'Choice' is mentioned in relation to the wearing headscarves. This is something else Muslims seem to be hazy on. Do they have choice? Do men make them wear it? Does Allah require it? We have heard all these reasons from different Muslims. To the observer, it often appears that there are different versions of the Koran and Muslim doctrine.

Religious requirement or just choice would make a great deal of difference in the debate concerning the wearing of headscarves.

The statements of an Jouhour El Ghoul of the Islamic Council of NSW, addressing a Muslim rally recently, didn't help much. She said, in defending the wearing of headscarves, that it (wearing one) is a 'duty to Allah.' Shortly after, she said, 'I can wear what I want when I want.'

Making allowances for religion is not new in Australia. When I went to school, Jehovah's Witnesses were excused from the flag ceremony, rightly or wrongly.

If we know whether the wearing of a headscarf is a religious requirement or merely an individual choice, perhaps more sensible and rational discussion could occur. It would be helpful if Muslims gave us some information on the facts and myths of their religion instead of just blathering on about how hard done by they are.

Jane said: <<even the strongest ..women talk about the headscarf and modest attire as a way of controlling male sexuality.>>

So, we (men) are all 'lurking, waiting, watching as predators' ?

265. It is related from Qatada that Anas ibn Malik said, "The Prophet, ... used to make the rounds of all his wives at one go either at night or during the day - and he had eleven wives. Qatada said to Anas, "Had he the strength for that?" He said, "We used to say that he had been given the strength of thirty men."

The question under discussion where that came from was 'should a man wash after intercourse with each wife. They concluded that he only needed to wash after the last one.

Dialoging with Muslims always reveals an admission of the reality of sex to the point of Allah desiring to please men. Up to 4 wives, and captive slave girls are 'legal'.

I hope this is not going to be interpreted as an 'attack' because I've made no value judgements at all here, I'm scratching around for the origins of this acute 'male sex drive' consiousness which seems to lie at the root of some Islamic ideas.

On logic of the Hijab or Burkah, being to 'free them from lustful glances of men' wellll..now I have to make a judgment and its plain ludicrous, as well as untrue. I saw a number of Iranian women all in black, a 90% burkah at Tullamarine, and the face +the general body type is quite adequate to determine if a girl is 'attractive'.

The principle which should guide ALL our behavior is that of modesty and NOT pandering competitively to our 'lower nature'. Even dogs have to wait for a bitch to be on heat, so their sex is not 'causual' as we practice it.

The more we reveal of our flesh and especially in 'sexy' ways, the closer we come to being "vagina's" and "penises" with a few arms and legs thrown in for mobility.

Beats me why we discuss the veil at all: I can remember when my mother wore a bloody handkerchief on her head in lieu of a hat when she went to church for god sake.

If muslim wome wish to wear a veil or a burkha thats fine with me; some do some dont, so I guess thelevel of compulsion is far form universal and not applied all that slavishly.

These debates seem to draw more heat from Western men and women than it does from those who might have to wear the thing.

Jane is right; we have our own home grown forms of oppression that are just a demeaning as might be the wearing of a veil - if you dont want to wear one that is.

I recently saw a french docco that featured a raft of intelligent articualte muslim girls defending thier right to wear the scarf in the face of some extremely agressive secularists - what made the whole thing more tellling for me was the fact I was in the company of young french women who dismissed the muslims because "they're not really French. Our Country is full of these people!"

It is high time we let live and let live.

Our dear Jane here, writes this article in the first and second persons - I and we - as a woman and as being part of the group, women, so I as a man am excluded from its readership - gosh, talk about sexist!

Anyway, having fallen into the trap of reading a woman's article, I wondered where it was heading. A very circuitous argument she expressed, somewhat like being led around the bush, but then at last I arrived at the ultimate point - "As long as we continue to take responsibility for male sexuality, blah, blah, blah".

Sigh!

Here we go again - what women wear or don't wear, what they do or what they don't do, apparently, according to Jane, is all men's fault. Geez, give us a break and get off our backs!

If women feel compelled to shape their lives around perceived requirements of men, they'll never be men's equals. If women can't raise their own beings to include self respect, how in the world do they ever expect men to respect them?

And legislating for it through EOCs won't work either.

