Aman Ali, a BoingBoing guest blogger, is the co-author of 30 Mosques, a Ramadan adventure taking him to a different mosque in New York City every day for a month.
My last post generated an interesting discussion (268 comments and counting) on Muslim women covering their hair. But it seemed kind of silly to talk about the subject, without hearing viewpoints from Muslim women.
My friend Mariam Sobh has graciously agreed to chime in. She is editor in chief of Hijabtrendz, the original fashion beauty and entertainment blog for Muslim women. Here's what she had to say:
It's the age old debate that quite frankly I'm sick and tired of. Muslim women and their "oppression".Oppression is such a loaded word and it conjures up all sorts of negative images, but what people don't seem to want to understand is that Muslim women are just like any other woman. We come in all shapes and sizes, and all sorts of beliefs. You can't paint us all with the same brush.
I'm as American as anyone else, I watch movies, I read celebrity gossip, I shop at Victoria's Secret, I work outside the home, I'm pursuing my dreams, the only difference is that little piece of fabric I wrap around my head. Big whoop.
I'm not harming anyone by wearing a piece of material on my head so what's the big deal?
I myself wear the headscarf and I do so because it's something I believe is mandated in my religion. No one is forcing me and it has no political significance (I have no idea why people keep thinking it does). Believe me if I didn't think it was required I WOULD NOT be wearing it. I hate being bullied all the time by the press or some ignoramus about my scarf. It takes a toll on you emotionally and eventually you have to develop a thick skin. But words will always hurt no matter what.
I believe God asked us to cover our bodies and that includes our hair. Look at other religion where people try to practice their beliefs and it's very similar; think of the Amish, Mormons, even Hasidic Jewish women. They all cover up in some way to preserve their modesty.Now, I'm not here to judge anyone. If you want to walk around outside naked, go for it. But I'm not going to reprimand you or try to psychoanalyze you, or even tell you that what you're doing is wrong. That's for you as an individual to figure out.
So why is it, that whenever it comes to people who prefer to live more conservatively everyone is up in arms? OH MY GOSH SHE'S COVERING HER CLEAVAGE! So what? Why do I have to share my goods with you? I choose who gets to see me and who doesn't. Is that what is so bothersome, that I actually have a choice? I'm seriously trying to figure this out.
Some Muslim women wear the headscarf and some women don't. Some Muslim women choose to wear their headscarf in a way that conforms somewhat to today's fashion and some prefer to go old school. It all comes down to personal interpretation and understanding and that's perfectly fine. We're all adults, we're all responsible for our own actions.
I'm not holier than thou. My headscarf does not make me some religious expert, it's just a small part of my life. It's a testament to myself that I want to be a better person and that I'm struggling to do good in this world by following what I personally believe God wants me to do.
For those who talk about women being forced into submission, that occurs everyday all over the world regardless of religion and it's very sad indeed. If people try to use Islam as a way to manipulate women then those individuals are sick and twisted.
At the end of the day I'm thankful that I have the life I do, where I can practice what I believe and not worry about anyone forcing me to do something against my will.
It's good to hear that you feel empowered and free.
The confusion of others about your dress choice may be related to the juxtaposition of two things you say:
"Believe me if I didn't think it was required I WOULD NOT be wearing it."
and
"I'm thankful that I have the life I do, where I can practice what I believe and not worry about anyone forcing me to do something against my will."
It's very hard for many people – particularly, but I would guess not exclusively, those of other or no religion – to reconcile those two statements. And I would say that that would explain much of the discourse of which you are sick and tired.
I myself wear the headscarf and I do so because it's something I believe is mandated in my religion. No one is forcing me and it has no political significance (I have no idea why people keep thinking it does). Believe me if I didn't think it was required I WOULD NOT be wearing it
This is incredibly revealing. So... it's not a choice. It's mandated by religion.
This kind of proves our point!
I myself wear the headscarf and I do so because it's something I believe is mandated in my religion. No one is forcing me ...
man⋅date /ˈmændeɪt/ –noun
3. an authoritative order or command
Either your choice of words is somewhat poor, or, indeed you are forced to wear hijab; albeit not overtly.
People can choose not to exercise their free will and acquiesce to the pressures of religion, family, society, etc. That is the beauty of free will; we are free to use or not use it.
I DO respect your choice. But please understand that using the terminology you did, your choice is not made without external pressures extolling a certain desired outcome.
Maa'salama.
wow... no sexist/racist drivel masquerading as progressive thinking yet...
it amazes me to hear people who hold otherwise liberal/progressive views suddenly categorise all muslim women as oppressed, submissive and incapable of independent thought when it comes to sexuality, body, gender and well, relationships with (muslim) men. having lived in non-muslim and muslim countries (regular Oz, Oz Muslims, SE Asian Muslims, Indian Muslims), I've seen the good and the bad of gender relations amongst Muslims, and they are by and large comparable to those amongst non-Muslims. The Muslim world doesn't have a monopoly on abusive relationships... there's plenty of awful shit done globally by men everywhere of whatever culture/religion/or other.
I personally believe this (often intellectual) hysteria about Muslim women is driven by a deep-seated cultural bigotry that has existed in our Western societies since Islam became the mirror of the "Other" to the West. Just because you don't call people towelhead etc, and because you've read Sagan or Hawkins, doesn't mean you've escaped that (imho) inescapable prejudice against that ancient Other.
For the record, i'm a male Anglo-Celtic Muslim Australian geek (who yes, converted) of a vague leftism.
As I said, it's an explicitly political symbol.
At best, it's a horribly regressive clothing style, at worst, it's like a nazi-armband.
Go watch Jesus Camp to find out more.
If covering ones head is a religious requirement, can anyone, of the proper theological background, cite a valid manuscript, for example a passage in the Quran?
Fellas I dont think you're understanding. When Mariam says mandate, its a command in the religion, just like any other command. She meant she's not being forced by any particular person in her life, just like nobody should be.
Just because there's a command in the religion she's following doesnt mean she's oppressed.
Being Catholic, I remember when covering the head was a Catholic women thing.
Remember Jackie Kennedy?
The naysayers approach everything from the negative viewpoint. Any tradition that gets in the way of how they want to celebrate a religion is exclusionary. Can't you allow for the beliefs and traditions of a religion?
For example, what if some Catholics want to speed up the mass by excluding different prayers? Well, it has never been done, BECAUSE Tradition is part of the religion. I am trying to come up with an example that is as simple as your minds apparently are. Have you ever seen Liberal [which, let's face it, is a religion] with a pro-Reagan t-shirt on? Isn't that exclusionary?
You don't have to feel oppressed to be oppressed. Religion manipulates tons of people to be happy with their oppression. It's been doing it for thousands of years.
Now, I'm not saying that you don't have a personal freedom to cover yourself up. You do, and you may. I don't think anyone here says that you can't. However, you cover yourself up because God tells you to. Not you. It's not your choice. It's the choice of your religion, and you've made your peace with it.
Which is fine. Just remember that you do it because your religion mandates it, not because you don't want to show your body.
And, let's not forget that when those of us who do not believe in magic flying carpets and zombie saviors have a responsibility to mock you for your foolish beliefs.
... have to because your religion mandates it. BWA-hahahahahah
Thank you for the post and accompanying video. I am an American woman raised in a Christian tradition, and I respect the tradition of the hijab. On the other hand, I am deeply troubled by the burqa and chador, which to my eyes disguise female individuality and make it more difficult for women to participate in public life. I would love to read about a Muslim woman's opinion of the difference, if any, between the headscarf and the full-body covering.
I don't think it's accurate to summarize that discussion as one about "Muslim women covering their hair". Characterizing it as such, and portraying that as the central argument demonstrating the oppression of Muslim females, seems like really aggressive strawmanning.
That being said, I'm thrilled that a female Muslim voice was brought to the table so swiftly, and hope it is the first of many.
There are a ton of women historically who are ardent supporters of FGM. There are a ton of women historically who support women not having voting rights or equal rights in general. Abused women are often the loudest defenders of their abusive spouses, who they genuinely love with all their hearts. I could go on and on. The oppressed are often the loudest voices claiming that they are not oppressed and arguing for the oppression to continue.
And really, the fact that your justification falls back to the Flying Spaghetti Monster shows me that I should not put a lot of faith -- pardon the expression -- in your ability to make a rational argument for your actions. Sorry, but if you're driven by superstition, your credentials get pretty weak. That's about as good as "I wear this tinfoil hat because of the voices in my head."
I love BoingBoing and have pressed reload a thousand times today and at least a hundred times every other day, but I think BB made a mistake with this series of posts and this guest blogger. Unicorn chaser? I'd love to see a Dawkins chaser on this one.
This is incredibly revealing. So... it's not a choice. It's mandated by religion.
This kind of proves our point!
If I may presume...I believe the choice lies in practicing the religion, and the headcovering is a result of that choice, not something imposed against her will.
An imperfect analogy would be the military. If I choose to join the military, I must wear the clothes, a uniform, that are accepted along with that choice, even if I would not otherwise do so.
Oh, come on. I was wondering how quickly people would misread her comments and jump like that. Seems like it only took a second!
There's a huge difference between believing that your religion mandates that you do something, and feeling forced into it. For example, take churchgoing Christians. Many of them wouldn't go to church each Sunday if they didn't believe it was what God wanted them to do, but it's part of the religion and so they do it gladly. They (usually) don't feel oppressed, like someone's twisting their arms, or maybe like someone will beat them if they don't go. It's just part of the religion.
She says that if she didn't think it was required BY HER RELIGION that she wear a headscarf, she wouldn't do it. That means that if some man told her to do it it wouldn't matter, if some group of people on the street told her to do it it wouldn't matter, if some politicians told her to do it it wouldn't matter. She believes her religion asks it of her (like any ritual or lifestyle in any religion), so she chooses to do it. This isn't oppression, it's called following a religion. If you believe that religion is fundamentally oppressive, that's fine - but then you have bigger fish to fry than some women who choose to wear headscarves.
Either way, you should read her argument carefully and respond to that, instead of immediately lumping her in the "poor oppressed woman" box just because she says she feels like something is required of her by a lifestyle SHE CHOOSES.
danlalan, religion that you're born into, that your whole family and culture supports, is not really a choice in the same way that most other choices are. It's not that easy to escape a life of conditioning.
the funny thing is over here in the UK until the 60's many women would not be seen out and about without some sort of head covering.
The full covering of the face leaves me feeling uncomfortable though.
Shannon, I'm a pretty hard core athiest, and I find your arguments as oppressive, offensive and as fundamentalist in tone as anything spewed out by the Westboro Baptist nutters.
The idea that this woman who states that she, by her own choice, practices a religion that you disagree with is brainwashed and incapable of truly free choice is the exact argument I've heard made about athiests by evangelical christians. Next you'll be saying the "hate the sinner, love the sin" crap your brand of intolerant offensive ideology spouts.
You are becoming the thing you detest. Please stop.
Do these posts on the Burqini represent a trend for the future?
Is it just a matter of time before we start discussing beard lengths and jalabiya-swimwear?
Finally, is a Burqini "a wonderful thing?" and does it belong in a "collection of wonderful things?"
Here's to hoping that the answer to these three questions is no.
I find being forced to wear a headscarf/burqa/whatever strongly abusive as much as I find the same for being forced to wear a jacket and a tie at workplace, no matter if the order comes from the office boss or the big bearded boss in the sky.
Every culture has its own way of showing that the human race as a whole still needs a couple more thousand years of evolution before it gets rid of that idiocy.
By the way, the almighty FSM, would never force her believers to wear anything they don't like. Although willingly wearing pirate costumes a couple days a week may bring some benefits in the afterlife.
I take her comment about not wearing it to mean that she feels oppressed by those *outside* her religion for wearing a headscarf. It seems to me that she is proud to wear traditional clothing but that anti-muslim sentiment is stronger than tradition, which is a shame.
I am agnostic if not atheist, but I do believe that tradition and culture are both immeasurably valuable to this planet we live on. It's a travesty for anyone to feel oppressed by their own culture, but it is far worse for that person to feel oppressed by others *for* their traditions and culture.
goldmineguttd@2
That's a glib response but not particularly helpful. There are billions of people in the world who make faith-inspired decisions. They wear distinctive clothing, attend religious gatherings, fast, pray, meditate, observe holy days, donate to charity, house the homeless, feed the hungry and help their neighbors. They frequently even put the needs of others above their own. Some of it may be unfamiliar, but doing something because your religion requires it is hardly a foolproof sign of oppression.
It's convenient to toss every Muslim into the same pot. But that's around 1.5 billion people living in every country in the world. There's no way that they'll fit into any single category. Rash generalizations give us a thrilling jolt of self-righteousness, but they're hardly accurate or fair.
I said this in an earlier comment, so I apologize for repeating myself. Labeling every woman who wears a hijab or a burqa as mentally damaged is just as demeaning as any other form of casual abuse. It's just dressed up as altruism.
Wow. I'm astounded at the boorishness of some of these comments.
Also: I have a question for the people who think she's being oppressed despite her assertion to the contrary. When exactly is it that a woman is "allowed" to speak for herself? Is it when someone else tells her that she's not oppressed anymore? Is it when she feels shamed enough by other cultural ideals that she bares some cleavage and shows her hair?
Or is it that because she's a proud Muslim woman, she's in a catch 22, kind of like a woman who is a proud sex worker? She can either renounce what she is doing and become "unoppressed" according to someone else's definition, though she's no longer doing what she wants to be doing, or she can remain "oppressed" according to someone else's definition, and be happy having chosen what she wants to be doing.
This is crazy.
It's as if the entirety of history can be swept away by a YouTube opinion piece.
I'd have to agree with Shannon. People tend to follow whatever beliefs their parents or other influential people in their lives may have given them while they were being raised.
Yes, it is oppressive, but it's human nature. We practice what we are taught. Obviously, people can overcome things like that, but on the whole, a lot of people are ideologically lazy.
It has nothing to do with the fact that it's this religion or any other religion. It's any belief system.
