The Hidden Pearls Bina,

Good subject matter choice. It is important to discuss these issues. I understand your concern to promote ``freedom of choice`` when it comes to dress and other matters, presumably. The problem is that passing pamphlets around encouraging people to dress in a certain manner (whether liberal or conservative) is wrong--especially when religion is used to browbeat people into adopting a certain dress code. As an intelligent and emancipated woman, you found the pamphlet unconvincing. But it is scary the number of women that are cajoled and coerced into adopting the hijab/niqab/burqa (``HNB``). A whole host of factors may result to this, e.g., student organizations, dawah groups, in-laws, you name it...

Believe me, this is not ``freedom of choice`` as one would like to think. This is more, as you said, an attempt to make women invisible, ensuring their participation in their own oppression. This is the result of what we in the law would call ``unequal bargaining power``.

Much has been made of the French move to ban religious symbols (including the hijab) in public places. As a French speaker, I have tuned into French TV and followed the debate carefully. Did you know that large groups of women of Arab origin actually lobbied for the ban, a fact little advertized in our press. Why would they do that? Because in the less affluent parts of France, where low-income and less-educated Arab communities abound, girls who did not wear the hijab fell prey to harrassment and sexual attack. They were considered immoral and thus easy prey. This is the type of atmosphere that is created when ``covering up`` is given too much importance (``hidden pearls``, as the title of your article suggests).

HNB have never been a solution to sexual harrassment nor have they served to resurrect women`s honour/dignity. It only serves to run away from the problem instead of addressing it through punishment for the aggressor/attacker. In societies where women are constantly hidden, the male population does think less of them and is frustrated to become doubly lecherous. In Saudi Arabia, for example (where I spent several years), it was common to hear ex-pats say ``You know you`ve spent too much time in Saudi when you can tell a size 10 by her ankles``. So in reality the HNB only serve to exacerbate, not solve the problem of sexual harrassment.

The Quran repeatedly calls for moderation (which is to be interpreted according to time and place). Islam is a sensible, logical religion. And in fact the word hijab implies reserve. Islam calls for respect/reserve on the part of both sexes when dealing with each other. This can easily be done by wearing otherwise modest dress, without necessarily covering the hair or face, which has actually at times become more of an attention seeking instrument--women in Arabia, equally frustrated by the oppressive environment, have actually confessed to using the niqab to show heavily made up eyes rather than hide the face. I think we need to focus on respectable behavior on the part of both men and women rather than any strict particular dress code, which neither ensures nor promotes morality.

A Work In Progress I have not read the previous replies and perhaps someone has already commented on this but the author does not seem to be aware of the rules for partition. Jinnah was not looking out for ``an ideal piece of real estate`` when he created Pakistan, but geographically speaking, those were the Muslim-majority provinces. And yes, he was a liberal man. He belonged to Congress before the Muslim League. He advocated Hindu-Muslim unity and joined the League only when he found such unity un-workable and when he became disillusioned by Hindu attitudes, in particular that of Gandhi, as he liked to mix politics with religion. Something Jinnah never believed in or practiced. Another piece of information for you, Jinnah did not ask to partition Bengal or Punjab. The Pakistan he had asked for was much larger than the Pakistan he actually got. In fact, his remarks when the boundaries were drawn were ``I don`t want a moth-eaten Pakistan!`` Neither he nor the Muslims feared competing with Hindus economically--all they wanted was a fair chance--something they would have been denied in India. And so, thankfully, Pakistan was created to safeguard Muslim interests, economically and otherwise.

Imran Khan Needs Money Zakkk #61

Answer to your question: Certainly not! Thanks for posting the site to the other article. Although it did not come as a surprise to me, it may to some of the others.

Imran Khan Needs Money Zakk #56

I thought it was quite obvious from my article that I do not believe in contributions to political parties--I would rather give the money to charitable organizations. And so to answer your question, no I have never contributed to political parties, but yes, I have exercised my right to vote, although I do not see how it is relevant to anything.

Musings Of A Suspected Terrorist Arjun_m....dude I have never ever seen one logical and/or contructive comment escape your keyboard. You are like a little weakling peering through the window dissing the big boys knowing you are safe in your house. Stop using the word ``paki`` as it is derogatory and is similar to calling a black man a nigger. What is the problem my man? Why so much hatred of Pakistanis?
#15 by arjun_m on December 21, 2002 1:40pm PT
Mommy..why dont they love us anymore..we may cheer murdering jihadis but we are still lovable cute cuddly pakis...

http://www.canada.com/national/story.asp?id={35C86E9B-93AB-44C9-8F36-E1CE2989EDE5}

Imran Khan Needs Money nawaid and rozaiba:

I suggest you research your facts a little before staking your claims. One of Imran Khan`s key allies when he started with his political plans in the early-mid nineties was General Hameed Gul (ex-director general Inter Services Intelligence). He is the same person who Imran relied on to apply pressure on Edhi--read the book and find out about it at length. Rozaiba, with your opinion of the military, I`m sure you can`t be happy with that. Further, it is not true that all PTI candidates are anti-establishment. More recently, Mohsin Ali Khan, the leader of the PTI, NWFP, hails from an old frontier political family and is definitely not anti-establishment. I could go on but do not care to ramble on for paragraphs like some of you out there.

asaleh1:

Congratulations on summing up your comments in an articulate and balanced fashion and for countering romair.

rsaxena:

thanks.

Imran Khan Needs Money As the author of this article, I would just like to set the record straight. I am by no means affiliated with any of the political parties in Pakistan. Nor do I believe that the status quo should be maintained in Pakistan. But simultaneously, I also do not believe that Imran Khan is free from controversy or hypocrisy. Therefore, I feel, as a politician in the public eye, he is fair game for public criticism.

Although this is my first article on chowk, I have in the past, written equally critically of PPP/PML/MQM/ANP leaders in other publications. I find it rather scary in fact that a select number of readers assumed that because I was critical of Imran Khan, I must in some way be affiliated with PPP/PML. It is even more disturbing that one assumed that because I was critical of Imran Khan, I must be sipping tea with the elite in some mansion. Incidentally, I spend my free time volunteering at the Edhi Foundation. And I would encourage some of these people to read Mr. Abdul Sattar Edhi`s autobiography--especially the part where he talks about the arm-twisting tactics employed by Mr. Khan when Edhi refused to support him politically. It may be a bit of an eye-opener for some of you out there!