So, Jane, please stop feeling responsible for my sexuality. It's in very good condition, it's all in perfect working order and I'm not driven into a raping frenzy by seeing scantily clad women, although I do enjoy looking at them. I seem to have my sexuality under control and just for the record I think women wearing the hijab makes them look very attractive, clean and respectable. It's an image of women us Western men don't get the privilege of seeing much anymore.

So, to all you women out there - wear what you want, but don't blame us, men, for it. Just don't expect us, men, to necessarily like it. What we like is our business. What you wear is yours.

Jane, thanks to the dismantling of the female prison known as the kitchen we have women like Bronwyn Bishop, Sophie Panopoulos, and others in parliament. I would've thought that the sisterhood would have been cheering for them. Instead you seem to be calling 'foul'. I bet if women weren't allowed to speak you'd be upset.
What if ALL males over 16 got a free pair of sunglasses? Would that keep muslim women happy? I mean if a male could hide behind a pair of sunglasses then the lascivious and lustful stare would be hard to prove. Under those circumstances the need to wear the burqa could not be justified.

As for the argument that someone's mother wore a head covering to church I have also observed this. And if mass is at 8am, by 10am most of those women remove their head coverings and segue into the role of mother or wife or partner. Not so muslim women. The muslim woman who wears the burqa in the mosque on Friday also wears the burqa on the 7:35am train from Parramatta to the city Monday - Friday. I haven't noticed any muslim religious services on the train so the comparison between women going to church with a head covering which is worn for about 1 hour and muslim women who cover their heads 24/7 is fatuous.

People will no doubt remember the Makkah School Fire in Saudia Arabia. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1874471.stm)

Comparing Australian habits with mediaeval dress rules is unreasonable.

We have a choice to dress like Paris Hilton if that rocks our boat. The likelihood that someone might laugh at us is one thing, the idea someone might compel us to look like that is another. To actually attack us for our appearance is still possible even in the West but it is hopefully diminishing. Unlike saudi arabia for example, where we are not allowed to wear what we want, our society has different values and, shock horror, does things differently.

In a secular society such as ours, muslim belief about dress is irrelevant.

What is relevant in Australia is whether each and every female citizen such as, but not only, the inhabitant of the tent (literally, the chador) may, according to our laws, speak and act when she chooses and on the subject of her choosing, attend all necessary medical examinations for her health, obtain the right amount of sunlight and exercise if she wishes to stay healthy, drive if she wishes, vote because she must etc etc.

In other words, her dress / our dress is irrelevant in Australia unless it impedes personal freedom and if so, then we should all slip on something a bit more comfortable IF WE WANT

Maximus

Thanks for your post. I wish I had written it - but then I could'nt have since I am female.

Cheers
Kay

Well, I was in a bit of a dilemna recently...
on campus there are many very attractive young ladies who like to wear small singlets.
I was getting quite embarassed when they leaned forwards and one could see the puppy with the pink nose.
I felt like a bit of a halfwit, blushing and looking away off towards nothing in particular.
So I asked a few of my mates what they thought, to perve or not to perve?
Eventually, it seemed to make sense that they are healthy people who arent bothered either way so if thats the case, a little perve here and there is fine.
As long as everythings respectful and out in the open, whats the fuss?
I doubt its solely aimed at any one person, and I assure you it wouldnt be that they feel obliged.
I bet uni is totally crap in tehran and places like that.

I didn't get anything out reading of this article, sorry. Aren't there more important issues in the world? This seems even more of a waste of time than moaning about Blokesworld.

Cheers SM

Has it ever occurred to Jane that men are just as trapped in their male stero types as are women in theirs.

Men have the highest suicide rates,highest burn out rates and shortest life spans and suffer the isolation of little emotional support from peirs.Just ask John Brogden.The world of male competition takes it's toll and it is only recently that many have considered getting their health checked.

We are all human and have our differences.There is nothing wrong with looking gorgeous,since beauty viewed in perspective,enriches all our lives.

I partly agree with Jane and I agree with Maximus and Arjay. They all have realistic outlooks on this subject. The Hijab along with all religious clothing, is an expression of their inability to live within the reality of the society they have chosen. Sure in muslim dictatorships, they are forced to wear these unhealthy coverings, but that doesn't make it right here, just stupid.

Sadly Jane, western and muslim women, can't take the responsibility for their own lives, they have to force that onto men and blame us for everything. Not much credibility in that assumption, just a lot of sad whinging women.

