To Western Women

Ok now first of all FUZAIR dont start with the personal insults cuz I am lahori and the personal insults I can come up with are beyond your wildest dreams or your worse nightmares ....

Now to all those who have pointed out the slavery was abolished as late as 20th century in some of the Islamic countries I want to point out the fact that sociologically speaking by the 17th century in most Muslim governed areas slavery was ``out`` of practice. I merely tried to show you how slavery in Islam was a remnant of the Jahilliyah which had to be done away slowly and the entire context of slavery was different from the western concept. Plus the Islamic concept of Manumation effectively

outlaws slavery on a moral plane if on a legal plabne it is permissable.

If some of you self professed intellectuals actually did read a little more you would probably understand things better.

Now coming to Fuzair ... who is this guy? I mean seriously speaking where did you get this guy from.

His personal insults throughout are extremely childish and juvenile and you know how it started.. Because I like Zulfikar Ali Bhutto ... and I dont know what Zulfikar Ali Bhutto did to Fuzair`s ... ahem... amma... because it really puts something ... up ahem ... Fuzair`s rear side!

Interesting

I like Bhutto he has a problem ... I defend Islam he has a problem ... will you just give it up Fuzair !!!!!!!! I have my views and most of the times they are the right views ....

Like they say

Sagacity doesnot necessarily come with age ... example Fuzair!

.....

Now dont you dare attack me again !

First of all, I hate to say this but this poem wasn`t even written by a Muslim woman.

It was written by a man. A man who has no idea what it`s like to be trapped in `char diwari`` (4 walls), who has no clue what it feels like to be stared at when you wear a hijab in the western world, who has no clue what is feels like when men from the east lecherously stare at you despite the fact that your covered from head to toe.

To be honest, neither do I. But at least I`ve been in a little bit of both worlds. I don`t condone a lot of things women from the west do but I admire them for standing up to men and making their place in the world. On the other hand, I respect the patience and resilience eastern women have.



The author seems to look down upon women who are competing with men. So tell me, Mr. Jazbati, you`d rather like women to walk a few steps behind their husbands, cook, clean and basically suffer under the control of men? How typical of a man! You prefer a woman from the east...why? Because she can`t stand up to you. And you thrash someone who prefers not to let you walk all over her.

Don`t get me wrong, I am all for following Islam by the book but I also believe in equality between men and women. Hijab is great but you cannot put down a woman because she chooses not to embrace it. Maybe you gave an overall comparison between Muslim and non-Muslim women but I chose to understand it as a tirade against women who don`t want to ruled by men anymore and being someone who`s trying to balance her traditional past, while trying to find a place in the west, I find the author`s ideas very chauvinistic.

SR #86

I tried to find the human rights convention which was referenced in that email which you copied, but this is the closest which I could find. http://www.tufts.edu/departments/fletcher/multi/texts/BH769.txt. If this is the right convention, then I really could not reconcile the comments in the mail to what was in the convention. Perhaps somebody could comment on the document vis a vis the email as to why would signing up to the convention and implementing laws based on that would be against the islamic laws and community?

Sincerely

bd

A question of style,

The following is from jang, a typical style of pakistani criticism, which invariably includes personal attacks. The following is by a pakistani prof, no wonder lesser mortals on chowk follow his lead.

Cook`s somersault

Prof Khalid Mahmud

Robin Cook has no shame. The liaison he had with his blonde secretary before he publicly confessed to it and broke his marriage of very many years was something that hurt our moral sensibilities. But we in this part of the world are a little more conservative people than the pragmatic, white sahibs. The scandal did not create a public furore in Britain. No one demanded the resignation of a foreign secretary for cheating his wife and keeping a mistress at state expense. We may therefore be asked to shut up and mind our own business, since poking nose in somebody`s private affair is not considered decent or civilised. But there are other matters related to Robin Cooks official business which are not his private affair but smack of disgusting duplicity.