We all make our choices based on what we have learned.
Danlalan, if as she says, she really believes that a god will sentence her to the horrible tortures of hell if she doesn't do it, then does she really have a choice?
And I'm nuts to say that she's incapable of choice?
You think she has choice because you know her underlying theory is nuts. But she doesn't. So she has no choice. A choice obtained by threat of torture is not freely made.
If you believed that you would be tortured for eternity (or at least a long time -- I realize that Hell can be temporary in Islam) for not wearing a head scarf, then I suspect you'd wear one as well.
The commentators seem to be conflating two different issues. The first is the fact that religions in general often mandate the behaviour and dress of their followers. This is true of most religions and not specific to Islam.
The second point is that Islam in particular has a set of mandates, concerning the dress of women, which some people feel are oppressive.
So when commentators pick up on the fact that Aman is obeying the mandates of her religion, they are addressing the first point. This is an issue for Islam (because it is a religion), but it is not specific to Islam, and is not really a women's issue (as both men and women have 'rules' in their chosen belief). And Aman nicely anticipates this when she talks about other religions.
The second point, the interesting one, is whether the particular mandates of Islam are oppressive to women. To make this point, you would need to show that the dictates of Islam differ in some meaningful respect from those of other religions. It is difficult to show this, because evidence of women being oppressed through religion is not necessarily evidence that the religion is oppressing them (as opposed to being a tool of oppression). Also, women like Aman appear to provide a clear counter-example to what is supposed to be a general principle.
This is incredibly revealing. So... it's not a choice. It's mandated by religion.
This kind of proves our point!
...only if you think that Jews are equally oppressed by their religion's head garment requirements.
So would it be cool for me to go around in those areas dressed very immodestly? I would assume so, right? No problem. To each his own.
"And really, the fact that your justification falls back to the Flying Spaghetti Monster shows me that I should not put a lot of faith -- pardon the expression -- in your ability to make a rational argument for your actions."
Religiousness and rationality are not mutually exclusive.
"Why do I have to share my goods with you? I choose who gets to see me and who doesn't."
People seem to forget this in our present society. The media compels us to dress scantily, tart up, feel uncomfortable with ourselves if our body doesn't match up with the forms of female splendor staring at us from the magazine racks by the checkout line.
To those who take the "female oppression" line, how is our society not equally or more damaging than among those who follow this mandate?
JFrancis, I think it's been mentioned before in a couple of the other discussions, but this is not about modesty. It's about control and religion.
My girlfriend recently talked to an arab girl from her street, who was wearing a headscarf. Turns out she wore it for a while and now would like to stop, but she doesn't dare to. She's afraid of how the others will react.
So I suppose some girls will wear it because they think it's a good idea, others because of peer pressure and that's not ok.
Personal liberty is very important to me, but we're seeing more and more beards and headscarfs overhere in a population who used not to wear them and in whose homecountry people their age don't. And it makes me feel uncomfortable.
I completely respect Mariam's choice to wear the hijab, however as a Muslim woman I personally refuse to wear it myself. I think Mariam has made a very valid point in that she has never been forced to wear it, or coerced and isnt making some sort of grand statement by doing so, it is her personal choice and we MUST respect that.
HOWEVER, growing up I saw countless friends and relatives being forced to wear the hijab, and to this day know many women that have no choice due to family pressure (occasionally from her husband even). It is frustrating and upsetting to see, I remember cousins being beaten as teenagers for getting caught going to the mall and removing their hijab when they thought no one would know.
But there is validity in the point that MANY religions impose similar standards upon their women, not just Islam.
Like everything in the world there are two sides to every argument, the thing we can ALL agree on, is that being forced to do anything is wrong, and Miriam clearly points that out in her interview.
Hala.
Head Scarves : Full Body Covering
Social Pariah : Dead to your family
Tolerence to other views : Absolute impermeability
I'd say about a 5:1 on the spiral.
But then I'm always lookin' out fer the fives.
Correct me if I am wrong,(and I know you will,thanks): the question that was asked was "Are Muslim woman oppressed?", Not "Are you Oppressed?".
Even in women where there is no threat of retribution as we've seen regularly in the news, and many posters have mentioned anecdotally, there is still major oppression going on.
I was raised atheist, and I'm guessing many BB regulars were. I think because the idea of believing in god is so alien to us, it's hard for us to understand the fear of eternal punishment. I admit that I can't even understand how a person could twist their brain around to believe in god... but I do get that my atheism is as alien to them in return, which is scary in its implications.
We speak out against torture. We speak out against police threatening to kill your kids if you don't do what they want. We speak out against coercion by force. Why not speak out against religion? Because that's exactly what religion is. "God" has a set of rules, often interpreted by a ruling class. If you break those arbitrary rules, you face a punishment worse than the death penalty.
As atheists, we kid ourselves into thinking that it's not, because we know that the threat is false. But to those who believe it, it might as well be real, and because of that, they do not have real freedom of choice.
This applies to all religions with a concept of hell -- most obviously Islam and Christianity.
I'll try and sneak in here while I can still read all the comments. There is a lot to be said for the simplicity of a standardized garment. It takes the vanity and anxiety out of getting dressed and done up in the morning. Think of the millions of (wo)man hours wasted hairdrying, dying, cutting, primping day on end... The head covering removes the need to spend time fixing up one's hair-do for the day. Not that its bad if you do, but- there is some comfort in a head covering that tucks everything away. Myself, I where a bandana most every day. It's a trick to keep enough of them on hand. It falls askew sometimes and I'm sure I look like a half-crazed pirate, but it still beats the alternative of going out with my hair standing on end in like 12 different directions...
Anyway, a note of the cut of the garment in the last post. There is an enviable simplicity there as well. I think the burquini is rather flattering. Seems like you get full range of motion and smooth lines. With a couple of modifications, I'd say it'd be an almost ideal uniform for daily life.
My personal opinion is that the *best* and *most beautiful* female garments in the world have to be the Indian saris the women wear. A woman in a sari floats on air. Traditions are usually just fine, be they religious or otherwise. There is often a collective wisdom to be found among long stading cultural practices. Please, everyone loosen up, live and let live. No more bombs or war. Kthxbai.
Shannon - While I agree that a cultural / religious upbringing is something you don't really escape, I think that's a different, and much larger, discussion.
There's a disturbing undertone creeping into a few comments, particularly in the other thread, which I'd rather avoid in this one: apparently even a free woman in a modern society cannot possibly have chosen to wear 'modest' clothes; it must be a result of her unwitting oppression by terrible cultural pressures. (Comparing, as some arguments did, a woman who makes a religious choice to an abuse victim who keeps going back to a violent husband is hyperbole that completely obscures the point. Frankly I find that insulting, both to the women concerned and to those who genuinely are oppressed.)
There's something a little dangerous about singling out, say, Mariam Sobh's chosen headscarf. (Speaking with my Jewish hat on for a moment... the kippah is every bit as inconvenient a piece of headgear. And there's no question but that I wore it for many years entirely as a result of childhood religious upbringing and extremely strong social and peer pressures. But I didn't have the slightest trouble giving it up as soon as I grew up and actually wanted to. If anyone here were fool enough to suggest that I was the unwitting collaborater in my own oppression I would not reply. I would be laughing too hard to type.)
Of course, my current work doesn't actually require me to wear a suit and tie. There's a lot of jobs I couldn't get if I wasn't willing to. Cultural oppression via fashion?
im starting to get the impression that Aman Ali is a cruel internet troll whom is about to reach legendary status.
it all makes perfect sense when you think about it, cory and xeni are known for their shenanigans (documented here in the boingboing archives).
@#1
' "Believe me if I didn't think it was required I WOULD NOT be wearing it."
and
"I'm thankful that I have the life I do, where I can practice what I believe and not worry about anyone forcing me to do something against my will."
It's very hard for many people – particularly, but I would guess not exclusively, those of other or no religion – to reconcile those two statements. And I would say that that would explain much of the discourse of which you are sick and tired. '
Western religions also have many many rules people follow only because their religions dictate, and would not otherwise. I'm not arguing about religion, only about the logic of your statement.
My question is: why does Mariam think it's mandated? (Does it clearly and unambiguously say it in the Koran, and if so, does she do EVERYTHING it says in the Koran?) Does she think it's impossible to be a Muslim and not cover your hair? Wouldn't it be good if she showed that there was a way to be a good Muslim and wear whatever you want (especially as she makes it clear she doesn't really want to wear the head covering)? I wonder what she thinks of the various kinds of Sufis, some of which praise homoeroticism and drinking alchohol. I am reminded of the story of the early Muslim judge who was appointed to the Maldives (I think it was). All the inhabitants regarded themselves as good Muslims, but the women refused even to wear tops. He reported that he managed to get them to do so while appearing in court, but had given up trying to get them to do so elsewhere. Were they just mistaken?
Tynam, Mariam has not chosen to wear a headscarf. Her god told her to do it, and, putting it in vulgar black-and-white terms as I always do, told her that he'd torture her eternally if she didn't, or something to that effect. That's not a choice.
A chubby girl who chooses to hide her figure with a big sweatshirt is still making a decision based on external beliefs -- the way a beauty obsessed culture has mistreated her -- but it is much more her choice because of the lack of perceived consequences. It is also REAL. She can understand the consequences of her actions, and make a decision based on them, and none of the consequences include a bizarre delusion like "hell".
So people who keep kosher diets are oppressed?
Willingness to obey certain bounds is not a mark of oppression. I don't do certain things because I believe they are bad for me. I limit my intake of animal fat because I think they're bad. I can choose not to whenever I want but I want to stay within those boundaries. Likewise I don't murder, steal, rob, etc. for I choose to follow those moral boundaries. Would you say that I'm oppressed? Taking a less extreme example, I drive within the speed limit. I do it because I believe they contribute to my safety and those of others on the rule. Is that a sign of oppression?
I know it's difficult for some of us atheists to understand but living according to the rules of religion is believe to be good for the believer in the minds of the believer.
You don't have to use force to make people stay within limits. When you do, it becomes oppression.
Hot Shot Hamish, she believes it because a man told her that's the way things are.
Is it enough to simply ask any one (or all) muslim women why they wear (or dont wear) a hijab?
This reminds me of conversations about "the masses", if everyone was stupid enough to think the world is flat that wont actually make the world flat.
If every single muslim women said "I wear the hijab by choice!" that doesnt address the issue properly, I mean evangelicals dont believe in evolution, they would say "god said so in the bible!", but that just makes them stupid, muslim women might want to think they arent oppressed by being "mandated" (her words) to wear the hijab but quite obviously it does stem from the arabic mulsim males want to control the female population, specifically her sexuality.
The rub is the fact that we are still instinctual animals and even in so called modern society we treat women pretty horribly and most women expect it and the odd time a women speaks out about it now shes labeled a man hater.
Of course this is a complex subject, female rights, but while I recognize the FACT that the muslim world treats women no better then property I have to also realize that my own society has many many problems with how it treats women.
Its like we are living in Victorian times talking about how much better we are then the savages because our women get to leave the house with an escort or how much better we are because our women are allowed to occasionally sit quietly in the same room with men who are conversing.
I wholeheartedly agree with #10.
Aman Ali's previous post was NOT, substantively, about 'Muslim women covering their hair.'
Hair was never once mentioned in the body of the post she authored.
Tynam said:
There's a disturbing undertone creeping into a few comments, particularly in the other thread, which I'd rather avoid in this one: apparently even a free woman in a modern society cannot possibly have chosen to wear 'modest' clothes; it must be a result of her unwitting oppression by terrible cultural pressures.
Depends what you mean by "modest" doesn't it, and according to whose notions. Does anyone believe they're being immodest by revealing their fingernails? I doubt it. So why should one feel immodest in revealing one's hair, unless one has been told to feel shame in so doing? Isn't modesty always tied to shame? And isn't shame, in the abstract, a bad thing?
Now, if you're talking about modesty when it comes to not bragging, I'd have to say that's a different matter. And if all Muslim women are wearing headscarves because they think their hair is just so fabulous the world couln't take it, then fair play to them.
Comatose51, I don't know if they're oppressed because eating kosher doesn't seem like the sort of thing that oppresses a person, but if they're doing it because the Flying Spaghetti Monster told them to, then they're deluded.
As far as choosing not to steal, murder, and so on, I think the book "Sense & Goodness: Without God" was recently covered here on BB. That would be a good start. You don't need God to be a moral person.
@#17, I think the Burquini is a "wonderful thing" if it allows women who would otherwise not swim an opportunity to do so. I went to the websites of both Burquini and the Orthodox "modest swimwear" and read the comments of people who had purchased them.
These are women who had not gone to the beach or the pool, in some cases, for years due to lack of something suitably modest to wear. They chose instead to refrain from activity, engagement,and enjoyment. That breaks my heart.
One of the fellow students in my karate class is a Muslim woman who wears a unitard under her gi, and a hijab. I am pleased she has found a way to reconcile her religious beliefs and the code of dress she believes appropriate with a challenging athletic activity.
Let everyone swim. Let them wear whatever they want. EVERYBODY IN THE POOL!
And on a lighter note, #38, I'm totally taking your line:
My hair is just so fabulous the world can't take it.
I think those young girls dancing around topless at spring break are more oppressed than these women. Oppression is in the mind. If a girl thinks she needs to flash her boobs to gain acceptance, love and attention in this society, is that not real oppression?
I know we've got some hardliners here who would disagree with me, but I think the general consensus is not "all muslim women are oppressed everywhere" but "muslim women women are oppressed in many middle eastern countries, and the coverings are emblematic of that oppression".
And so while it's great that some muslim women who would not face a violent death without a headscarf choose to wear it, that's not really what (most) people here are arguing against.
And so I'm really sick of posts saying that wearing a burqa is totally cool if you live in a western society without the threat of death or violence if you choose not to. Fine, that's great, but that's not *really* what people here are objecting to. The burqa is a pretty potent symbol of the oppression and subjugation of women, no matter how many "liberated" muslim women living in America can't wait to cover up.
