Comments on: Schakowsky’s burqa moment gives me apprehension about my trip to Middle East

By: stranger

stranger — Fri, 25 Dec 2009 10:06:52 +0000

I think Phil’s questions concerning the rights of women in Afghanistan , and by extension, Gaza, deserve a fuller discussion than they have received so far, which has amounted to “women are fine under Islam, but out”. Since the discussion began in Afghanistan, check out; link to en.wikipedia.org

This notes that from the age of eight, women were not allowed to be in direct contact with men, other than a close blood relative, husband, or in-law. Other restrictions were: Women should not appear in the streets without a blood relative or without wearing a Burqa .
Women should not wear high-heeled shoes as no man should hear a woman’s footsteps lest it excite him.
Women must not speak loudly in public as no stranger should hear a woman’s voice.
All ground and first floor residential windows should be painted over or screened to prevent women being visible from the street.
The photographing or filming of women was banned as was displaying pictures of females in newspapers, books, shops or the home.
The modification of any place names that included the word “women.” For example, “women’s garden” was renamed “spring garden”.
Women were forbidden to appear on the balconies of their apartments or houses.
Ban on women’s presence on radio, television or at public gatherings of any kind.
Women were also not allowed to go to school after they aged 8 years old, receive medical treatment from male doctors (with no educated women, women doctors were not available), work outside the home or travel outside unless taken by a male relative. Olive’s comment that women are not subservient to men is hardly borne out in the case Phil was discussing.
One could also mention that in Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed to drive, vote, walk by themselves etc.
Like Phil, I find these practices offensive. (I consider the rights to vote, travel and free assembly to be important.)
If you believe choirs should not sing in Israel lest it give comfort to apartheid oppressors, how do you justify giving support to a regime in Gaza which is introducing the same oppressive rules for women as mentioned above? Just as we should not allow Judaism to be used to justify oppression, neither should we allow Islam. It is great to see other expressions of Islam where women are treated more equally, but that does not change the fact that some expressions of it are utterly brutal to women. Hamas in Gaza appears to be coming one of these, how then should we react to it?
As stated, I think Phil raised a very important dilemma which deserves fuller discussion.

By: DICKERSON3870

DICKERSON3870 — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:14:46 +0000

RE: “…also held up a blue burqa that she had gotten in Afghanistan. She pointed out the small space that women get to look out when they wear a burqa.” – Weiss referring to Schakowsky

MY COMMENT: Burquas, marital rape, and the prohibition of education for girls/women would probably not be much of a problem today had we not intervened in Afghanistan to wage a proxy war against the Soviets in the 80s. I am confident the literacy rate for all and conditions generally for women would be far better in Afghanistan today if we had minded our own business instead of using the Afghans to wage war on the Soviets* and thereby laying the groundwork for a Taliban takeover.

*thereby fighting the Soviets “over there” so as to not have to fight them “over here” (or in Europe)

By: unverified__f8b589fd

unverified__f8b589fd — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 14:39:09 +0000

“She pointed out the small space that women get to look out when they wear a burqa.”

That’s just a lame argument: The space given by the burqa is still much bigger than the space for most humans. The area of the eyes is still smaller than that of the “burqa”.

By: sammy

sammy — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 08:06:10 +0000

I have to say the sight of girls with thong lines over their jeans made me wonder about how these girls perceived themselves. As a relatively liberal Indian, I found it as amusing as the three year olds wearing clothes with suggestive writing on them. It seemed to me that girls in the west seem to have a very short childhood. It never occured to me that they needed to be reformed.

By: Chaos4700

Chaos4700 — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 23:09:59 +0000

One thing I’ve noticed, as an artist and as a student attending a university with a substantial Muslim student population, is that Muslim women wearing hijab and dressing modestly (and when I say modestly, I mean clothing that would be considered office workplace appropriate) display every bit of personal expression that I see from women with Western hair styles and clothing.

Fundamentally, is there a functional difference between a women who chooses for her appearance an elaborate haircut, or who chooses a beautiful headscarf with vibrant colors and intricate patterns? Is the latter really being suppressed?