He was recently in New Delhi on a PR mission. His Indian hosts were obviously delighted to hear Robin Cook declare British support for New Delhi`s claim to a permanent UN Security Council seat. Even more satisfying for Jaswant Singh and company was Cook`s endorsement of the Indian prescription for peace in Kashmir, as he asked Pakistan to respect the Line-of-Control (LoC), or in other words, suggested acceptance of the status quo in Kashmir as the basis for a quid pro quo with India. Little wonder, he made no reference to Kashmir as a dispute which called for a negotiated settlement and disclaimed any intention to play a mediatory role.``

With professors like the above who needs idiots.

Fuzair.

Since you have posted in a nice manner, but mentioned my name on it.

I have to ask you. Is two pieces worn by woman is their choice? If so then why no pieces worn by woman is not allowed in public place?

Why is there a strong compaign against heroine and drugs? they are also by choice.

But there is no compaign against making and selling weapons of mass destruction, which you will agree has done much harm to humanity in this century.

Omar 74

leave Dupatta and Shalwar Kameez discussion.

Why not discuss half shaven colored head called punk and deliberately torn bottom of shorts and shoes without which you cannot enter a shop.

Or Englishiased Urdu which has no head or tail but accent. There are lot of things to discuss including the role of turban and Dhoti in plains where it serves as protection in both summer and winter or Shalwar Kameez (not Pajama of Lucknow with pan in mouth) which covers the body for all purpose in all weather, is cozy, and can be worn outside without shame (unless one feels ashamed in wearing shalwar kameez and takes pride in wearing tattered shorts).

Or use of toilet paper, the most hygeinic and pleasant smelling method of cleaning (and cause of Urinary tract infection), rather than cleaning with water.Or why not discuss the smell of smegma under prepuce of penis compared to circumcision.

There are lots of topics for such a bright mind like you to discuss.

I`m not a Muslim and therefore cannot speak from personal experience, but I can imagine the frustration the poet felt by being disdained by women who think their secularism/modernity makes them better. While I don`t agree with some her convictions regarding secular dress being associated with sexual discrimination, I must commend her strength in voicing her personal views. She really does show that powerful thoughts and voices can exist behind the veil, and many Westerners might not see that.

``O Muslims What occurred in Egypt with regard to the new personal

statute and what occurred in Saudi and Kuwait in terms of legislative

developments regarding women, and what is occurring nowadays in

Iran, as well as what occurred and is still occurring in Jordan in terms

of developments and reactions over many laws and concepts related

to women, under the banner of, ``Women`s Revival``, such as the

approved amendments in the labour law, the personal statute, the

non-segregation of the two sexes in swimming

pools and the insistence on abolishing article 340 of the penal code,

all this should not be viewed as being a mere cancellation or a legal

amendment of legislation, nor should it be viewed as an appraisal of

the viewpoint towards women as they claim, it is rather a host of

calculated steps towards destroying the social aspect of the Muslims. ``

That is probably the longest sentence I have ever read in my entire life for which I really give lot of appreciation to the person whoever wrote it and to the person who posted it here on the discussion forums of chowk, in this case ``to the western women`` poem forum, telling us in details the evil evil designs of the Evil West and how we, good people, the ones chosen by God to implement what God want us humans to do and the way he wants us to live our lives every moment of our this eartily lives, should understand such decietfull acts of the West and organise to fight against such designs so that this human beings can be saved from the wreth of God, which sure we all will face when we leave our earthly bodies.

Now may be this was the longest sentence;-)

DullaBhatti

ps: that was intentional:-)

re farangi_kush who said

`All the libraries were destroyed by the British around 1857.Only the Khuda Baksh library was cleverly saved by rushing it to Rampur before the Brits could lay their hands upon it.`

Tum magar baaz nahin aye!

If indeed that assretion of destroying libraries is true, I bet the British borrowed from the example of Hazrat Omar (RA) who burned down the libraries in Alexandria saying ` all the wisdom needed is conteined in this Book`.

So they took the surviving library to Rampur? Now I am sure that Rampur was probably in Siberia or somewhere for how else could the British not reach tiny Rampur but conquer the rest of India? I believe we are speaking of the same Rampur which produced the illustrious Gen. Sahibzada Yakub Khan (and his brother Nawabzada Col. Yusuf Khan of the Indian Army)?

You contend that the British uprooted the Sharis system of India. Really? Perhaps you could enlighten us where in Sharia you find hereditary monarchy as practiced by the Mughals? Don`t give me that nonsense about the Mughals not really being Muslim: you have just admitted that pre-British India had an edifice of Sharia law (unless it was the Hindus who were administering it!)