I'm all for an individual's right to wear what they like, but I do think the asymmetry in dress standards displayed by muslim men and women makes it rather apparent that men are making the rules and that women don't have much say. What self-respecting conservative muslim woman would stand for men wantonly titillating her by displaying their chests [1]?
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_clothing
@Shannon: I don't think everyone who follows a religion do so out of fear. Jews, IIRC, don't have a concept of hell, yet many of them keep kosher. The appeal of religion for many people has more to do with their ability to satisfy some spiritual need. Buddhism, at least in the form often practiced in the West, doesn't involve much punishment either. Karma, as explained to me, isn't really about being punished or rewarded but about being tied down by the consequences of our actions. Nonetheless, Buddhists still follow certain rules. Giving Mariam the benefit of the doubt, I would guess that her choice to follow the rules of her religion is done in the same spirit. Muslim men cannot wear silk or jewelry, IIRC. Perhaps there might be some benefit to this enforcement of personal modesty? Your chubby girl example actually illustrates the possible benefits of this. When everyone around you is modest, no one is made to feel bad about themselves.
I'm an atheist yet I still follow rules that most religions espouse because I believe transgressing them would make me less happy as a human being.
Here in the secular US there are expectations of female modesty that don't apply to men. Ladies gotta keep their tops on. Unlike the hijab, which is a choice, most of the US finds female immodesty to be a crime.
And why is this? It's because boobies (and lady head hair) drives men CRAZY with desire. Why, if women were allowed to reveal these sexy bits, men wouldn't be able to get the real, important work of civilization done.
For those of us who would like to see men and women treated equally the hijab and bikini tops are reminders that women are still second-class citizens.
What do female clerics think about the hijab?
Religion is just a highly codified set of superstitions to keep people in line and this is a perfect example.
If you ask women being beaten by their husbands many would claim that it's not happening, or they 'deserve it' or some other such nonsense, and that' where I fit in this kind of argument.
Good point, hotshot.
There's a peculiar fascination with veils and unveiling in the West. Of all the ways that women could be considered oppressed in Islam, this would seem to be one of the lesser issues, as compared with say the problem of the lesser value given to women's testimony, but I guess that topic isn't sexy.
AND. do we want to support a religion/society where there's one set of rules for some people and another set for others based on whether they have 'dangly bits' or just breasts? Ridiculous. And if that IS the case, then where does it end?
To those who are pointing at "Believe me if I didn't think it was required I WOULD NOT be wearing it" as proof of her oppression, why not include the next sentence which explains why she wouldn't:
I hate being bullied all the time by the press or some ignoramus about my scarf.
She's not admitting that the hijab is a religious shackle--she's saying that she hates putting up with the idiocy it attracts. And based on the past few threads about this, it's a whole lot of idiocy.
Comatose51, I know, that's why I left Jews, Buddhists, etc out of my earlier comment and focused most strongly on Christians and Muslims.
I certainly agree that there are advantages to school uniforms -- they make everyone equal -- but I don't like the idea of taking away personal freedom by choice. I feel the same way about communism (especially after my recent visit to Cuba)... Wonderful idea on a great many levels, but so outrageously flawed on human rights that the wonderful parts don't matter.
patadave, I thought topless laws had made their way through the courts by now in most of the US? I remember what a fun summer it was here in Toronto when it changed in the 90s. Just about drove me crazy, haha.
@39: Why is keeping kosher less oppressive than covering your head? Not being able to enjoy the delights of pork or cheeseburger could be seem as sad to some people. I'm not sure if they're deluded or I'm deluded since I can't prove that there is no god and they can't proof the other way.
I definitely agree that you don't need god or gods to be a moral person since I'm an atheist and believe that I'm a moral person. Nonetheless, there are many people who do believe in some higher being(s), believe that being a good person make them happier, and being a good person to them involves following rules that was set down by those higher beings.
I just don't think what is "oppressed" is as clean cut as some of us think it is. One can argue that Buddhist monks and nuns are oppressed because they cannot eat meat and have sex. On the flip side, we have also seen the negative consequences of too much of both.
grimc, she points out in those statements what an unfortunate lose-lose situation many Muslim women are... really damned if they do, damned if they don't. All the more reason to stand up against it.
Comatose51, I love to argue, but even I'm not going to argue about whether not being banned from eating wonderful delicious bacon is oppression or not.
@51: LOL. After I wrote that I wondered what the orthodox Jewish view on "I can haz cheeseburger" is. Do the kittens have something to atone for on Yom Kippur?
I've endured similar conversations about my decision not to have sex without a life-long commitment. There are a lot of people who seem to think that I am somehow destroying the sexual freedom of women. This is ridiculous and insulting.
My body belongs to no one but me. It is not a public space or a political entity. If women truly have sexual freedom, they should also be allowed to choose not to have sex, for any reason they like, without having to explain themselves to anyone.
I think the hijab conversation is similar. Just like the concept of abstinence, a hijab can be used to oppress women. Oppression removes personal choice from important decisions about your own circumstances. If these women are respected as people and adults, they should make their own decisions, and be allowed to wear a hijab if that is what they want, without having to explain their personal decisions to people who disagree with their choice.
In short, get your ideology off of our bodies.
Shannon,
You're turning into a broken record. Take a breather.
Everyone else,
Keep it civil, and if you're going to make sweeping statements about a billion people, back them up with some facts.
It seems like we're making some pretty rash generalizations about Muslim culture. There are 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, living in every country. That's enough room for the whole gamut of human nature. Judging the entire group by the bad acts of its worst members isn't fair to them and it doesn't help our understanding at all.
If the world judged my own demographics (American, Christian) the same way, we wouldn't look any better. Of course, we know that we're better than the example set by our criminals, pundits, celebrities and politicians. But we know it because we're steeped in American culture. We can spot the variety and nuances that aren't obvious from the outside.
The conversation here feels like the same thing in reverse. We're rushing to judgment with only the most superficial knowledge. It feels deliciously self-righteous, but we're not learning anything.
So. Bored. With. Your. Religions.
Leave me out of it.
From skimming through the comments of both of Aman Ali's posts it seems that there's a lot of discussion about choice and religion. When a religion dictates a certain kind of uniform this issue is clearly evident. But what I find most people are seeming to ignore is the fact that everything we ALL wear, the way we ALL act and interact in relation to our genders is absolutely socially influenced.
Perhaps as a man in America you may feel that you cannot relate to a kind of "gender-based dress-code" as the one faced by Islamic women, but you can! Our joint cultural perceptions of what it means to be male or female infinitely influence the way you dress (as well as many other aspects of your day to day life). Gender (versus sex) is completely socially constructed, and whether you live in a society that forces you to cover your hair or forces you to wear pants versus a skirt, you are influenced by its gender norms.
I'm not arguing that either of these systems are particularly oppressive or not, but I think we all need to realize the similarities of gender performances and gender normativity that ALL human cultures perpetuate.
Read "Gender Trouble" by Judith Butler for more on this kind of stuff.
Why does God get so freaked out by the details of things, why does he care what you wear, or eat, or whether you cut the tips of penises off? Doesn't he have more important things to take care of?
... really damned if they do, damned if they don't. All the more reason to stand up against it.
You do realize that your statements represent the "damned if they do" part of the equation, right?
Humans invent religions.
Some humans are men.
Historically, men have used religion, and the fear of the unknown / fear/love of non-existent deities to control who in their cultures can receive property, who can run a country, who will control the wealth, what the values of society will be, etc.
All Judeo-Christian-Islamic (and I am sure lots of others) religious books in these cases say that men are morally superior to women and as such have certain rights and powers that women do not.
Men, who created the religions then use the religious tenets they have written in the book(s) to make laws that determine when they are allowed to e.g. kill the women for misbehavior.
There have been witch burnings (millions of women were murdered in Europe and America by the Catholic Church for being witches). Sharia Law says that if a woman is discovered not to be a virgin on her wedding day she can be killed. Sharia law has determined that 13 year old girls who have been gang raped should be subsequently stoned to death. This happened just last year.
There is nothing to celebrate about "ladies fashions" within man-made cultural institutions that have been constructed by men to control and kill women.
If Scientology suddenly announced that they were going to require women to wear Burkinis or head scarves, everyone at BoingBoing would go batshit crazy with indignation and cries of injustice. Why? Because it is commonly agreed that this is a made up religion - we even know the *man* who invented it, L. Ron Hubbard.
But all religions are based on stories men made up. Talking snakes, burning bushes...Just because a religion is over a 1000 or 2000 years old, doesn't make it any more reasonable or rational than Scientology.
And it doesn't mean that the oppressive teachings can ever be incorporated into a truely free and open democratic society. It's like trying to create a better healthcare system while keeping the for-profit Insurance companies involved.
There are many kinds of feminists - two in particular are liberal feminists and radical feminists.
Liberal feminists want equal rights and equal pay etc. WITHIN the current capitalist system.
Radical feminists see that the current system is poisonous to both women and men and that it is impossible to fix the system from the inside, but rather a radical revolution is necessary and we have to start over.
That is the difference here. There is the liberal view that as long as women are not being stoned and caned and having their clitorises cut out with dirty shards from broken Coke bottles, then it is okay to celebrate Burkinis and Hijabs.
But the radical people here are saying No. You can't ooh and aww the paint job on a prison. Judeo-Christian-Islamic religions have been dangerous to women from the get go. Eve is blamed for sin coming into the world - that's the foundational myth that everything else is built upon. That's a huge problem.
sorry for the double post - comments were turned off here for awhile.
" d s bcs t's smthng blv s mndtd n my rlgn. N n s frcng m"
Y mssd t. Lstn t yrslf. Yr rlgn s frcng y.
Cmmnts frm Mslm wmn r nt mr vlbl thn cmmnts frm nyn ls. Ths s bcs Mslms hv bn brnwshd. f y hv nt bn brnwshd, y wll nt dclr yrslf t b Mslm. Thr s nthng n t fr y. Nthng. Bng Mslm s f n bnft t th blvr. Hwvr, n strngly slmc rs f y rfs t b Mslm thy wll kll y. Mst Mslms ccpt thr rlgn fr xctly n rsn: thy hv n chc.
So the choice is in adopting the religion? That's cool.
I guess I could be an apostate there and everyone would be fine with that, too? Excellent.
Secret Life of Plants,
Thank you for the post that I was trying to write. Yours posted first, and is both more lucid and reasonable then anything that I could have posted.
Miriam, thank you for taking the time to share your perspective in this post. I just skimmed through some of the posts on http://hijabtrendz.com/, and I think your blog is really neat. You have really, really thick internet-skin.
I am so saddened and dismayed by the tone of many of the comments here.
I have spent time in Muslim homes in Africa and Asia and America, and when I hear stuff like this, I feel absolutely alienated from my own country. WTF? Racism + xenophobia, plain and simple. You can doll it up in all the misquoted Dawkins or botched libertarian talking points you want, it's still ugliness.
To borrow a line from Aman, it is so entertaining to see people get so bent out of shape over someone's lifestyle -- a lifestyle that does not affect their free will at all.
Guess what? I am a Muslim woman. Sometimes I wear Hijab, sometimes I don't. Its my choice, and I realize the consequences. Just like if you robbing the store. You do it even though you know the consequences. Its your choice. The truth is some Muslim women are oppressed. The other truth is some Christian women are oppressed... Jewish women...Catholics women etc. A lot of women in general are oppressed. It is just insane to me that there are about what? 1.8 billions Muslims in the world, and because of a very very small portion of the religion chooses to behave negatively we all are bashed. Its funny too because there are a lot of different types of Muslims (like for Christianity- Baptist, Methodist etc.) we all practice the same to a point. Some chose to go a little extreme as in many other religions there are extremist. Someone told me after they spit on me when I was walking down the street that I should go back to my country. Well, I am a born and raised American. Why do you care so much about they way I dress? Why must I be spat on and Hijab ripped from my head for things "my people" have done? Yes, I get it. 911 was a tragic event, and a lot of people hate Muslims because of it. But do you see me going around spiting on protestants and Catholics because john booth killed president Lincoln? no, because I don't believe you should bring religion into things like that. People are bad, man people are dying everyday massacres are happening in this moment by the hands of people other than Muslims. I am such a nice person, kind, caring, compassionate and I get treated like crap because of my faith? People complain about us not wanting to mingle and get involve outside our homes... how can we when you want to push us away because we are different. It troubles me, saddens me as well. The reason I wear Hijab and a Jilbab is not only because its mandated by god, but because I really don't want some harry old guy starting at my goods. Sizing up my shape and starring at my behind. The only man I would love to give that privilege to is my husband. Its something about giving my husband something no other has had before. Like a virgin giving her husband her virginity on the night of their marriage. Its special, its reserved for someone special.
I encourage you to wear it - it is your choice.
However, many women in the Muslim world do not share the choice. That is why it is a symbol of oppression.
Sometimes it seems like when women actually get murdered - crickets. When they dress funny - ZOMGwereallgonnadie.
@#27:
Most vocal people on BB do indeed seem to have an atheistic world view, but I don't think that can be extrapolated to them being raised in an atheist household. My experience is limited to social circles in two predominantly Christian countries (Britain and Germany), but in neither of these truly atheist households are common. Most have vestiges of religiousness still, bits and bobs doctrine that for some reason or another are still followed and passed on.
That aside, there's an astonishing array of flaws in the current discussion. It starts with the kindergarten line of reasoning that unless the person making an argument is above reproach, they have no right to argue in the first place, it continues with people arguing about several issues as if it was one and the same thing (oppression of women is not the same as wearing a head scarf is not the same as Islam is not the same as condemning religion as a whole is not the same as...) and doesn't end when people who seem to have an axe to grind about certain issues chime in with their standard arguments, adjusted with a few keywords to make them appear vaguely related to the topic.
I can't help but giggle when I read phrases like "Frankly, I find that insulting"; it reminds me too much of the "thinking bug" newscast from Starship Troopers. All we need now is a "speaking as a mother" post and the cycle of bovine droppings is complete.
