced and honest (for you) interrogation of the veil?
I find that lack of these basic conventions offensive.
#10 Posted by saminasha2 on October 16, 2006 11:21:35 am
Veil, Veiling and Contemporary Representation edited by David Bailey and G. Tawadros. You`ll find artists and essays that interrogate issues of gender, ideology, religion and agency.
#9 Posted by Urstruly on October 16, 2006 10:56:01 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#8 Posted by Urstruly on October 16, 2006 10:50:16 am
AS LONG AS CHRISTIANITY WAS THE MORALITY OF WEST........the ideal was always veiled
#7 Posted by ana on October 16, 2006 9:52:10 am
Aparna,
I do agree with Ally that you have made some valid points. My grandmothers covered their heads when they went out, and they are not Muslim. It was not something my aunts or my mother chose to do. And if some of us did during the Zia era, it was to protect ourselves from being assaulted or slapped as that was what was happening to some women in Lahore that we knew of.
Having said all of that, we are talking about a veil that covers the entire face sometimes, not just the covering on our heads, and I believe Jack Straw made a valid point about that, for whatever reason. I responded to the veiling issue at a blog, and for me, not only is it uncomfortable to not be able to see who it is I am talking to, but as a child, it was uncomfortable just to see what these women had to deal with in 100+ degrees temperatures walking through the crowded Anarkali bazaar. It cannot be healthy to be covered not only with the veil but also the entire burqah.
I don`t know that wearing the burqah/veil is an affront to the entire Muslim community, but I do believe that it has to be a matter of choice. If women choose to do so then more power to them, but let`s not dismiss what Straw says and let`s cut out the fact that it is an article of faith. Veiling/head covering is more a cultural aspect that has been twisted into one of faith. It was when St. Paul said that women should cover themselves, and it still is.
I think women who are affronted by what Jack Straw said should be more concerned about other issues pertaining to women. And one could also argue that if it is true that what matters more is what lies beneath, then why wear the veil? Are women really any more protected under the veil than they are without?
I do agree with Ally that you have made some valid points. My grandmothers covered their heads when they went out, and they are not Muslim. It was not something my aunts or my mother chose to do. And if some of us did during the Zia era, it was to protect ourselves from being assaulted or slapped as that was what was happening to some women in Lahore that we knew of.
Having said all of that, we are talking about a veil that covers the entire face sometimes, not just the covering on our heads, and I believe Jack Straw made a valid point about that, for whatever reason. I responded to the veiling issue at a blog, and for me, not only is it uncomfortable to not be able to see who it is I am talking to, but as a child, it was uncomfortable just to see what these women had to deal with in 100+ degrees temperatures walking through the crowded Anarkali bazaar. It cannot be healthy to be covered not only with the veil but also the entire burqah.
I don`t know that wearing the burqah/veil is an affront to the entire Muslim community, but I do believe that it has to be a matter of choice. If women choose to do so then more power to them, but let`s not dismiss what Straw says and let`s cut out the fact that it is an article of faith. Veiling/head covering is more a cultural aspect that has been twisted into one of faith. It was when St. Paul said that women should cover themselves, and it still is.
I think women who are affronted by what Jack Straw said should be more concerned about other issues pertaining to women. And one could also argue that if it is true that what matters more is what lies beneath, then why wear the veil? Are women really any more protected under the veil than they are without?
#6 Posted by nasah on October 16, 2006 8:02:42 am
my dear Aparna ji -- kaun jeeta hai teri zulf kay sur hone tuk -- it will take a century for the Hijabi women to get rid of their educated illiteracy in weirdom.
#5 Posted by KaalChakra on October 16, 2006 5:58:02 am
Aparna ji, I envy you. Had I a chance to re-enter the grad school and had I been intelligent enough to carry your course load, I would have chosen precisely your course of study.
Found your views regarding the Islamic veil fascinating. Look forward to learning more.
Found your views regarding the Islamic veil fascinating. Look forward to learning more.
#4 Posted by iron_mask on October 16, 2006 5:19:05 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#3 Posted by echoboom on October 16, 2006 5:05:29 am
Goraa says : Only those with ties can enter this restaurant
Ghulaams says: How cultured people these are
Goraa syas: All interviews in english in slavelands
Ghulaam says: English is important today but FORGETTING urdu is even more necessary. Look
now I don`t even count, multiply in Urdu! Look I can`t read urdu newspaper even! Am I not smart.
Goraasays: Bars, Nightclubs & gambling means you are free & liberal & NOT a fundamentalist.Get rid of this Islamic Republic nonsense.