If the British indeed did destroy the last vestiges of barabarian customs like chopping of limbs and burning widows(Hindu rite), all the power to them. My only complaint about that is that the Crown tolerated separate personal law codes for the different communities whence in a democratic society there can but be one set of laws for all concerned.

And, btw, you just sound ignorant putting all the appellations like `liberal`, communist, aetheist together. They are hardly the same. Please count me out of any of that fuzzy category. I am conservative, libertarian, God-fearing, and find nothing but pity for the pinko liberals or the radicals.

On a slightly different note:

I can`t seem to remember where, but I have read an article somewhere (by some gora) narating his early life in the Gulf (his father worked for an oil company). The jist of the piece was that he spent his foramative years in the company of women who would dress, from head to toe, in a ``black shawl``. Apparently it completely brainwashed the gora. He can`t stand bikinis or any other flash-baring clothes. For him, the ultimate turn-on is a fully clothed woman with an ankle showing! He claims he would spend hours fantasising about what went underneath burqas.

There are over 130 million people in Pakistan, half of whom are male. Imagine how they spend their afternoons?

Rafay

PM #56

Thanks for your valuable insights and pointers esp. regarding Locke and Bloom. Don`t you think its sometimes good to be a few steps behind, so one can avoid what hits the guy walking in front? Whether it is cell-phone technology or evolution of a just society, its good to have the pick of others experiences and initiatives :-).

Hopefully the various culminations currently seen in Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the West will help.

Sometimes(only sometimes) I envy the Chinese, no religion, no castles-in-the-air, no hassles whether about identity, social relations, clothes, equality (it seems). Plain old-fashioned folk wisdom to put things in perspective and down-to-earth emphasis on improvement of living standards, what more does one need, even to be close to the Divine :-)?

How`s this for a `History of Religion`: wherever and whenever guys were vegetarian and depended on womanly patience and acquiescence to sit at the pots to cook them a decent meal(as opposed to other guys who could get themselves a decent meal by merely holding a leg of meat over the fire), the sages went back to their books and gave women a fair deal in those future scriptures. Papi pet ka muamla!!

Sadhana

really funny - your thoughts, ideas all end when your husband says ``Talaq, Talaq, Talaq``

Hmmm, I don`t know how to respond to you. I agree with part of what you have said and disagree with some. Thank you for granting me the right to say that yes, God did write the Holy Book, that`s my opinion and I think I`ll stick by it. As for Hamidm, well, don`t ask me to look at his posts...he doesn`t make sense to me!

You know, when u wrote that part about the Maulvi forcing the Koran down your throat, I realized that yours is a pychological thing...you`re so anti everything Islamic because it`s been forced on you and it has absolutely clouded your judgement. Of course, this will make you angry (or maybe you`re too `unbarbaric` to feel angry at such trivial accusations? after all you`re used to calling people `howling dogs`!)...well, anyway, to move on, I`d finally like to agree with your sister. What she said is exactly the point I`ve been driving at.

I agree that a large proportion of women are not given a choice in observing purdha...your sis said `Each to their own,The problem comes when you start calling the person who chooses a different path from your own as deviants, ``weird``, ``bad`` (as in promiscuous) or even ``oppressed``. `...that is exactly what I`ve been saying...if someone wants to (and is lucky enough to be given the choice to) wear a hijab, then for God`s sake, let her!!!! As for those who don`t have a choice, well, the poem is all about not criticising them! Who`s saying women should not be given freedom and shouldn`t be treated better?...but that`s not the point in the poem. What I was trying to say in my last post was that I``m only looking at things in the poem and you`re just bent upon blaming everything on Islam! Try to look things in perspective and you just MIGHT find another scapegoat.

Please forgive me, ladies and gentlemen, but I just received the following unsolicited email. I think its noteworthy:

From: ``s.akbar`` akbar@easynet.co.uk

Subject: The onslaught on the Islamic Social System

Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 23:22:38 +0100

In recent months, we have noticed numerous events taking place around the world pertaining to the issue of male/female relationship and how best they should evolve and develop. These issues have received widespread publicity within the Muslims countries (e.g. Jordon, Pakistan, Saudi) particularly in context of issues like `Honour killing` and `Women rights`.