And just to stop this from being entirely meta: if people want to wear an onion on their belt because it is the style at the time, fine. But either they have the conviction to go with it when people laugh at them for it (safe in the knowledge that those laughing are too thick to grasp it), or they had best examine how certain they are about it and if, perhaps, it's not a teenage hissy fit after all.
@patadave
I can't speak for anywhere else, but here in Columbus Ohio, woman can not be arrested for toplessness, because it would be unconstitutional to have a law that applied to one sex that did not apply to another. This provision is tested here, each and every summer.
I'm not entirely buying this. Religion oppresses. That is its primary job. Nothing's wrong with Islam that isn't wrong will every other religion. All religions oppress. That's what they're for. They oppress the mind and nearly all freedom of expression. And it would seem that their primary target for oppression and control worldwide, in all cultures, is women.
If you want to control the bodies of women, you start a religion. It's what you do if you are an insecure, closeted, hallucinating guy.
But then again, women are also oppressed by most Western corporations.
It may show that I'm a big fan of Christopher Hitchens.
I live in Bay Ridge/Ft. Hamilton Brooklyn. There's a large Muslim community, especially people from Yemen. It changes in 9 or 10 block, but in the blocks surrounding my apartment I'm one of the few non-Muslims.
I've lived here for 5 years, and I know my neighbors well enough that I've been invited over for dinner. They're candid, and we've discussed the burka issue quite a bit. My next neighbors, who aren't ultra-religous let their daughter decide whether or not she wanted to wear the burka when she got to middle school. She decided not too. She still hangs around with the same kids on the block, shops in the same stores, and it doesn't seem to be a huge deal. It strikes me as no different that people in Texas wearing cowboy hats, because that is what people they know wear.
I realize that this is Brooklyn, and other parts of the world function very differently. It just seems to be a personal choice among my neighbors, and not a big deal. Let people do what makes them comfortable seems like a decent way to live.
@Shannon It's been rather entertaining watching you create all of these contradictions against your own points. What I think is really interesting is your apparent lack of belief in free will. (post 21)
Since I do believe in free will, my view on this makes it appear that Mariam chooses her religion, and chooses the customs that she wants with it. Most of the "oppressed" women (and men) who would like to change their traditions, but feel pressured not to, are still making a choice by doing nothing. (I do acknowledge that there are people who are genuinely forced to do things against their will.)
Your comments about cultural upbringings are also entertaining. I was raised in a religiously neutral home (that is, my mother is a religious extremist, and my father is an extremist on the agnostic end), and eventually, on my own accord, became certain in the complete lack of a god. But now I am a devote, open-minded Christian. I don't believe it has /anything/ to do with my parent's beliefs. In fact, I'd like to think that I have been eclectic about it. I digress.
You argue that it is overwhelming, even /impossible/ to escape cultural upbringing. Perhaps this reflects your own experience, but do not assume it is the case for everyone. That is a logical fallacy.
Frankly, I find your lack of acceptance and respect horrifying. Even if you are right, you are trying to cram your beliefs down your rival's throats. In doing so, you are no better than those you oppose. Try to open your mind; who knows what you might find. At the very least you won't be met with such adversity.
@All-the-atheists-out-there-wanting "out-of-religions." Most of you are making a very difficult time of it, and are on your way to making your very own. Woot! Yayy! An exclusive club in which we are better than the stupid masses! Yippee!!!
Not really. Just stop the "us versus them" mentality (we're all guilty) and then it'll be fine.
I think.
I think the people complaining about the hijab are nothing but Fascist Atheists who want to make everyone as "free" as they are, whether they like it or not. They are going to hate any symbol of faith and religion, whatever it is.
It's all well and good that she has the choice to cover her hair as she wishes. Unfortunately, it's not the case that women in many parts of the Muslim world have the same freedom. The fact that American Muslim women enjoy a (totally justified) range of sartorial choices says more about the wonderfully wide range of personal freedom we enjoy in America than it does about the gender politics of the Muslim world.
I imagine that this woman gets a lot of queer looks walking down the street. That's unfortunate. I also imagine that a Muslim woman in a bikini in, say, Iran would get a lot worse than queer looks. Until the latter woman is as free to dress as she pleases as the former, then we have a problem. I concede that the dynamics of the problem are complex, that the west also has "imperfect" gender politics, that the perspective of Muslim women needs to be included in order to understand the true contours of the problem, etc., but none of that changes the fact that there is a problem. A big problem. That's a broad-brush statement, but also a true one.
(Also, religion is stupid.)
As an academic who studies Muslims living in the U.S., I am disheartened by the ignorance displayed in some of these responses. I would not bother to reply except that this type of fear of anyone different than themselves pertains directly to my research and the way people easily hide behind their anonymity on the internet to show the uglier side of humanity. Such ignorance is why they are so easily misinformed and manipulated. Over a billion Muslims means diversity and Ms. Sobh gave a simple description of one aspect of one Muslim woman's life. I applaud Aman, Ms. Sobh and BoingBoing for attempting to set up an unapologetic dialogue that might educate those who choose to receive it-that is truly a gift.
I wonder what responses you get if you asked a Muslim woman in a more theocratic Muslim society?
#52, I agree....who's *really* oppressed here? I think it's really the women who live in a culture that places an absurdly high value on teenage bikini body, flawless skin, and constant sexual availability? Puh-lease don't tell me that image of what a woman should be isn't oppressive beyond the pale. Just because there's not a law mandating anorexia doesn't mean it's not oppressive. Frankly, I'd rather live in a society where I could wear a hijab so I could avoid all the judgment people feel absolutely free to make on women's bodies.
It seems like most of the discussion centers on Muslim women in America. And the blurb from Aman's friend Mariam is all about being a Muslim woman in America and choosing to wear the hijab. That's fantastic, and choice is what we're all about here.
What seems to be mostly absent from the discussion is that in a number of places, the penalty for not wearing the hijab, or even the niqab or burqa, is severe corporal punishment or worse. In other places, some Western, there are environments where the hijab is banned. French schools, for example. Universities in Muslim Turkey banned headscarves until the uproar forced the government to relent.
Is either of those examples--being punished for disobeying religious norms, or being punished for adhering to them--not a case of oppression? Maybe a more precise title for this post would be "Are Muslim Women Oppressed in America?" That answer seems to be "no" but it is hardly a universal truth.
As a fascist atheist myself, I think the problem is that we often feel like people don't get to choose their religion. Sometimes atheists (and I only say this because I am one) feel like they're enlightened compared to those who still have religion, and that people do not choose to be religious, but have not been able to overcome the brainwashing that made them believe things that don't make logical sense.
Therefore, the reasoning is:
religion is forced on you --> religion mandates something --> wearing the hijab is not only not your choice, but even your free will has been bent so that you can't even make rational decisions about it
That's the reasoning, but I think sometimes people put too much weight into rationality. People should do what makes them feel satisfied and happy, whether it's logical or not.
I imagine that this woman gets a lot of queer looks walking down the street. That's unfortunate. I also imagine that a Muslim woman in a bikini in, say, Iran would get a lot worse than queer looks. Until the latter woman is as free to dress as she pleases as the former, then we have a problem.
But people in the US and Europe can't change Iran (except maybe in the way that we 'changed' Iraq.) We can change our own countries and how we act in them. Being friendly and supportive is a lot more likely to effect social change than giving women the fish-eye because they're dressed differently.
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0403/hudf_hst_big.jpg
@ XENI
I think we're all just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I'm not going to think that the politically and culturally enforced on threat of violence norm of burqas is cool no matter how many liberated Mulsim women in western societies (or in Islamic societies, for that matter) say they wear them free of coercion.
I'm not even going to change my mind if you call me a racist xenophobe.
When women are allowed to travel without an escort or drive in Saudi Arabia, maybe then we can all high five about how cool burqas are.
When men are forbidden from driving and need a female escort, maybe then.
Until then, I'll think they're about as cool as Cosmo Magazine and unequal pay for equal work.
And while we're on the subject, I'd like to know why FGM is a straw man in this larger discussion. It seems to me that it's another cultural norm set by men and imposed upon women that some women choose voluntarily. I've heard a lot of the same arguments w/r/t cultural relativism applied in conversations about FGM. So how is it so different, as a place for comparison?
Anonymous @ #94,
Is that photo an argument for or against the existence of God? At any rate, I like pie.
If Christians in the U.S. were given six inches of leeway to do so, they would oppress women just as badly as they are oppressed by any other religion. It's all the same horror everywhere. The separation of church and state is not a slogan. It's life or death. For real.
But I also think that the attempt to portray Muslim women as free to do as they please and to choose, is exceedingly sloppy thinking and wishful to boot. Muslim women in relatively free nations are free to do many things. That does not mean that their religion gives them that freedom. What it means is that the state gives them that freedom.
Religions don't give people freedoms. They take them away.
I work in a school system that has a considerable population of Somali and Togolese immigrants. These students are Muslim, and the girls wear hijab.
My experience with their culture leads to mixed feelings about wearing hijab.
On one hand, I think that American culture is sexualized nearly to the point of insanity - we are REALLY confused about sex. I think that our valuing women mostly for their appearance is one form of oppression and cultural control. So, the hijab as a path out of that cultural sickness does have a certain logic.
On the other hand, there is the 'Daughters of Eve' point that Secret Life of Plants brought up. Religious clothing rules for women - Jewish, Christian, Islamic - are based on the idea that women are responsible for men having 'sinful' sexual thoughts. I think that is sick, too. I believe that everyone should be held responsible for their own thoughts and actions. Blaming someone else for something I choose to think or do is simply not acceptable.
I'd like to see a social experiment in those cultures that 'strongly encourage' feminine modesty, but I know the ethics involved would not allow it. I think one test of 'choice vs oppression' is to have a woman in such a culture disregard the modesty rules for a day and then observe the reactions of the people around her. (Something like a loose, high collar long sleeve shirt and loose slacks. Nothing tight or sheer or revealing.) If she is condemned as a sinner or temptress for her choice, then I think she is oppressed. If nobody cares, then she truly does have a choice to dress as she pleases.
I would also like to say that I am as likely to slap the Cosmo out of a woman's hands as I am to behave with hostility toward a woman wearing any kind of hijaab. Which is to say not at all likely.
@Marya & @Shannon - Six US states have decided that men and women have equal rights when it comes to toplessness (and a handful of cities and smaller communities).
But, when I lived in Texas in the 1990s, and where female toplessness is legal, I recall some women going topless in protest of something-or-other, but being arrested for disturbing the peace. A woman in New Hampshire was recently arrested for toplessness, but let go without being charged.
Men and women are not treated equally by either religious or secular laws.
I feel more comfortable wearing clothing in public even when the weather is nice enough to go naked, so I can't criticize anyone for feeling obliged to wear a head scarf.
"As an academic who studies Muslims living in the U.S., I am disheartened by the ignorance displayed in some of these responses. I would not bother to reply except that this type of fear of anyone different than themselves pertains directly to my research and the way people easily hide behind their anonymity on the internet to show the uglier side of humanity. Such ignorance is why they are so easily misinformed and manipulated. Over a billion Muslims means diversity and Ms. Sobh gave a simple description of one aspect of one Muslim woman's life. I applaud Aman, Ms. Sobh and BoingBoing for attempting to set up an unapologetic dialogue that might educate those who choose to receive it-that is truly a gift"
As another academic in the US I am appalled by the sloppy reasoning and vague scattershot name calling in this response. The fact is that Mariam gave an argument and the majority of people disagreeing with her are taking that argument seriously. I doubt that she needs your sympathy and condescension.
Suppose a friend or family member of yours did something that you disagreed with - wouldn't you argue with her? If you didn't, I think it would be a sign that you didn't want to stir things up or you didn't want to have to live with the hurt feelings. Sometimes, then, it helps to hear arguments from anonymous people on the internet. Particularly as they are as non-threatening and reasonably thought-out as most of these comments. In fact, I think the quality of these comments is to be applauded. Except, perhaps, for the following:
"I have spent time in Muslim homes in Africa and Asia and America, and when I hear stuff like this, I feel absolutely alienated from my own country. WTF? Racism + xenophobia, plain and simple. You can doll it up in all the misquoted Dawkins or botched libertarian talking points you want, it's still ugliness."
First of all, the first sentence is a bit of a red herring, unless it's supposed to be a badge of something. But what, exactly? Is the implication that the people making these comments would assault people who invited them into their homes with unwanted anti-religious diatribes? I highly doubt that most of the people offering criticisms here would think them the kind of thing you bring up when visiting other cultures or even sitting next to people in headscarves on the subway. There's a difference between simple accommodation of others' eccentricities/differences in a social setting (which is simple politeness) and rational debate about customs in an internet forum.
Next, what is the "this"? Most of the discussion has been academic, and the kind that I'm sure a large number of Muslims indulge in. Or are they incapable of that? And racism? Since when was Islam a race? Isn't it you who's lumping all Muslims together? Not to mention all the various different arguments here. But I guess all us internet commenters look alike.
And for a final bit of silliness:
"Keep it civil, and if you're going to make sweeping statements about a billion people, back them up with some facts."
Why is the number important? Shouldn't this be true of any number of people?
"Read "Gender Trouble" by Judith Butler for more on this kind of stuff."
NOBODY should read Gender Trouble. Not necessarily because it's wrong, but because it's impossible to tell because it's so horribly written.
i think people are missing the point here - john lennon said it best -
"Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace"
maybe we should ask the girls in Afghanistan who are now legally the property of their husbands if they feel oppressed.
maybe we should ask the girls in California who let multiple men use their bodies for the camera if they really feel free.
Look, she can wear whatever she wants. She's not hurting anyone. If she wants to believe in a petty god that will judge her at the end of her life and say, "Well, you tried to live your life morally. You looked out for other people. You even sacrificed your own life while saving a bus load of orphans from a fiery death. Good. Good. BUT... Oooo. You didn't wear a scarf. That's a shame. I'm sorry, you're going to have to burn the fires of Hell for all time. Go with Adolf, he'll help you get situated. NEXT!" That's her choice. (Except really it isn't. For the VAST majority of people, religion is assigned to them by an accident of birth. Which renders the whole "I know in my heart this is true," argument suspect.