There is nothing wrong with beauty being shown or observed, it is mostly religion that's against it. I wonder what they are all so scared of, there own bodies, or being real.

Religous clothing creates cultural ghettos, from these spring disharmony and dissent. Follwed by attempts to disrupt the majority society and we can all see where that leads to, by the present growing examples, here and overseas.

Some good points Arjay, there’s pressure on everyone to live up to certain standards these days, albeit in different ways for each sex.

You’re right, there’s nothing wrong with looking good – but a lot of women do it because they feel they have to, not because they want to, and that’s the issue here. Still, it’s hardly a uniquely human condition. We preen ourselves and do various things to attract the opposite sex just like many animals do. The problem comes when a women is judged only on her appearance, instead of her appearance just being one of many attractive features. Not many people would dispute this happens a hell of a lot.

A liberation from this judgement can come in the form of a head scarf or whatever else, and I think the fact it has religious origins is neither here or there. As long as it’s by a persons own choice, they should be able to wear whatever they want. Drape yourself in curtains for all care. Wear a superman costume, I won’t judge you. Those barrels with straps are pretty cool, I might get one of those.

Why can’t a man wear a dress to the office? No, seriously. Why are there different dress standards in a work environment for men and women? A woman can wear just nice pants or skirt and a jumper or whatever, but a guy has no other choice but the shirt and tie combo.

Ok, let’s water it down a bit, forget the dress thing. Why does a male have to wear a tie when a woman doesn’t?

Most guys, of course, want to wear a shirt and tie, but isn’t that a created want? Because there’s pressure on men to look and act a certain way? I mean as long as you’re presentable, what’s the difference?

Just thinking out loud, as usual.

indeed, to wear a veil here is to make yourself stand out and be judged on your appearance alone. Because it has been transplanted into this culture, veils have the unintended and opposite effect of making the wearer stand out much more obviously in a crowd.

It is an interesting paradox though - Australians wish to remain unbiased and not judge people simply on appearance, and that goes for all Australians because we value our egalitarianism.

Therefore, muslim Australians cannot not discriminate against muslim Australian women who are unveiled nor ever judge them by their choice of dress. At the same time, muslim Australian women should wear a veil if they want

Kay,

Many thanks for your kind sentiments. I thought it was good too.

Hijabs have nothing to do with 'religion'. They were invented in Iran in the 1970s as a symbol of opposition to the West and to the Shah's plans to westernise Iran.

Besides being damned ugly, hijabs impede the sight and hearing of the wearer. They must be sweltering in an Australian summer.

Muslim women supposedly wear them to pronounce to the world their modesty and purity. So what does that say about those of us who dont wear them? Are we less modest and pure?

We are extremely stupid to allow this primitive way of life to impact on our society - we are even more stupid to even consider changing our school dress code because members of an immigrant group wish to parade around in special costume.

Well said, Maximus.

I also think that Spendocrat should be able to wear a dress to the office if he so wishes. I would presume that the public service has come far enough to make such allowances these days.

Men wearing dresses.

There's nothing new about this idea of course. In ancient times, they were the standard mode of apparel for all people and also at other times over the course of history, even continuing to this day as traditional dress for Scotsmen.

Of passing interest was a reported incident, a couple of years ago, where several senior schoolboys in the US, just for a prank, all turned up at school one day wearing skirts and the like, claiming they should have the right to wear them seeing how girls could wear trousers. As could be imagined they caused some considerable, but harmless, disruption to the normal day's proceedings. They were told to go home and change, but refused, and were then suspended. Of course, after that, all manner of law suits flowed forth, for months - as they have a tendency to do in the USA. All over a few boys defending their right to party - in skirts!

Fair dinkum! It really makes you wonder.

And I'm wondering, if Spendocrat does wear a dress to the office, does he have to shave his legs? Does he have nice legs? And what about up-skirts photography in the case of a man? Would that be forbidden or open to interpretation?

As you can see, it's going to cause a lot of problems for small minded middle managers and the politically correct. This sounds excellent - go Spendocrat, get that dress on mate.