Given the recent spate of Local and International Conferences covering the issue of `Women` in general and Muslim Women in particular, the Media Forum of Hizb-ut-Tahrir has released the following addressing and highlighting the above issues in their true context



Bismillah-ir-Rahman-ir-Raheem

Address to the Ummah

The onslaught on the Islamic Social System

O Muslims Ever since she became the sole appropriator of the international situation, in the wake of the Soviet Union`s demise, and succeeded in neutralising her conventional competitors and in alienating them from the international political issues, and ever since she succeeded in helping the other Capitalist countries in making Capitalism the basis of international relations and conventions, the United States of America has been working with an unprecedented persistence towards making Capitalism the ideology of all the nations and the peoples of the world, so that people embrace its doctrine and turn its thoughts into concepts, criteria and convictions in all aspects of life, and not just implement them as systems and laws.

Since that day, America has not desisted for one moment from drafting the plans and designing the styles in order to globalise Capitalism among the nations and the peoples of the world. She has not settled for her international gravity and world wide influence, nor has she settled for her leadership of the Capitalist states, International Law and its tools, namely the United Nations and its charter, which she exploits in executing her plans, nor has she settled for dominating, together with her allies, the world media and the revolution in modern communications. She has not settled for all this, but went on to subjugate the nations and the peoples of the world into embracing her idea and carrying her concepts and values. She even mobilised the collaborating rulers for this purpose and those around them from among the mercenaries and hypocrites and those who support them from among those smitten by the culture of the disbelieving West and those seduced by its way of life, and even those who pretend to be adherent to Islam, be it from among the government sheikhs or those who are introduced to people as being Islamic intellectuals, who in fact are secularists calling for the separation of religion from life.

Part of this manoeuvre are those international or regional or local organisations, governmental or non-governmental, which are attempting to impose a host of new statuses, economically, socially and culturally through the channels of the United Nations which directs and finances such organisations, which in turn work on the field among people, be it under the veil of strengthening democracy, or fighting pollution, or removing land-mines, or promoting the role of women, or family planning or the like. The threat posed by these organisations lies in their ability to provide certain short-term services to people and to practically infiltrate all their milieux, thus reaching all the various sections of people and marketing the thoughts of the corrupt Western culture under the banners of intellectual edification, economic development and reproductive healthcare. All this is no more than an attempt to implant the concepts of the Western culture and its corrupt values among the nations and the peoples of the world.

Although these American plans are directed at the nations and the peoples of the whole world, they are in fact targeting the Islamic Ummah by striking at the ideology embraced by this Ummah, who has started to move towards building her life upon its basis and to aspire towards salvaging the world with it, bringing it from the darkness to the light despite what she herself suffers in terms of division, which the Kuffar had caused before and after the destruction of the Khilafah, and despite the sway that the collaborating rulers have over her.

Having mobilised all her tools to execute this plan and having thrust with all her forces to engage in this battle, America focused her attack on the Muslim woman in order to destroy through her the entity of the Muslim family. In this attack, America is aiming her arrows at the social system in Islam and its rules in order to harm the honour and the dignity of the Muslims by spreading depravity and propagating decadence amongst them. In order for her attack to serve its purpose of corrupting the Muslim woman and distort the rules that govern her relationship with man, thus fragmenting the Muslim family and destroying the social aspect of the Muslims under the banner of reviving the woman, America set about drafting these plans and designing a host of extremely devious and wicked styles. She lured the rulers in the Islamic countries to sign a host of agreements related to protecting Human Rights and removing all types of discrimination against women, in exchange for writing off some of their debts.