I have family members that Pentecostals, and apparently believe that Jesus demands that they not cut their hair, tie it into a school-marm bun, hairspray the hell out their bangs to make them stand straight up, and wear full length denim skirts. The hijab is no different, nor is the the yarmulke. I find them all equally disappointing.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
To steal and mutilate a quote:
I may not agree with what you believe, but I'll defend to the death your right to believe it.
@97
I don't know if God exists.But if he does... I just find funny that the same God created billions of galaxies and petty rules for us mortals. We should look at the night sky more often.
#103,
John Lennon is overrated.
Let's be honest here: Islam is open to critique in a way that Judaism and Christianity are not. Not to mention Hindu, Buddhist, Communist, or Capitalist mythologies!
The United States has no direction without some sort of Other to hold in contempt. Today's Other is Muslim, so anything you might find peculiar about any other groups out there, you can just keep to yourself.
Bigotry in the service of nationalism, is called patriotism.
Hey, maybe the NFL oppresses too. I've been watching football today and I've seen the players do countless prayer huddles when the games finish. But I never see any Muslim players with prayer rugs on the sidelines. Are they forbidden by the obviously super-christian NFL from praying in the stadiums?
The attitude I'm seeing here that because women in some countries are forced to wear hijab, women in all countries are oppressed for wearing it, is ridiculous.
To piggyback on the toplessness discussion, I'm sure there are women in the US who would like to go sunbathe without a top. However, not every women would do so given the opportunity. There are plenty of beaches in Europe that can support my contention. Some go topless, others don't, because they have a choice - just like Muslim women in America have a choice about wearing hijab.
under_study,
I removed your last comment, which was massively off-topic.
As another American academic, I've come to the conclusion that everyone posting here (myself included) is a dumb American. I've submitted my research to several scientific journals and will be awaiting your responses.
Nothing is wrong with wearing pants, skirts, burqas, hijabs, low-cut tops, or mini-skirts if the person wants to wear it.
If a person is forced to wear something, there is a problem.
Being forced, mocked, or harassed into removing an article of clothing is just as bad as being forced to wear it.
So is the problem really the piece of clothing/person wearing it?
I think it's a stereotype to think that every woman around the world wearing a burqa is doing so under coercion, and probably makes the person who makes this accusation comfortable depicting other people as less evolved or backward without even having to think about it.
Aman, I am a non-Muslim (completely non-religious) woman who is enjoying your contributions to BoingBoing immensely.
Sorry, I've got to go back to football for a moment because when you play football you're sort of forced to wear the helmet and all that other stuff. I played football in college for a while but I quit because every time I saw myself in a mirror with the helmet and pads on I felt completely and utterly ridiculous. I was oppressed to some degree when I told this to the coach.
He looked at me for a long time and said very quietly, 'What is wrong with you?'
I shrugged and told him that I didn't know. But I certainly felt oppressed and have no problem admitting that my football helmet did in fact oppress me quite a lot. So I quit.
“What is Liberty?” asked a brave of the Elders. “Go ask Eagle” they replied.
“What is Liberty?” asked the brave of Eagle.
Eagle flew high up into the Sky, until he was almost out of sight, folded his wings and plummeted to Earth. At the last second he spread his wings, gliding over the rocks and alighted by the brave.
“I am a Prisoner of the Air. That is my Liberty.”
In related news, the arguments made by the hard-core Atheists are starting to look and sound exactly like those being made by the religious people they hate so much.
Not to mention that most of the Atheists here are stunningly ignorant about religions as a whole.
If you want to preach against religion as a whole, go right ahead - but at least get your facts straight. I think every single blanket statement about religions in this thread is incorrect. There's pretty much nothing that all religions have in common.
Buddhists are actually atheists, wicca is dominated by women, satanism is entirely about freedom to do what you want, shinto has no doctrine, no moral commands - and has only the barest mention about anything that might happen after you die. Traditional Celtic religion put men and women pretty firmly on an even keel.
This series of posts rules. Many of the comments do not rule, but I suppose it's good that the discussion is happening. Even if it does, as Xeni says, make me feel alienated from my own country.
Is there some study somewhere showing that mocking and patronizing people who believe different things than you is the most effective way to turn them into 'free thinkers'? Because a lot of people seem awfully confident about it. And they also seem confident that they can tell who is and is not truly 'free' in their thinking (hint: it's people who think the same thing as them).
As has been said about western democracy, if your system is really as great as you think, you wouldn't need to force it on people. They would steal it themselves.
I want to stay away from making any broad generalizations about large groups of people, so let me just speak for myself. Whenever I find myself in one of these classes where we discuss the ways various groups have been marginalized and oppressed over time, it's all gravy till we get to the chapter on women. Then I want to say, "Take your constructions and shove them." Having the title of "oppressed" thrust upon you is just gross. It's extrememly patronizing. If a person or group is oppressed it's for them- not for any outsiders to decide. And it's for them to shake the shackles and no one else. Haven't we had enough foreign dominated "liberation" for one go round the great cosmic wheel?
Just curious, what is 'opressive' means in the context of clothing?
Is it being oppressed when your group of friends wanted to go out partying with very revealing clothes, and ridiculing you coz you are wearing a turtleneck with long pants?
Is it being opressed when you go out to the beach and people are staring at you coz you are wearing long skirts with no slits and long hand t-shirts, while the rest are wearing itsy bitsy bikinis?
These are the choices that we made, and people should respect it regardless of the reasons behind it.
As far as I understand it, even Christians (especially Catholic) required the women to cover up their hairs (thus the Sister's uniforms). Don't let me start on Protestants and the rest.
The only thing different is that Islam is still being practiced wholely and the other religions had either deteriorate over time or being changed by people with other agenda in mind.
So, let them be...if you don't like to see women covering their hair, then look the other way. It is after all, your choice too.
Leave your assumptions about what I see when I look at you out of it too.
Oooh, yukky sound! Get that woman closer to the microphone!
THANK YOU for first-person accounts of these issues. More, please.
#116,
Buddhists are Atheists? So what? That has nothing to do with religion or football.
And by the way, because Buddhists do not address the subject of god does not mean that they are Atheists.
#118,
'If a person or group is oppressed it's for them- not for any outsiders to decide.'
Hmmm. Well, then alright, the next time I see someone being oppressed I will leave it to him or her to decide and I will say and do nothing.
What a relief. I thought was supposed to help in some way. Now I can freely ignore all the oppressed people in the world because it is only their own problem.
Thank you. Life is good. It's All Good.
Go to Lebanon, and you'll see many bikini-clad Muslim women.
Sorry if that doesn't conform to the monolithic narratives being espoused by some people in this forum.
So basically it's just a hat, get over it. Don't Other Religions have proscriptions against women showing their hair?
If you want to worry about a religion that is oppressive to women worry about the Catholics and their rules on birth control. They're more harmful. Plus they already have their Ummah & Caliph (The Pope).
"..millions of women were murdered in Europe and America by the Catholic Church for being witches.."
Sorry to pick on this tangential aside, but it isn't true.
In Europe's golden age of witch-hunting the figure is about 60,000 (when the real organised stuff was happening, 1480-1700). Both men and women. So, about 85% of that figure if you are singling women out; around 51,000.
"Brian Levack (The Witch Hunt in Early Modern Europe) multiplied the number of known European witch trials by the average rate of conviction and execution, to arrive at a figure of around 60,000 deaths. Anne Lewellyn Barstow (Witchcraze) adjusted Levack's estimate to account for lost records, estimating 100,000 deaths. Ronald Hutton (Triumph of the Moon) argues that Levack's estimate had already been adjusted for these, and revises the figure to approximately 40,000."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt#cite_note-ReferenceA-0
Before this time, there was still heretic prosecution, but it wasn't as rabidly enthusiastic as the witch trials. That is, until the 12th/13th century, when the Inquisition was invented.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
In the USA it is far less, the only official example I can find mention of is the trial at Salem, in which 20 people were executed. There may be other cases, officially or not, but as Salem is so well known I presume there were not many more, and likely no bigger. Let me know if you know different.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials
A funny(?) note to this is that before Europe had really got going on its witch-burning mission, the persecution of witches itself was outlawed, because one must believe in witchcraft to persecute it:
"The Council of Paderborn in 785 explicitly outlawed the very belief in witches, and Charlemagne later confirmed the law. The Council of Frankfurt in 794, called by Charlemagne, was also very explicit in condemning "the persecution of alleged witches and wizards", calling the belief in witchcraft "superstitious", and ordering the death penalty for those who presume to burn witches." [emphasis mine]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt#Middle_Ages
Why is everyone so concerned about what other people wear? Christ, you people talk about head scarves like it's the same thing as incest or rape. Do you also say that people shouldn't pray, on the grounds that it is part of their religion? Should people not go to church because it oppresses their Sundays? Are you opposed to crosses? Fish decals on cars? Shirts in general?
Let them wear the damn scarves. And mind your own business.
Alessandro,
Obviously, if a group of people is crying out in unison, "Help us, we're dying here," then, yeah, try to help if you can. What I was trying to say is that a group with one set of cultural norms shouldn't be imposing their beliefs on another with the intention of "liberation." Cause it doesn't always seem like that from the other side.
oh jeeze, i'm too tired to read all of the comments but i got about 40 posts in...
yeah, what she says is typical of the blind religious follower.
what she doesnt say is typical of the polar opposite "open-minded" individual.
you know what i say? who gives a shit?
if you want to do it, go ahead. if you dont, well, dont...
but, never try to say that its better to do "your thing" than it is to do mine.
what is "my" thing? people, i have faith in people. i just wish they had more faith in themselves.
-rob
If a woman, muslim or otherwise, is being "owned" or otherwise abused, perhaps her clothes are not the first thing you should look to for an explanation. I would think that the clothing issue is loosely related at best.
What's really sad is people thinking that Islam mandates the wearing of a scarf on your head. NOWHERE in the Quran does it say that a woman must cover her head. NOWHERE. Not in Sura 24.31 or anywhere else. This is nothing more than innovation. And yes, it is oppressive because it was man's idea that a woman should cover her hair so that the man wouldn't get sexually excited over flowing locks.
It's just a shame more people who say they follow Islam don't even bother to educate themselves concerning what the Quran (written by MEN) says and what it doesn't say. Ever heard of bi'dah? It's become the foundation of Islam. Bi'dah is innovation. It's men making the rules for everyone else in Islam. If you believe that Islam mandates that you wear a headscarf, then you're participating in oppression. A headscarf is used to cover a woman to hide her from society. Purdah is even worse.
I would think that the clothing issue is loosely related at best.
And loosely fitting, at the least.
points to trueblue!
If women can be considered to be oppressed because their religion dictates their dress, then what can we say about a liberal democracy that dictates the dress of women?
As you correctly point out, Islamic women have a choice. They can wear or not wear the hijab. US women (except for a half-dozen states and a handful of communities and cities) do not have that choice.
Which is more oppressive?
#6 posted by Anonymous, September 27, 2009 2:49 PM
"If covering ones head is a religious requirement, can anyone, of the proper theological background, cite a valid manuscript, for example a passage in the Quran?"
That's the problem, NO verse anywhere in the Quran says to cover your head. And if you ask many Muslims where it says in the Quran that you must cover your head, they will tell you it's in there, but they don't know where - but they will tell you tomorrow.
Sura 24.31 written in Arabic nowhere even mentions the word "ra'as" which means "head."
@ #78
"Sizing up my shape and starring (sic) at my behind. The only man I would love to give that privilege to is my husband."
I don't want to 'size up your shape', nor do I want to 'stare at your behind' & your assumption that I do offends me & belittles you.
These comments are breaking my heart. Snide mockery and boorishness and ignorance. Honestly, I'm stunned and uncomfortable.
millions of women were murdered in Europe and America by the Catholic Church for being witches
Millions? Really, Secret Life of Plants? Got a citation for that? That would be around one in every fifty women in Europe and America.
[All religions] oppress the mind and nearly all freedom of expression.
Visit Rome and say that again. Christianity paid for the Renaissance. For extra credit, remember that Michelangelo, Einstein, Spielberg, and Tolkien were strongly religious.
If Christians in the U.S. were given six inches of leeway to do so, they would oppress women just as badly as they are oppressed by any other religion.
Damn! We've been found out! News flash: I'm a Christian, and I'm (apparently) a better feminist than you. It's easy to sit smugly and paint with a broad brush, difficult to understand the complexities of lives unlike yours. I would never judge all atheists by the grade-school bullies jeering at the poor oppressed Muslim woman here.
I'm sorry to snap, but I'm getting sick of the scattershot personal insults being hurled at me and the people I love and respect.
—A Quaker, married to a Mennonite
"As has been said about western democracy, if your system is really as great as you think, you wouldn't need to force it on people. They would steal it themselves." Well put, #117.
I suppose I should count myself lucky. I am a person of faith who counts many firm Atheists as good friends. Heck, I've even gone with a couple of them to see Hitchens speak at one point in the last few months. I thank God that they are mature enough to genuinely respect my beliefs as I respect theirs, and not put out the sort of sheer dickishness and arrogant superiority that has come forth from so many of their brethren on Aman Ali's posts. You'd be surprised what we can learn from one another if we give people some credit for having a considered basis for and active critical relationship with their beliefs, as the vast majority of Christians, Muslims, and Atheists I've known do, rather than writing them off as simple stereotypes.
The original conversation was about the burqini and by extension, the burqa which is a dehumanizing piece of clothing that turns women into moving sheets.
Instead of trying to argue that the burqa isn't oppressive, the author has argued that the hijab isn't. Of course the strawman isn't oppressive. There are plenty of old women around the planet that wear garments very similar to the hijab. Sure, it may be a crime against fashion, but it certainly isn't oppressive.