Well the Scotts have been wearing dresses for centuries and wore no under wear.I don't think it would go down too well in the office.Imagine a gust of wind and images of a male Marilyn trying to look coy and shocked whilst grappling with his kilt.It'd be enough to drive us all to chasity,where ever that is.The real worry however is what they kept in that sporran and knowing the Scotts there be not much change jangling around.No,the mere males will have to stick with their ties ,the symbol male dominance and really large ones will make up for our inadaquate manhood.So what does that say about men who like wearing bow ties?Are they liberated from this need to feel dominate,or is just another subtle tool of supression over females?

You see,we can just about read unconscious meaning into anything if we try hard enough.

Jane Caro,

"There is something bizarre about the extremes western women are prepared to go to look good. Show me a woman from 13 to 70..."

l dont know wots more bizarre. The deeply vain narcissm of some women or the fact that you define a 13 yr old as a woman.

Are you suggesting a 13 yr old girl sould have a sex life, like one would expect to see in a normal woman?

l think the implication of you defining a 13 yr old girl as a woman is far more onerous than your analysis.

The sentiment of your article is the root of the problem. People who allow themselves to be influenced against their better judgement are responsible for their own motivations. They are responsible for their own behaviour. Your approach, a very predictable and cliched one, is to blam men for your own self image , your motivation and your behavior. you speak of empowerment. Blamining others is the single most disempowering thing that one can do. You do not have to buy into the nonsense that the mainstream constantly feeds us. You can choose to unplug and think for yourself.

Scapegaoting men, which seems to be a favourite past time of some (many?) women, for your own autonomous behaviours, is not the way to go. Until you see that you are forever doomed to obsessing over your bodies and writing articles filled with thinly veiled vilifiying invective.

Trade

Well said mate!

Cheers
Kay

even tho the point is long gone...in my last comment i had one too many "not"s. the sentence was not meant to say "cannot not" and it did change the meaning entirely, bugger.

I think you can't overlook the fact that women in some countries have been made to wear that garb on pain of death. So it's not just a choice, but a powerful symbol of oppression. Equality is one of our "core" values.

You can be very, very modest in slacks, long sleeved top, scarf and sun glasses - Jackie Kennedy seemed to often dress like that - without signing up with the oppressive connotations of the chador.

Absolutely agree about Ms Kennedy and her exquisite style, but in Australia we do concentrate quite rightly on comfort and function (and for some, but not a lot, elegance) in this hot country rather than modesty.

Modesty is very much a personal notion and of course it applies to men as strongly as it applies to women and both sexes practise it as they see fit, eg. toning down the swearing or declining to boast about oneself in public.

In this sense, a person's 'actions' make them modest not their outward appearance which is only a very superficial and shallow guide to their character. You CANNOT buy elegance off the rack but neither can you purchase modesty to wear.

The irony of Homer Simpson's request "No fat chicks" says it all.

Sure look after your health etc, but, anyone obsessing about weight etc purely on the grounds of beauty is suffering vanity and that is always self imposed.

As for the original point - women controlling men's desires etc - self control is only tempered by a society that has appropriate values, be it a society of nudists or Eskimoes. What forms those values...the real question / answers lie therein.

The sight of a women shrouded in that hideous black tent is plain ugly. I would like to see their men forced to wear it.
Some young Aussie girls could do with a bit more modesty, most of their attire looks as if it could do with a few more bits of cloth.
The most revolting are pregnant females who wear tight jeans and a skimpy top with a great portion of their anatomy bulging through the gap.And it does bulge. What happened to decent maternity wear.
One can look cool and with it without flaunting that which should never be flaunted.

I know it sounds a bit like man-bashing but I don't think that was the intention of the article.

It is true that it's still a mans world and it is true that women are women's worst enemies generally. Some would say that the latter is due to the former (competition).

It is also true to say that the 'beauty' industry is self perpetuating.
The more you read magazines, the worse you feel about yourself in general and the more you tend to look for ($$) solutions - whether that is beauty product or dieting or pilates. I consider myself very lucky that I never got into womens' mags, so I mostly missed out on the agony of the beauty myth.
Nothing can convince you of poor self esteem as easily as an internal 24/7 mantra....get it free with this months issue of Cosmo!

So the point? Is Australias resistance to the hijab/burqa/chador really a Western resistance to the death of the multi-million dollar beauty industry? Just a thought....

BTW - Muslim men also have to observe religious modesty, they are forbidden to show their torso from chest to knee. Not quite a burqa but in the land of the shirtless-bronzed-Aussie, still a restriction on comfort and personal freedom.