America has also generated a host of governmental and non-governmental agencies in order to pursue and monitor the implementation of such agreements and to draft the periodical plans for this through a host of international conferences held under the themes of, ``Population and Development``, ``Women`` and ``Women 2000``. Among such conferences are the ``First World Conference on Women``, held in Mexico in 1975, the ``Second World Conference on Women``, held in Copenhagen, the capital of Denmark, in 1980 and the ``Third World Conference on Women`` held in Nairobi, the capital of Kenya, in 1985. Also among such conferences are the ``International Conference on Population and Development``, held in Cairo in 1994 and the ``Fourth World Conference on Women``, held in Beijing in 1995, which is deemed as the most harmful of the conferences due to what it produced in terms of resolutions and recommendations which became known as the ``Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action``; also the ``United Nations Conference on Human Settlements Habitat II``, held in Istanbul in 1996 and the ``World Conference on Women 2000``, which is scheduled to take place on 5th June 2000, under the banners of Equality, Development and Peace.
America endeavours through these conferences to destroy the concepts of family, motherhood and
marriage, and to open the floodgates for promiscuity, outside marriage and outside the framework of the family, thus generating a host of new concepts such as raising the minimum age for marriage, legalising adultery, abortion, homosexuality, transsexualism, lesbianism and incorporate their right to exist under
Human Rights and under personal freedoms of individuals.

These conferences call for women to be equal to men irrespective of the consequences and the complications that may occur. Hence, these conferences demanded the review of the systems and laws pertaining to employment for women and the issuance of special laws for them in order to prompt the Muslim woman to go out and casually mix with men in public and private life. These conferences have also called for the alteration or the amendment of legislation in order to secure the ``Legal equality between men and women``. This is the legislation related to the personal statute which includes marriage, divorce and inheritance, or related to securing the personal freedoms of women, be it the freedom to establish illicit
sexual relationships or the right to participate in government or the like.

The recent developments sponsored by the governments of Egypt, Morocco, Saudi, Kuwait, Iran, Turkey, Jordan and Syria in relation to such legislation are but the start of this fierce onslaught, which will have the worst possible impact upon the prevalent social relations in Muslims` countries, especially as time goes by. This will lead to destabilising the social structure of the Ummah and consequently to society becoming a prey to the concepts of the disbelieving West and its corrupt values, from which humanity had suffered a great deal due to their contradiction with human nature. The severe social problems that Capitalist societies are experiencing and the diseases, psychological and mental disorders that these problems cause are but some of what these societies have suffered because of these concepts.

O Muslims What occurred in Egypt with regard to the new personal statute and what occurred in Saudi and Kuwait in terms of legislative developments regarding women, and what is occurring nowadays in Iran, as well as what occurred and is still occurring in Jordan in terms of developments and reactions over many laws and concepts related to women, under the banner of, ``Women`s Revival``, such as the approved amendments in the labour law, the personal statute, the non-segregation of the two sexes in swimming
pools and the insistence on abolishing article 340 of the penal code, all this should not be viewed as being a mere cancellation or a legal amendment of legislation, nor should it be viewed as an appraisal of the viewpoint towards women as they claim, it is rather a host of calculated steps towards destroying the social aspect of the Muslims.

A quick glance at the recommendations made by the conferences on women held in the past few years and at the stipulations of the international agreements related to Human Rights and to the abolishment of all forms of discrimination against women, which these countries have become part of and of which these events were the fallout of such stipulations, will undoubtedly reveal the extent of the damage which the implementation of the agreements and recommendations made by these conferences will cause; it will also reveal the horrific impact upon the social system that governs the relationship between men and women and the affairs of family, childhood and marriage, namely familial fragmentation, moral disintegration, the spread of depravity and fornication, juvenile delinquency, the spread of fatal sexually transmitted diseases and the severe psychological and mental disorders and, most of all, dealing a heavy blow to the Islamic viewpoint towards the woman, in her quality as a mother, a housewife and an honour that must be protected.

Dear Noble Ummah The United States of America, the disbelieving West and their tools are attacking the Ummah with these thoughts and they are propagating their way of life on the basis of these concepts. They endeavour to inculcate their viewpoint through vulpine intellectual and political styles. They will not desist until their objective is achieved, namely making the Western way of life prevalent in our lands and turning the Muslim woman, like the woman in Capitalist societies, into a cheap commodity, working in advertising, modelling and the sex industry, spending her life amongst men and when she grows old, she will find no refuge but the sheltered accommodation for the elderly. Islam however has dignified the woman in the best manner possible, by making the concept about her as being an honour that must be protected, and for which the Muslim fights if it were threatened. Islam views the woman as a mother who must be respected and obeyed.