Gulaams says: He is so right! How backward we look. How will ``tourists`` come [ as if promoting ``tourism`` based on Islamic culture & archeology is ``backward`]
Goraa says: Smoking is bad..it was great when I said so.
Ghulaam says: How smart of them. Paan is bad. cigar is good. BeerRi is bad bad. Kat is horrible. Chhaliaa stinks [ ever seen a goraa do that?]. Chewing tobacco good good ..see you not baseball players? Naswaar bad bad bad..the evil pathhans, bloody muslims!
Goraa says: Your food smells
Ghulaam says: Sir we have given up on mirchee. Its bad bad. Now I eat what daddi-jaan said were cat`s-farts & ammi-jaan siad Dog`s pee {mushrooms]. You eat it , you discovered & invented. we did not eat those & look we backward backward.
Goraa says: But I`m thinking, lately, of converting to Islam.
Ghulaam says: Sir I have taken reading up Qura`an myself. In it I read somewhere that one should be tolerant & nice to those who are bad to you. Sirjee, whtever you say must be true. Qur`aan indeed is a great book. My abba-jaan read it in arabic..maybe thet`s why he ate paan & smoked hookah......Jeesus! How confused am I these days.
Goraa says: Fcuk off you wimp! You are no muslim!
Ghulaams says: How cultured people these are
Goraa syas: All interviews in english in slavelands
Ghulaam says: English is important today but FORGETTING urdu is even more necessary. Look
now I don`t even count, multiply in Urdu! Look I can`t read urdu newspaper even! Am I not smart.
Goraasays: Bars, Nightclubs & gambling means you are free & liberal & NOT a fundamentalist.Get rid of this Islamic Republic nonsense.
Gulaams says: He is so right! How backward we look. How will ``tourists`` come [ as if promoting ``tourism`` based on Islamic culture & archeology is ``backward`]
Goraa says: Smoking is bad..it was great when I said so.
Ghulaam says: How smart of them. Paan is bad. cigar is good. BeerRi is bad bad. Kat is horrible. Chhaliaa stinks [ ever seen a goraa do that?]. Chewing tobacco good good ..see you not baseball players? Naswaar bad bad bad..the evil pathhans, bloody muslims!
Goraa says: Your food smells
Ghulaam says: Sir we have given up on mirchee. Its bad bad. Now I eat what daddi-jaan said were cat`s-farts & ammi-jaan siad Dog`s pee {mushrooms]. You eat it , you discovered & invented. we did not eat those & look we backward backward.
Goraa says: But I`m thinking, lately, of converting to Islam.
Ghulaam says: Sir I have taken reading up Qura`an myself. In it I read somewhere that one should be tolerant & nice to those who are bad to you. Sirjee, whtever you say must be true. Qur`aan indeed is a great book. My abba-jaan read it in arabic..maybe thet`s why he ate paan & smoked hookah......Jeesus! How confused am I these days.
Goraa says: Fcuk off you wimp! You are no muslim!
#2 Posted by Ally on October 16, 2006 3:52:18 am
MAnto,
Aparna makes valid points, and kudos to her!
Aparna makes valid points, and kudos to her!
#1 Posted by MantoLives on October 16, 2006 3:44:59 am
Dear Aparna...
I don`t think you fully appreciate the issue here...
Many Muslims believe and with a lot of justification that Burqah (and even Hijab) has nothing to do with Islam ... and those who makes these articles of clothing matters of faith are affronting the entire Muslim community.
I don`t think you fully appreciate the issue here...
Many Muslims believe and with a lot of justification that Burqah (and even Hijab) has nothing to do with Islam ... and those who makes these articles of clothing matters of faith are affronting the entire Muslim community.
listing 1-16
1 2
Interact Index
Also by Aparna Pande
Similar Articles
- Building Barriers in Britain Farouq Taj
- The Veil Issue, Once Again Aparna Pande
US Elections 2008 Primaries
Get Chowk RSS FeedLatest Interacts
- wiseguyin: Re: # 47 [[[ #40... US Commando Strike in
- wiseguyin: ... keeping the... US Commando Strike in
- Sylph: Shansiddiqui, your patience and... My Dear President Musharraf
- banneditem: #44 Posted by naeemchaudry... US Commando Strike in
- Faruk: re:46 & re:51 I... US Commando Strike in
- Faruk: re: hamdim2 #44 There... Why Zardari Should Be
- hamidm2: Re: # 42 faruk mian, "If... Why Zardari Should Be
- muqaddam: It is exactly the... US Commando Strike in