But the burqa is. The burqa turns human beings into furniture. Human beings communicate with their face and their bodies. We form bonds through our expressions. Taking that away is cruel not only to women, but also to men.
The burqa is an abomination that should be attacked and ridiculed as the backwards dark ages torture device that it is.
This has been a very illuminating discussion.
I find that the atheist posters are by far the most judgmental, oppressive group responding to the topic.
I am an atheist, and I am ashamed at the intolerance shown by some of you to people who have different beliefs than your own.
This is why I left Islam. I realized that it, like all other monotheistic religions, are man made and oppressive to women in numerous ways.
I'm glad that I left Islam behind. I am much happier now because of it.
Someone else made a point about oppression of women in Western society - that we are oppressed because of the societal pressures put upon us by the media through fashion and movies. We're supposed to look our best at all times and never falter or we are perceived as unattractive or repulsive. To me that is just as oppressive as being expected to cover our whole bodies as if we should be ashamed for being born female.
There's a lot of closemindedness here.
Something to consider: the definition of "oppression" or "oppressed" is HIGHLY subjective.
So in the eyes of those screaming "oppression," well, sure, it is.
But your opinion isn't the one that counts.
REGARDLESS of how you feel, its the opinion of the woman in question that counts.
ANd yes, to SOME women, it may be oppression. But to some others, like this woman, it obviously isn't. Circumstances, circumstances! These are something that us outsiders can have little idea of, but are so crucial!
She's said she wouldn't wear it if its not part of her religion. But since it is, she accepts it.
Obviously religion plays an important and fulfilling part in her life, as it does for many people. Clearly she WANTS her religion to be a part of her life.
You don't have to personally like every aspect of something to want it to be part of your life, or for something to be important to you.
That's not oppression, that's making a life choice.
Yes, some of the women who adopt these dressing trends are "oppressed". But clearly plenty aren't.
One of the most difficult things the Western-minded must deal with is the prejudicial belief that all such ladies are being Stifled by the Oppressive Muslim Regime!!! which is clearly not true in plenty of instances. This is an instance in which the temptation to enforce OUR moral values on them tends to prove too strong to resist.
Those of you railing against this as oppression may tend to think of yourself as openminded.. "openminded" being hand-in-hand with the "liberal" mindset.
But being TRULY openminded is really, really difficult. And it includes accepting mindsets so alien to your own that something that seems so hideiously oppressive to you may just be an acceptable, and even good, part of life to others.
I personally thank Mr. Ali for bringing this conversation here. This is in some ways an important discussion. There's so much misunderstanding regarding Islam and women, and its good to have an open discussion about it.
There's a great deal of ugliness, here, I urge some of you to take a break, then come back and look at what you said. It's not pretty.
FYI, my stance: hardcore atheist & hippie liberal who feels religion's the cause of most of the world's evils.
But I strongly believe in everyone living as they like (an it harm none, do as ye will. "harm" of course, being subjective. I seriously doubt this woman feels "harmed!").
I don't keep kosher or fast or dress modestly (for religious observances at least) or decorate my body for special events or ceremonies. I don't stretch my neck or bear spiritual tattoos. I don't build a sukkah or shake an etrog. I don't eat only fish on fridays or avoid mixing meat and dairy. I'm not weaing a prayer shawl or tallis or arm-wrappings or sacred vestments under my clothes.
But as long as the people who do choose to do those things I will defend their right to do so.
Honestly, the reactionary "AH! Religion, grab the Dawkins!" attitude is quite trite. Most of the Atheists I know don't bark with this kind of intolerance, and many of them are quite curious and knowledgeable about other's beliefs.
Talking to actual Muslim women instead of seeing them as a simple oppressed and repressed "other" is a good exercise, regardless of your take on the whole God thing.
Secret Life of Plants, the usual number of women "burned as Witches in the Burning Times" was allegedly invented by Z Budapest, a radical feminist who apparently has no ethics whatsoever. She took the number of Jews murdered in the Holocaust, added 50%, and published the number as fact. The nearest thing to justification she could give for this was that women were "erased" from history. In my opinion she just wanted to make it seem like a bigger deal than the Holocaust.
This reprehensible deceit was swallowed hook, line, and sinker by the Wiccan community, including me, until someone pointed out that there's no historical evidence to suggest that. As usual with conspiracy theorists, Budapest and her partisans claim the evidence was covered up. The public execution of nine million women in Renaissance Europe could NOT have been concealed; since Budapest never cited any real evidence for her claim, the remaining possibilities are that she made it up, and that she got it from someone who made it up (but AFAIK there's no citation of it preceding Budapest).
So... this modesty is commanded in Islam of women, but not men? What, are men exempted from modesty?
And isn't it interesting they didn't go to...oh, say Saudi Arabia and ask a Muslim woman what she thought on the subject.
Oh... wait... that's right. She would be beaten within an inch of her life for talking to anyone without a man present. And someone would have to drive her to the hospital because she isn't allowed to drive a car herself.
And she wouldn't be allowed to visit a graveyard by herself.
Or attend Friday prayers in a Mosque, unless that mosque would happen to have a special 'women-only' section.
So what are the restrictions on men in Saudi Arabia? They can't go to women-only venues. That's it.
So I don't know why there is any debate about 'repression' of women under Islam. No clue at all.
Seeing as ones cultural identity is of apparent importance in these threads - of which I have read most, though not all - I am a honky from Canada.
I am continually flabbergasted by the comments in opposition to, lets be clear, a swimsuit cast as something more than an interesting insight.
Since I am going to cast myself as a western pig objectifying women, I actually think is far more attractive than one that lets a woman's tits hang out. Sure, call me a prude. My brain can do more with little. I'm quite a pig. Clothes don't stop that.
But why, oh why, do these threads degrade into cultural fear? The perception of prosecution of women coming from a western-centric perspective does not compute, I don't disagree that people - men and women, LBGT(suffixed with the rest of those letters I can't remember) - suffer more under strict enforcement of cultural laws. That has little to do with what the cultural edict happens to be.
Moreover, double-you tee eff? On boingboing? A little disheartening.
And yes, I said nothing in this post. Was merely reacting to the third thread in this chain - 500+ comments all told - out of a disbelief that this level of cultural fear lives in even an open minded community such as this.
OK, final disclosure: out of all monotheistic/abrahamic religions I do find most of the tenents of Islam the most interesting. As far as monotheistic non-animist faiths go. Must make me a woman hating monster.
I wonder what would happen if everyone on the planet suddenly became genuinely open-minded.
(chaos? Is being completely open minded, sans any prejudice at ALL, a bad thing?)
Mariam,
Thank you for your post, and thanks for your courage in exposing yourself to this torrent of responses, not all of which, sadly, are as polite or mindful as they could be.
All women--indeed all people--should be free to live their lives as they wish. Worship as they wish (or wish not to, for those of us who are atheists), dress as they wish, behave as they wish.
I think (I hope!) the majority of this site's readership supports and celebrates strong, free, independent women. I know that millions of women choose to practice Islam, and choose to observe its teachings or rules, including those about what they should wear. And I hope that we support this too. Find your own peace. I am certainly trying to find mine.
But I suspect that a lot of the resistance to Islam that you may find in America, even from supposedly informed progressives, even if it comes in the form of stereotypes or insults, is that we know there are countries in the world where Muslim women are killed for failing to wear the hijab, or for speaking to a man not their husband, or for being the victim of a rape. People here may wonder how, or why, you would choose to follow a belief system that tolerates this kind of oppression.
I quickly concede that of course Islam should not be judged by the behavior of its most fanatical adherents. Nor should Christianity or the Republican Party or the Democratic Part or the FSM-ites.
But we're trying to make a free society here. We're still fighting for equal rights for gay people. We're still fighting for rights for racial minorities. And we're fighting for equality for women. And while you freely choose to wear the hijab, we must acknowledge that many, many Muslim women wear it because they'll be punished if they don't. And that's a problem, if I may so understate it.
You choose to wear the hijab. I hope that you live in a community that equally respects women who do not.
Thank you again for speaking to us.
this makes me kinda sick. i live in the states and i should be able to wear whatever the hell i want to. i don't have to show my body (my skin, my shape, my hair) to anyone if i don't want to. this isn't saudi arabia. nobody's going to beat me if i do want to show myself. and nobody should be pissed off if i don't.
YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO SEE MY BODY, I HAVE THE RIGHT TO COVER IT UP.
this is fem lib folks.
Remember when the US first started attacking Afghanistan? There were pictures of women in burqas in the news all the time. Presumably as some sort of incentive to get us to support the war. This is what we were fighting against! Liberating the world from it's oppressive regimes! Ah, such sick, sick irony.
1MacGeek, I don't think there's any reasonable debate that women are horribly oppressed in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia, contrary to its own apparent representations, is not Islam.
Please remember that "American Moslem," for example, is not a contradiction. I know a young Moslem who is very American in every way (well, he didn't go out drinking for his 21st birthday, but then neither did I). He says his mother and other female relatives don't wear the headscarf or act subservient.
In my opinion blaming the behavior of Saudi Arabia (whose religious police are on my "sure hope they die" list) on Islam is a lot like blaming the behavior of Eric Rudolph or Fred Phelps on Christianity. These two ARE Christians, much as all decent Christians would like to repudiate them, but they are neither representative nor exemplary of Christianity.
@ 1macgeek: "Oh... wait... that's right. She would be beaten within an inch of her life for talking to anyone without a man present. And someone would have to drive her to the hospital because she isn't allowed to drive a car herself."
Once again, an issue only loosely related to whether those women wear burqas or not. How is it that the existence of abused women in the middle east means that women in other parts of the world should not wear a scarf?
It has been my observation that people do not need religion to make them violent, greedy, or otherwise evil. But religion seems to be an effective pretense for evil in many cases, particularly it seems in the Middle East these days.
I would also say that people don't need religion to make them good. But religion seems to be an effective pretense for goodness in many cases.
The thinking that men are uncontrollable creatures whom women are responsible for hiding/protecting themselves from frees men of responsibility for assaulting a woman if she doesn't comply with the dress code. And it's not just Muslim women, a lot of women still get blamed for their rapes in the West (look what she was wearing! She was asking for it!). To the point where many women aren't just afraid of being raped, they don't want to take risks because they're afraid of /being blamed for their rape/, that somehow they are being irresponsible. Oppression is an extremely subtle, insidious thing and it's not obvious and not even fully understood by its victims. Most forms of oppression are so deeply systemic and ingrained in society that the victims themselves, and the ones they love, may help perpetuate it without realizing.
This video comes to mind:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUtSM2oVy_E&feature=video_response
I live in Saudi and I understand Muslim women in America are far less "oppressed" in a Western world setting than a traditional Muslim country.
But nevertheless, in Saudi women are treated like pets and have no rights. The Wahhabi/purist interpretation of Islam pretty much treats them like third class citizens.
It is really hard not be sickened by the obvious inequality. What is worst is going to Thailand and seeing the men everywhere with their wives trailing behind them. The men wear shorts and look like goofy tourists while their wives are wrapped in black gauze. I've talked to some Saudi women and they say they like the clothing because it makes them feel anonymous and it keeps men from pestering them.
Is the "It can't be liberating to wear modest dress because the impulse stems from male oppression" argument equivalent to the "It can't be liberating for women to produce porn because the impulse stems from male oppression" argument? Because it always seems to come down to men telling women what they are and aren't allowed to do.
The more I think about it the more I think that a relatively interesting link/post has been burdened with a title which is a fundamentally unanswerable question.
"Are Muslim Women Oppressed?" Is not answerable.
Are _All_ Muslim Women Oppressed? Obviously not. It's a large enough group that any definition of oppressed that applies to all Muslim women is going to apply to damn near everyone else as well.
Are _Any_ Muslim Women Oppressed? Pretty definitely yes. Again, it's a big enough group that any definition of oppressed that excludes the entire group is going to exclude just about everyone.
Is the specific woman whose blog got linked oppressed? Seems like not.
Is apparel the be all and end all of oppression? No.
Am I starting to sound like Donald Rumsfeld? Yes.
Anyway, we all seem to be descending into a real shitfit of an argument without defining basic terms. What constitutes oppressed? And, for the definition of your choice, do we have any actual data? Because one person is actually a pretty small sample from which to extrapolate to "Muslim Women"
People, people!
We need to focus on the REAL enemy: Mormons.
(hehe just kidding don't disemvowel me!)
Along the lines of post 55:
If she thinks wearing a headscarf in some way honors God, and if she feels right in honoring God, then how can you call that oppression?
@Shannon
We are all products of our society and upbringing. I too find it difficult to conceive of some all-powerful being that guides the universe, but on the other hand I acknowledge that any religion in essence is a frame through which to view life, the universe and everything. Many atheists pride themselves and lose no time stating that they are moral people. These morals have not sprung from nothing, they came from social understandings which were all codified into either laws or religion. Sure, some of these codes have gotten stale (Christianity and birth control regulations) or overly complex, but to attack every religion as some sort of delusion is to ignore that religion in general is an incentive to moral action and a connection to the wider spiritual universe.
Ah, and finally - by the time we come to comment #154, we have solid logic.
"Is being completely open minded, sans any prejudice at ALL, a bad thing?"
Talia,
If open your mind too much, your brain will fall out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=AU&hl=en-GB&v=RFO6ZhUW38w
The phrase is from the book "How Mumbo Jumbo Conquered the World", which is a fantastic book indeed. I heartily recommend spending the money.
Two points on witches and Salem: 1. to paraphrase TS Eliot, we don't burn 'em, we hang 'em; 2. Salem was a theocracy, under what eventually became the Congregationalist Church, not the Catholic Church.
I think this thread has almost as many pompous blowhards as all the religions of the world put together. (EXAGGERATION!) Some very arrogant and disappointing responses. I expected better of Boing Boing readers.