Therefore, Islam makes it incumbent upon us to stand firm against these thoughts and resist this fierce onslaught, before its effect spreads and before its yields creep into our society and expand until its thoughts become the regulator of our social relationships, thus increasing our misery in this life and warranting the wrath of Allah (swt) in the Hereafter.

Allah (swt) says: T.M.Q. ``Those who love to see depravity broadcast among the believers, will have a grievous penalty in this life and in the Hereafter,.......`` [24 -19] .

As we warn you against the threat of this onslaught, we all ought to realise that it is the current regimes in our lands who enable the disbelieving West from passing its culture to us, and that they are the ones who enable its tools from creeping into our society in order to poison it with what they spread in terms of thoughts and concepts which contradict what we carry in terms of thoughts and concepts. While they call for women`s liberation, they have not for one moment ceased destroying the Islamic emotions in our hearts, with what they propagate in terms of thoughts and what they call for in terms of concepts and what they evoke in terms of the species` instinct, be it through what they spread in terms of disbelieving Western culture or what they broadcast in terms of disreputable scenes or what they allow in terms of lewd publications, which contradicts the culture of Islam. Such regimes, which do not protect their subjects from a culture that contradicts theirs, but rather approve of it and implement it openly, and punish those who resist it, labelling them as fundamentalists, extremists and terrorists, should be treated with disdain and we must endeavour to rid ourselves of their yoke. We must gather our efforts and unify our forces in order to establish the authority of Islam in this life.

O Muslims We call upon all of you, deputies, orators, teachers, writers, intellectuals and journalists, as we are all obliged to carry the Message of Islam, to mobilise your efforts and to work assiduously and with full awareness and true sacrifice in order to stand together in the face of the disbelieving West`s frenzied attacks against our Islam, including this attack. We must confront the propagators of this attack from among the ruling factions and those smitten by the Western culture and its corrupt values. We call upon you to work towards spreading the true thoughts of Islam and struggling for their sake, until the Khilafah is established, with which the banner of Islam will be hoisted over all the other banners, thus the Word of Allah (swt) will reign supreme and the Message of Islam will be carried by way of Jihad to the whole world, as a Light and Mercy to mankind.

Allah (swt) says: T.M.Q. ``Allah does wish to turn to you but the wish of those who follow their lusts is that you should turn away, far, far away.`` [4 -27]

Hizb-ut-Tahrir

3rdThul-Hijjah 1420h

9th March 2000

It is not the burkha but what goes on in it that counts!!

re: Zeemax

This is concerning your comment in which you say people should take it easy and this is just a natural reaction to the way hijabis are viewed in the west aka the way african americans are responded to be called the ``N`` word.

There`s no problem with a hijabi defending her decision in the face of criticism. This poem I don`t think is a great response to it. IMHO it reduces the dignity that a hijabi woman hopes to acheive. Plus this poem isn`t just about hijab, it`s also about a woman who`s main purpose in life is staying at home, raising her children and tending to her huband`s needs.

The stereotypes are even more reinforced because yet again the hijabi herself is associating the scarf with being a submissive wife. The only difference in this poem is that she`s proud of that!

She doesn`t need to get so defensive and then start exaggerating about the treatment of women in the west.

Every attempt at defending the reasons for wearing hijab can be contested very easily by someone who doesn`t. The only reason that really matters is that she thinks it`s a requirement by Allah. Period. Nothing else flies. All the rest of the arguements about protection against sexual terrorism, more respect, etc etc are weak.

Now before any of you counter my above paragraph, I will say the same reasoning can hold for not eating pork. Fact of the matter is, no health reason, cleanliness reason etc will stand up 100% for why Muslims shouldn`t eat pork. Only real reason is because Allah says we shouldn`t. Case closed.

Personally I don`t wear the head scarf. I don`t like the idea of equating head scarf with hijab. hijab literally translated means modest dress, not just head scarf, and hijab in the sense of modest dress is enjoined on both men and women in the Quran.

That`s just my opinion, and i`m in no mood for getting into an arguement as to whether hijab includes head scarf or not.

At the same time, if another muslim woman feels it does than that`s fine- it`s her decision.

Regards

Fozia Zaidi