On the flip side, is a woman really liberated if she feels compelled to wear revealing clothing, and then subsequently to diet to the point of eating disorders or take on cosmetic surgery and the like just to feel good about themselves?

By: Citizen

Citizen — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 22:31:29 +0000

Now, that’s a wrap!

By: jan_gdyn

jan_gdyn — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 22:28:58 +0000

Might there be things to admire, not just apprehend, in a visit to an Arab society, Phil? Keep that possibility in mind.

By: olive

olive — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 22:28:31 +0000

Philip, I take issue with one of your assumptions: “Yes, these societies are struggling with sexual issues; I think my society is more advanced in that area”.

Such a statement can be shown to be incorrct from this excerpt from the article entitled “Women Under Shariah?”. Now, I must admit that almost all the Muslim countries in the world ar secular dictatorships, so it would be unfair to say that, Palestine (for example) is being ruld by Shariah but you seem to take issue with the hijab (headscarf) and niqab (face veil) . Hopefully this will refute some false assumptions that Western liberals have. Enjoy:

—————————————————————————————

Allah tells women to cover themselves so that they be recognised as pious Muslim women and are not bothered by men. It is a dress code intended to ensure respect and decency in the interactions between men and women in society.

This dress code is not as some have suggested to subjugate women nor to prevent men from lechery or worse. It is completely incorrect in Islam to say that a woman who does not cover is “asking for trouble.” Whether a woman is covered Islamically or not, a Muslim man is obliged to lower his gaze, treat her with respect and decency and her dress code is not seen as a criterion or justification for any form of illicit action.

Western societies have a different dress code. In general both men and women, but particularly women attempt to adhere to the fashions of the day. In general this promotes female images likely to be attractive to men. Often this includes a relative increase in the amount of skin displayed and a relative reduction in the amount of cloth as covering.

SEXUALISATION

Observing Western Society it is apparent that this does not promote men to treat women with respect and decency or vice versa. Men are lecherous and often speak of women in the most derogatory terms. Women are almost traded as commodities and objects of lust or desire by corporations in their advertising. Women feel under pressure to adhere to unrealistic images of perfection undoubtedly related to low self-esteem, eating disorders and depression. The Western dress code achieves an admiration of a sort but affords no real respect.

God in His Greatness has given Muslims a different dress code as part of a comprehensive social system and it is not surprising that many Muslim women choose it over other dress codes.

Women are not subordinate to men.

Women and men are not the same in Islam. God by His Knowledge has made for men and women different roles, rights, responsibilities and duties. Men have been given the responsibility of protecting women, providing for them and upholding their dignity. This does not make women less than men in any way but enhances the balance and harmony that exists within an enlightened Islamic society.
——————————————————————————————————-

So, in light of these facts, Western liberals need to reflect on why their societies allow for womens bodies to sell eveything from chocolate to toilet paper instead of trying to go on neo-liberal crusades in the Muslim world.

Just my two cents.

By: potsherd

potsherd — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:59:52 +0000

Schakowsky is an arch-Zionist concealing her Islamophobia under the burqua of feminism.

By: Chaos4700

Chaos4700 — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:51:56 +0000

As it happens, I have decided to not vote for any Democratic party candidate for federal offices, under any circumstances, no matter how progressive they might be. There are a number of reasons for this:

A) The ones that hang on to their office get a lot less progressive really fast. On international affairs certainly, and especially with regard to I-P, but it happens to their platform on all issues at some point.

B) Those that aren’t have been ostracized and even attacked by the elites of the Democratic Party. Cynthia McKinney, Howard Dean, Ned Lamont, I can name off the top of my head. The Democratic Party is no officially hostile to American progressivism. There really isn’t anything progressive about the Democratic Party at this point.

C) A vote for any Democrat or Republican is essentially a vote cast for the status quo and continued domination of the vast corporate lobbyist complex that currently runs the show, for all intents and purposes. As long as money equals votes in American politics, nothing will change.