The Forum > Article Comments > A war on women > Comments
A war on women : Comments
By Lyn Dickens, published 4/6/2010Banning the burqa is tantamount to waging war on women.
- Pages:
- ‹
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Page 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- ...
- 12
- 13
- 14
- ›
- All
Posted by Proxy, Saturday, 5 June 2010 9:15:48 PM
| |
Cornflower <' Why so when all of the available evidence is that it is the women who are making the choice?"
What evidence is that then? Does this 'evidence' come from the radical clerics mouths? Do you even know any Muslim women Cornflower? I do, and have cared for many of them in their own homes here in Australia. Many of the ones I met are totally under the control of their menfolk. When I suggest they need to see their GP to check a wound or another medical problem, they tell me they have to wait until their husband has time to go with them because they are not 'allowed' to go out on their own. So we wait, and wait, until the husband has time to take her to see the GP. Of course, it must be a female GP- or she can't see anyone. If they do go out, then they must cover themselves or their menfolk (including young sons) would 'not be happy'. This treatment of women should not be allowed in Australia. Posted by suzeonline, Saturday, 5 June 2010 11:10:47 PM
| |
CJ thinks it’s all about social opprobrium –but there is more to social opprobrium than meets the ire.
It wouldn’t be hard to guess what forms such social opprobrium would take if an attendee turned up in Nazi regalia to a public institution, and it seems even in fancy dress mode, it might be highly risqué (remember prince Harry’s bad selection of uniform http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4170083.stm ).Social opprobrium in bucket loads! But contrast this with our experience of what happened when a student ( suddenly, overnight ) decided she had an overpowering religious obligation to wear what she considered religious attire to one of our public schools –it happened, we don’t have to guess.( http://www.smh.com.au/news/Miranda-Devine/Coverup-campaign-cavein-a-blow-for-common-sense/2005/05/21/1116533578045.html ) .There was social opprobrium, but it was cut short--in fact the authorities, like a scared puppy, almost wet themselves trying to appease the rebel. Thousands of movies, documentaries, books and history lessons, few of which present Nazism in a positive light have cemented a very negative image of Nazism ---and possibly with good reason. But there is an anomaly, some of the creeds that are now colonizing Australia have an equally chequered past, but strangely you will hear little about it, because some such groups feel offended if you talk about their misdemeanours let alone their masterdemeanors. They don’t even like you drawing pictures of their heroes! And, if you do,they take “offence”(if they dont kill you) and to offend in a “multicultural”society is a grade A charge–leastways, if it’s a minority which takes the offence! So social opprobrium is not likely to be a very reliable measure –control or otherwise. Which brings us back to what Stevenlmeyer and AlGoreisRich and Proxy and others have been getting at for some time: the censorship, selectively and outright cowardice which is becoming so much a part of our “multicultural” society. Posted by Horus, Sunday, 6 June 2010 8:38:12 AM
| |
Horus,
So are you saying that Muslim women have been collectively responsible for genocide and other war crimes ? And that is why they shouldn't be allowed to dress as they wish, or currently feel they have to ? Are you also suggesting that Muslim women should take on the sins of the Muslim world and be punished for them, and that dress has got something to do with it all ? And before you go on about burqas and suicide vests, should we ban taxis because some crazy taxi-driver went on a rampage ? Yes, one thing has nothing to do with the other, I agree: and the same with burqas. What people wear is their own business, not mine or yours. Posted by Loudmouth, Sunday, 6 June 2010 9:35:58 AM
| |
Loudmouth,
I am not too concerned about dress codes ( after all, a wolf in sheiks clothing is still a wolf) –except to make two points: 1) If a school, bank or airport security sets a dress standard – it would be reasonably to expected that it should apply across the board, & 2) I suspect the dress code that many Islamic women abide by has little to do with *their* choice ( suggest you reread some of the feminist theories about societal controls) And, if it is ok –nay not just ok, but absolutely de rigueur–to highlight /deconstruct every low act of western nations and creeds. Being equal opportunity and non-discriminatory as we all no doubt aspire to be, we should apply the same to Islam, in all its various forms and misforms. Posted by Horus, Sunday, 6 June 2010 10:40:43 AM
| |
Horus,
'to dress as they wish, or currently feel they have to' - point already taken. The internal politics and gender relations in the Muslim community are issues that are yet to be sorted out, but blaming the women is hardly the way to help this along. And surely the more they can get out and see the world in all its unrestricted glory, the better ? Non-discriminatory: exactly. Posted by Loudmouth, Sunday, 6 June 2010 10:56:31 AM
|
Dr. Abdelwahab Meddeb
“…in the context of the veil, "free choice" was an illusion: "The moment [wearing] the veil is presented as a divine duty, the issue of free choice is no longer valid, [and] all Muslim women are exposed to [this religious] propaganda. How can we pretend they have a choice when they are told that [their] religion obligates [them to wear a veil]? The women [who wear] a full veil [i.e. a niqab, which covers everything but the eyes,] do so in order to comply with what is requested and expected of them by their husbands or their sect."
Leila Barbès, professor of religion and sociology at the Catholic University of Lille
"We seem to have forgotten the blood-soaked days in my country of origin, Algeria, when women were slaughtered for [choosing not to wear the veil]. And what about the Afghan women [under the Taliban], who were denied education and suffered from the [negative] effects of wearing that portable prison [the burqa]?
"To think that Mr. Obama reached out to fundamentalists in Cairo, trying to buy them with [his statement about] the veil! He did not say a word in Cairo about fundamental freedoms... or about all the women who are currently fighting around the world to launch a debate [about the veil] in their country! We must support these women... What are we afraid of?"
Sihem Habchi, president of the feminist organization Ni Putes Ni Soumises ["Neither Whores nor Slaves"],
http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/4248.htm