Freely, happily choosing to be subject to something is not - I repeat, NOT - oppression. It is freedom. If you must insist that (for example) my faith in Christianity is oppressing me, then fine. You're free to do so. But no one is forcing me to live as a Christian. I am choosing to subject myself to its laws and guidelines, in much the same way that Mariam chooses to be subject to Islam's laws. I still have my freedom in the matter. I'm choosing how to live my life. Would you be receptive to me telling you that your life is wrong, that you're a fool for your choices? Then maybe you shouldn't do it to others.
Do you not choose to be subject to the laws and regulations of The United States of America (or whichever country you live in)? No one's forcing you to live there (at least, I hope not), but you (hopefully) choose to. Are they oppressing you? For most of you, I'm guessing your answer would be "no," yet you're still subject to their command. Are you not still free? Does the law not, for the most part, benefit you even though it "oppresses" you?
Then again, perhaps I just haven't reached the level of enlightenment necessary to see myself as the ignorant, teat-suckling religious neanderthal that I am.
i've been to plenty of christian weddings where the man was told he's the head of the household and his job is to return his wife to heaven as beautiful as she is that day and that for her that HE has the final say in the matter under the roof... yeah whatever... women are all oppressed pretty much...
and no, i'm a dude.
Slaves will imagine the wildest rationalization to justify their own oppression.
@115: Where did you get that from or did you make it up? It's wonderful!
@159: If that's the case, then none of us know if we are truly free. Perhaps you're right.
CRAP! Comments shuffled. I was making reference to TooGoodToCheck's comment in regards to consisting of sound logic. Please disregard my previous comment as illogical.
Muslim men does have clothing restriction - from the navel to just below the knee.
As for women who are oppressed, i know some of you keep going to the ME for reference. But why not Indonesia or Malaysia, where in Indonesia alone there's about a hundred million muslims. If you say the Muslim women in these countries, with their colorful and festive hijabs are oppressed, where some of them are ministers and head of businesses then you have already set your mind in stone; no amount of cajoling and argument will change that.
i urge those who dont know, to learn, and those who knows, to learn more about Islam and its tenets, and take everything in context, not just taking it piece by piece and deconstructing it from there. everything have its context.
@arkizzle
"I believe in an open mind, but not so open that your brains fall out."
Arthur Hays Sulzberger,
Editor, NYTimes, 1935-1061
One of my favorite all time quotes....
If I read Shakespeare and then make you dress like Hamlet, I'm oppressing you. There is quite a lot of stuff like that going on in the world. Not everywhere and not for everyone. But certainly organized religions do tend toward this kind of thing. I don't see how one could seriously argue that point.
Organized religions do seem to tend toward insisting that certain habits are kept and that certain appearances are maintained.
That is oppressive.
But I know some corporate guys who think intelligent, hard-working men should wear ties. That is also oppressive.
Oppressive people always tell other people what to wear. They can't help it. It's first thing that springs into their tiny minds.
Mark @ 101 has said all that needs to be said in this thread.
As for the rest of the berserk anti-hijab lecturers here, GET A LIFE! If the oppression of women upsets you, GO LOOK FOR REAL ISSUES.
Can women vote, get education, get jobs, equal pay, are they safe from sexual harassment? Are they safe from rape?
The last damn thing you need to worry about is a frigging headscarf.
It matters not to me if my neighbor chooses to wear 20 headscarves, one headscarf or none at all.
It neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket.
(With apologies to Thomas Jefferson)
Religion seeks to demean, and either willingly or otherwise, people agree to be demeaned.
Now she may welcome the fact that she is demeaned or is asked to do things differently; that, however, does not change what it is.
Of course, I am quite indifferent about people doing whatever the hell they want - it is none of my business and they are free to do as they will.
However, as a fellow human, it is deeply paining to see what religion does to people.
I would express the same sympathy to any other religious person, immaterial of what the religion is.
Oh, I see! So because you've been brainwashed by the leaders of your community into believing that a magical sky fairy will stop liking you if you don't do what they say, you're not oppressed at all! That clarifies things greatly.
What a very odd and (to me) unexpected debate.
I live in the midwestern United States and see women wearing headscarves all the time, and it's never occurred to me to wonder if it was a sign of oppression.
I don't think the issue is headscarves. When I see someone in the U.S. wearing clothing/jewelry/whatever that marks them as belonging to a particular religion, a reasonable base assumption is that they are wearing it intentionally and could stop if they wanted.
A point that seems to be eluding many posters on this thread is that millions of Muslim women have not been simply mired in darkness waiting for someone to tell them they are being oppressed and lead them into the light. That kind of paternalism is not that different than some of the more odious right-wing adherents who want to "bring freedom" to the "Middle East".
You cannot make a gift of liberty, and to assume that any Muslim woman in hijab is some movie-of-the-week tale of religious oppression is pure nonsense. Shall we start crying out for the poor Jewish boys tallises and kippahs?
And hey, Little Edie Beale was a fashion plate in her time, and take a gander at her daily wear.
Can the next post be about how the Jizya is totally justified and okay and kind of cool?
Wikipedia it!
"Opression" is not a thing by itself.
Of course, the set of relations that is envolved is very real to the participants, but "opression" is a word. A sign. Someone is opressed based on some understanding of what is it to be opressed. I think all monogamous relationship are opressive. Many will disagree. You don't have to believe in the invisible friend on the sky to be opressed based in some paradigm, c'mon.
You can say someone is opressed based on marxist, or anarchist, or feminist, or any other terminology. Then we can debate and try to convince the others. Opression by itself isn't debatable.
We keep circling around choices and individuals and etc. We're not dealing with something that operates on the individual basis. We choose our language? Our parents? Our beliefs, our soccer team? We may choose a few, we may think we choose everything, but then we have the problem of, like, distinguishing childrens that are abused by their parents and children that aren't. The children-parent relation short-circuits our comprehension based on 'choices' as much as this religion-person relation. I don't think we have much chance of debating opression based on individuals. I think we need to deal with systems.
"Choice" seems a poor divisor. We're all free to bully this woman for using certain clothings. She is free to be pissed off and complain. We're all choosing. You can easily choose to be opressed in marxist terms, in anarchist terms, in feminist terms, whatever. You can choose to have a lord that walks over your tummy. In my view, we all choose the opression of the national states. So what? It doesn't makes it less opressive, in anarchistic terms.
I digress. I think she's opressed. The only way to effect some change in this situation - and I want it - is to convince her. In the ends, it's just who convinces who. I have my values and paradigms and she has hers. (:
If you introduce one hundred white Americans to an Iranian Muslim woman, ninety-nine of them wouldn't be able to guess if she was more likely to be Sunni or Shi'a.
But all one hundred of them would have an opinion about whether or not she should wear a veil- an opinion they'd think she was foolish not to listen to.
And that (speaking as a Westerner) is the West's foreign relations problem in a nutshell.
Just to inject a little cheer into this:
Saudis open hi-tech science oasis
Danlalan,
Thanks! I knew it was a quote, but didn't know of whom, just the book I'd read it in.
:D
It strikes me that many statements about religion - how it limits your freedom, imposes its own mindset on yours, forces you to do things that don't accord with your personal preferences - can all be said with equal truth about interpersonal relationships. It's the nature of life that we give up some of our perfect self-determination in order to enter into relationships that provide us more comfort and fulfillment than we got from our independence. And for some people, religion is that relationship.
For me, the moment of entry into adulthood was the moment that I decided that I'd rather be happy than right.
Regarding: "it's something I believe is mandated in my religion. No one is forcing me and it has no political significance."
I think people are having some issues in parsing of emphasis here in these 2 sentences: There are also some muslim women who don't _"believe"_ specifics are "mandated".
N.B.: I'm a muslim female born and raised in the U.S. I'm not a Sharia scholar--though I do have a PhD. My mom is not a muslim. My dad is. My siblings vary widely in their practice: from the Richard Dawkins citing end of the spectrum to the fasting Ramadan and trying to explain things on the internet end of things.
...My understanding is that the most specific mention in the Quran (and I'm paraphrasing here, so I apologize in advance, but I think it's circa ~33.59) is that ladies should wear sufficient clothes to not be confused with streetwalkers.
When it comes to what any individual practices, there are cultural mores that can come into play. And for those who are inclined to cover up, when it comes to modesty there are rules that apply to males too: I believe the general case for males was from belly button to knee as far as ideal coverage, but again, that is more of a general practice that I've noted via seeing folks at community centers when I was a kid, I can't provide a citation.
The most important aspect of any act of faith, or even just general "act" is intent. (There's a whole Law and Order franchise that I think supports me there.) If I roll up my sleeves to change the pump oil it is not to seduce my labmates with my sweetly defined forearm muscles--it is a utility and safety issue. Likewise, if I were to to walk down the street on a cold night with 4 inches of cleavage showing, I'd know what I was doing, and personally I wouldn't feel great about representing myself that way so I don't do that. And regardless what I believe when I go to bed at night, whether it is along the lines of making sure I have a positive balance in my metaphysical checking account or a fear of a flying spaghetti monster, that is how I'd behave. The basic tenets of Islam happen to jibe pretty well with how I logically tend to do things, so I tend to find myself under that tent.
Regarding the original issue: I used to frequently lake- and competitive-swim so I tend to wear bathing suits more along the lines of short-johns and technical suits. Have never owned a bur- or bi-kini, though would consider the former before the latter. My parents actually think I dress a little too conservatively (due to what they think is body shame,) but the fact of the matter is there is a lot of crap in lakes and I've always been paranoid about such things touching my lady-business after seeing that scene in "Stand by Me" with the leeches. I'm not always the best example of a muslim, but then again I'm not always the best example of a human; everyone strives to improve.
--Another moderate American Muslim who only wears a headcover to pray.
Bravo for those brave words! Religion remains the only virtually taboo subject on Earth for liberals, even harder to get one's head around when persons who command respect by dint of intellect also happen to be very religious. A liberal usually comes to grips with religion either by rejecting it out of hand or by becoming religious. There is no middle ground, and of course there should be. Sometimes the blind spots in liberal perspective are breathtaking.
Islam in particular is hard for Americans to understand, because it, almost alone of all religions, gives perfect freedom to its adherents, absolute free will tempered only by the warnings of the Quran and the example of Mohammed. I liken it to walking across the Grand Canyon on a narrow bridge without guardrails. Your fear of falling should be, and in this case is, the only guide you require. The headscarf is a matter of personal choice -- not OUR personal choice, but HER personal choice.
Speaking as a convinced Darwinian, a lifelong student of Buddhism, and a so-so Catholic, I always and inevitably find myself admiring the example of religious persons of any tradition. It helps to draw lines in the sand that surround each other, and do not divide us. That headscarf is not a dare, and certainly not an insult to any true American.
I don't care if women want to cover themselves, veils and hijab are often very beautiful on the women who prefer to wear it, and if it makes they happy, who cares, as long as women are not coerced into wearing it. As for those who insist on being fully covered, they should have to obey the same restrictions on concealing clothing that I have to, unless they want to fight for my right to wear a ski mask in a bank.
@ GRIKDOG
The headscarf is a matter of personal choice -- not OUR personal choice, but HER personal choice.
(broken record, barely spoken, mumbling, exhausted) except where required by law, and enforced under threat of prison or violence, as part of a larger system to oppress and marginalize women...
In defense of the anti-religious nutcases. . .
I can't speak for everyone else's experience, but I personally grew up as a member of a very tightly knit christian organization. In retrospect, a lot of what I did, and what I didn't do, is pretty wildly disparate from what I might have wanted to be doing or not doing, but I tried to serve god, following the spirit and letter of what He commanded.
And you can say I had a choice - I lived in a nation with freedom of religion and public education, and yet for the first twenty years of my life it was utterly inconceivable to me that there was even a choice to be made. It's not that I felt trapped - its that my entire world view, my experiences, and most of the people in my life were lined up in such a way that there was no thought that the religion I followed could be anything but true. And losing my religion was more a matter of good luck (got a job in another city so I had less of a religious feedback loop, didn't get married before I got out of the religion) than good planning or force of will.
So I'm not sure that you can say someone really has a choice if they don't believe it's a choice. For myself, I wouldn't say that I was oppressed, but I can easily imagine how someone could be getting a seriously raw deal from their religion, and still feel like they don't have a choice even if they technically do.
Very few people walk out there with an open mind an look for a religion that works for them. Most of us follow the same religion as our parents, and for a lot of us that works out fairly well. Other times it sucks hard, and people end up working against their own interests, significantly invested in something that's really not good for them.
We have freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the separation of church and state. These things are a mostly reliable defense against religion doing too much damage. I would certainly rate them as better tools than a ban on all religion or a specific religion or whatever.
But I do think that Shannon has a valid point - just because someone believes in a religion without physical coercion doesn't mean that they're not oppressed (for a given value of 'oppressed' which includes acting against your own interests and giving away your power).
TooGoodToCheck,
That argument could be applied quite well to capitalism, or any other economic system. Or parliamentary democracy. Or the kindergarten through 12th grade school system. Or any of the other peculiarities of any culture or nation, all of which are assumed to be 'normal' by the vast mass of citizens or adherents. Which is to say, that the argument may be correct, but does it have value if it applies to every aspect of every human's existence?
This is the same old debate that's been going on since the 1700's - all the ways the West likes to see the Middle East as backwards, brainwashed, thoughtless and violent, because it would be oh so much more convenient for us if they actually were.
Because then, when we pressured them to be more like us, we'd be doing them a straightforward favor, instead of... whatever really, really odd thing it is we're actually doing.
@grikdog
There are certainly flavors of the Muslim faith for which your statement is not true.
I think what really freaks people out is not the "perfect freedom" which I had not actually heard of before, but rather the fact that there are a non-trivial number of people who would self-describe as Muslim who are really scary dudes, and who are avowedly opposed to freedom for adherents and non-adherents alike.
Salman Rushdie was encouraged to temper his free will, and he was given a lot more incentive than the warnings of the Quran and the example of Mohammed. There were riots over cartoons published in Denmark.
That behavior is obviously not representative of most Muslims, but please don't spout BS about how we're freaked out by excessive freedom.
Everyone is debating a symbolic piece of clothing while missing the fact that most countries still have laws requiring one to wear a minimum of clothing in public. Only when we are clothing optional will we be free.
Adendum: (Another moderate American Muslim who only wears a headcover to pray again)
The implication that the choice to wear hijab is oppression due to it being
(per Str1ken)
"required by law, and enforced under threat of prison or violence, as part of a larger system to oppress and marginalize women..."
is fine to make, but it is important not to confuse those things as being part of Islam rather than constructs of nations.
The problem with the wording of the post title "Are Muslim Women Oppressed" is again an issue of parsing. People can go in the direction "Are Women Oppressed (because they are Muslim)", "Are Muslims Oppressed (when they are women)", and the leap that many have seemed to take "Are Women Oppressed (by Islam)".
I would argue that there are crappy places to live with respect to local laws, but that those are not inherent to Islam, and it's kind of silly to do the country/religion bait and switch because there are millions of Muslims in America too. And, if you're American too, if I'm oppressed, you're oppressed.
I tend not to wave the "help! help! I'm being repressed" flag except in Monty Python related jest... though I battle the cruel oppression of gravity every day; just like everyone but the 6 people on the International Space Station.
I haven't time to read everything at the moment. but here is my two cents.
1. It's silly to base the question of oppression on an individual response. Why don't we take a poll of domestic violence victims to see how many, think they "deserved" it?
2. Head Scarves are the tip of a really big iceberg. There are many countries where women are not allowed to participate in democracy, get educations, choose if their genitals will be mutilated, who they will marry, or go to a doctor to be tested for breast cancer.
3. Any woman that chooses to wear the tip of that iceberg on their head every day and thinks they are "as American as anyone else" really have zero sense of American history. American women have fought and died for a century to remove the bounds of religion and tradition so they are as free to dress and socialize as men. My mother fought for women's rights and the removal of dress codes and so have many American women. If you think watching movies and buying sexy undies is at the heart of what is American you should really crack a few books.
Lots of points made about how free Muslim are in the U.S. to believe and to dress as they wish. Of course they are. But that is not really the issue as I see it.
I think that if you look at the globe you find that wherever organized religion has been allowed to take control, by either becoming the government or by enmeshing itself inextricably with the a government, it oppresses. I think this is true without exception.
It is the natural tendency of all religions when left unchecked to control oppress.
Some secular governments do this also. Like China. You don't need religion to oppress. But religion is one of the best mechanisms for oppression ever invented.
Are my comments being deleted or is BB commenting broke?
@Antinous
Yes. If it's applicable to every aspect of your existence, then that just means you should question everything, and generally treat personal testimonials as being deeply subjective, with limited applicability outside of the worldview of the person delivering the testimonial.
re Capitalism, yes, the argument applies. I've gotten used to capitalism. Is it oppressing me? Am I giving away my power? Do you I better options available? (yes, yes, and maybe but I kind of doubt it). I do think that there's value in questioning capitalism, even if you think it's awesome, because maybe it just seems awesome because you've never given serious consideration to the alternatives.
re K-12 school system. I highly encourage thoughtful review on this one, although by the time you do this you may have wrapped up most of K-12. But yes, I absolutely think that K-12 needs an attempt at objective review and a serious consideration of other options. And I also totally believe that just because you think K-12 worked for you doesn't mean that there isn't something better, or that it didn't snuff out a significant amount of creativity and individuality in people who walked out of it thinking they're totally fine.
An argument that applies to all aspects of life is just a really awesome argument ;)
The important thing is to consider where the argument leads. What I get out of it is that personal testimonials (i.e. 'I am religious and I feel free', or 'I am an atheist so I'm more free than you' are preposterously subjective and they cannot be used to argue much beyond themselves. Also, I conclude that anyone who wants to say that a given religion (or economic system, or political system, or anything else that gets in to your brain early and claims exclusive rights) is or is not oppressive should bring definitions and statistics, or be prepared to be mired in a mess of conflicting and irreconcilable opinion.
Mostly I just wanted to say that I think Shannon had a valid point buried there initially (which was I think that a subset of Muslim women (A) are passionate believers and (B) are getting screwed over by their religion or getting screwed over by their culture with the complicity of their religion; ergo a personal testimonial is not in all cases going to be airtight evidence of non-oppression), and it kind of got drowned out by whole atheist/fascist/I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I thing.
RedShirt,
The US hasn't even managed to pass the Equal Rights Amendement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Rights_Amendment
Also, the system keeps holding your comments back and I don't know why. It's not normal for it to detain comments with no links in them.
I think the lesson is fairly clear: please, let us respect individuals and treat them fairly and sensitively in regards to their beliefs while still fighting against societal norms that are against our beliefs.
So, Mariam Sobh, I respect your beliefs.
I do not believe society should punish people for wearing a hijab, nor do I believe we should punish people for not wearing a hijab.
I have a lot of problems with the ways that societies punish people, and I advocate that all countries that mandate clothing should remove this from their laws.*
However, I recognize that I have a poor understanding of the culture, history, and future possibilities of the nearly infinite societies on planet earth, and so I try to understand a little more each day to reduce that ignorance.
I still haven't found a good reason why society should punish a woman for wearing or not wearing certain clothing.
Wow. Bickering over scarves. I wonder if house pets would wile away their lives over such minutiae if they could type?
When everyone has finally exhausted themselves on this "issue," maybe we can have a protracted argument over Sikhs and their Kirpan. I think a good, long argument over Kirpan would be a fine way for bored, sheltered westerners to demonstrate both their awareness of the religious symbol as well as their outrage because of something or other to do with this and that.
Plus it would generate even more hits for BoingBoing. See, I'm always thinking of you guys. ;)
@pinehead, unfortunately, all of this handwringing does nothing for our traffic, so, sorry: even that potentially selfish motivation is not at play. 200 comments may seem awfully dramatic, but that does zero for our pageviews. Sucks, I wish there was some benefit to all the trolling.
Well, I'd love to see the same kind of interview/presentation with Morzal O.
I am an American convert to Islam. I wear hijab-for several reasons. I can't lie and say that I never feel pressured to wear it. Yes, sometimes I do. There have been other times when I removed my hijab and felt my spirituality take a dip. My hijab is part of my daily faith. Wearing it makes me feel closer to God and it keeps me feeling more connected to Islam. Am I oppressed? I don't know I think I'm very fortunate. I have a hardworking husband who is a decent husband and father. I stay home to raise my children and have a comfortable lifestyle. All of my basic needs are met. Perhaps, we can remember those who are truly oppressed in this world. We debate a piece of cloth that a woman wears on her head while there are people in this world who are so poor that they have no clothes on their back, no food, no shelter, and disearse and poverty have wrecked their worlds. They are the oppressed-not me. I chose Islam as my faith and lifestyle. I chose this life for myself. It's not a perfect life and there are sacrifices to chosing this life. But, they are sacrifices I choose to make.
In related news:
It's illegal in the US for women to walk around topless in public. If they do so, they are subject to arrest, fines and possible incarceration.
The only significant difference is who's definition of modesty is being followed.
Here's where I stand: if I'm honest with myself, I think the burqa/headscarf is the most disgusting and tragic symbol of female oppression in the modern world today. But, of course, I would never say that anywhere other than this forum and I almost regret admitting it here. I have to maintain my carefully prepared facade of cultural sensitivity.
Eek.
I think Xeni is totally right on calling out the xenophobia of most of these comments. Many of you seem interested in chastising people (particularly Muslims) for their personal beliefs and arguing that those very beliefs are not held because of their own actual will to hold them, but by a "social brainwashing" from birth.
Like I said in my earlier comment, we ALL perform our genders based on social systems and guidelines that we hardly ever think about. I cite this phenomenon to simply draw awareness to this issue and it's prevalence in ALL societies. Gender performance is a part of all of us and one culture's version of that is by no means "better," or "smarter," or "more logical," than another's. If you believe that the American way of life and the way Americans perform their gender is any less complicated or socially influenced than that of the citizens of a Muslim country, then you are simply wrong in your assumptions, and I would venture that your ignorance on the subject is upheld by a xenophobia that doesn't allow you to take seriously the life choices of individuals that you could easily classify as "other."
Please. I beg of you. Read Judith Butler. Has anyone else reading this? Does anyone care that people (like Butler) have devoted their entire academic careers to this subject, but this comment thread is full of ignorance-inspired rhetoric? Any Gender Studies majors out there?
Seriously...
The advantage of becoming aware of one's personal gender performance and it's social history is the creation of a more interrogative thinker when it comes to evaluating others. If we all become aware of the roots of our performance, then we can become more accepting of how others choose to perform their gender - and others includes everyone, from transgendered Americans, to straight white men to Muslim women. The study of gender identity and performance is not about getting to a place where one can adeptly cast judgment on another culture or community, but to better understand they systems that create gender performance with the intention of deftly following it into the future with the added responsibility of creating a more tolerant society.
This is why organized religion is such a crock of shiite. Christianity is filled with this nonsense too. "Do this", "Don't do this", blah blah, blah. In my opinion anyone who does what someone else tells them to is a weak-minded fool.
Muslimas should feel free to wear the Hijab, but I feel free to denounce them for basically saying to other women (and especially Muslimas who choose not to wear it) they're hellbound floozies.
Anyone who tells anyone else they're deserving of eternal fire and brimstone for any other reason than genocide or child rape ain't no friend of mine.
You're completely right, Binaryloop, as is often your custom.
@Xeni
So far we've been called racist, xenophobic, and trolls. Perhaps you'd like to compare us to Hitler?
I oppose the troll label, because that implies people who've come here to start a fight for no reason beyond love of conflict, and I seriously don't think that the comments deserve in general to be categorized as such.
I'm not sure that I can comment on racist. I haven't seen anything that seemed to me like it was explicitly race driven.
Xenophobic, well maybe. I've noticed a strong trend towards rabid anti-religionism, which probably qualifies as xenophobia.
Mostly though, I'd say at least two out of three posts is a good faith attempt to have a reasonable discussion about a hot button issue. It's a discussion which turned into something of a confused mess, but smearing the entire conversation as racist xenophobic trolling isn't going to open minds or make people any more comfortable with faiths other than their own.
Any woman that chooses to wear the tip of that iceberg on their head every day and thinks they are "as American as anyone else" really have zero sense of American history. American women have fought and died for a century to remove the bounds of religion and tradition so they are as free to dress and socialize as men. My mother fought for women's rights and the removal of dress codes and so have many American women.
Yeah. Just remember that American women have fought and died so that if you exercise your freedom as you see fit, rather than as I see fit, you aren't "as American as anyone else".
Or something like that.
i wear hijab & i love wearing it. nobody forces me to wear. to clear this misconception that muslim women are forced to do hijab i have started a signature campaign on loveforhijab.com. here muslim women who loves wearing hijab can come & put in their comments.
i launched this site a week back and i already have few comments. hoping this site will change everyone opinion about hijab.
Here is a story from a Belgian school that allowed headscarves, and upon receiving a flood of muslim girls coming in, forbade them again. Some of the girls interviewed speak of immense pressure they had lifted from them by the ban:
http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14447929
Well, I am delighted to return to find that the biggest problem people found with my post was the number of witches burned. Okay, that's fine, I stand corrected. I will take the lowest figure offered here, 40,000. Then I will take the other figure that this means that 85% of the 40,000 were women. Fine. 34,000 women were burned as witches because "Religious Authorities" would not suffer a witch to live.
(I took a "burning times" class as an undergrad and probably hyperbolized the # with no help from anyone, just my false memory. I've never even known anyone who was a Wicca(n)? Also, as was also pointed out, I miswrote when I said "Catholic" and "America" since the Puritans weren't Catholics)
Okay. Still, 34,000 women...is this supposed to invalidate anything I said?
Let me be clear about one thing - The fact that I think religion is bullshit would never lead me to treat someone wearing a headscarf or even a full Burqa unkindly. I think it is appalling that anyone would spit on a woman/person for wearing (anything). Why would I add insult to what I perceive to be injury?
That doesn't mean that I cannot say that these dress codes are a sign of an offensive belief system that is dangerous to women. That doesn't mean that I don't get to argue about religion with my Muslim friends. The Muslim men who own the 99 cent store near my house even bought me a Quran because they said that I was "Too nice to be an American [and that they] didn't want me to go to Hell(?) because [I] didn't believe." They knew I didn't believe in any God/Allah because I argued with them all the time - but they also often came for dinner at my house where I made sure that what I served was Halal.
I am not out to hurt anyone, but I have the duty to say that what some people believe is repressive and dangerous crap.
I think it is important to try to build a better world here on Earth for everyone. I don't believe that religion helps build a better world in the here and now and, in fact, it makes people put up with crap that they would never put up with if they realized that this one short life is all we get.
And as far as the separation of Church and the State, ask a gay person in California who wants to marry their partner if religious prejudices don't interfere with their rights in our so-called "secular" society.
Religions always take away personal freedoms and rights. Always. We shouldn't celebrate any of it or put "religiously designated ladies fashions" in a directory of wonderful things.
The rise of a more, shall we say "confrontational", strain of Atheism in the past few years is easily dateable to 9/11 and the assertion that religion, and specifically Islam, was "ZOMGWEAREALLGONNADIE!" The argument strain became "you moderate and liberal religious people are just as deluded as the fanatics and you give them cover".
Even though most suicide bombers were less motivated by religion than by personal vendettas. Endless tirades listing every vile thing done in the name of religion, followed by repudiations and accusations and someone calls someone else a Nazi or claims Hitler was an Atheist/Christian/Pagan/Zoroastrian. 200 posts later everyone is a racist and no one remembers what we were arguing about.
It's silly. Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens have (very nice) books to sell, and their counterparts do as well. Good for them.
But day to day, moment to moment, neighbor to neighbor, I could care less what you worship or don't, who you pray to or don't. Just be happy and try to do more kindness than cruelty.