As long as people set out to make themselves look different from the rest, they are going to have problems. Forget about the rights and wrongs of it. Accept the fact. If you wish to cover your head, you will be a target – from tacit resentment and contempt to open aggression. If the questions (why would anyone bother) the author is being asked is the worst she experiences, she’s doing very well.

“To many Australians, my hijab represents patriarchal oppression, conservative traditionalism as well as religious dissent.

To many other Australians it represents an attempt to be different; to stand out from everything the wearer despises. It is also a relic from the Middle Ages which has no place in the modern world. If Muslim men don’t have to express whatever it is that is supposedly being expressed, what is so special (or weird) about Muslim women that they feel the need to look different? If they need an outward show of their feelings (of no interest to anyone else), their religious devotion would appear to be very shallow.

The author is keen on denying that she is looking for sympathy. Just as well, because she will not get any sympathy from most people. If she wishes to look odd, in a modern setting, she will have to take the consequences, and sympathy is the very last emotion she will receive. And, there is no reason why others should care one way or the other if Islam is oppressive to women or not. There are laws to protect everyone in Western society, and nobody is forced to remain within the confines of Islam.

“The problem Australian Muslim women currently face is the marginalisation and dismissal of their voices from political and social discourse”, writes the author. And they will continue to be marginalised as long as they wear their clown costumes.

And, as the author says, that’s their problem.

Leigh, are you suggesting that it is common, or correct, for people to be ostracised because of what they wear? Perhaps instead of the hijab Muslim women should wear mini skirts and midriff tops? Maybe that will not offend you senses as much. Rather than being a symbol against western society, the fact that the author is allowed to wear a hijab, in a predominantly Christian country is a symbol of all we stand for. There are undoubtedly paternalistic families in which women are treated as second class citizens in this country, the distinction is that we pity and support white women in this situation, and we criticise Muslim women for not becoming icons of feminism by standing up to their oppressors. Everybody should be free to wear what they wish without being criticised by anyone else. Or, if you are not happy with this arrangement, move to North Korea, where the workers uniform is nice trouser - jacket combination, available in a stunning shade of gray.

For years I lived in Brunswick - surrounded by stout women in Gabardine Coats and head scarves, Muslim women - before that I lived in Coburg surrounded by stout women who wore black - all the time - Italian women in mourning - it was then a non event it was just what they did.

Westerners now have prescribed a meaning of their own to these habits - and it is that form of labelling that has forced Islamic women and in some cases men into a corner defending what once was a simple custom - add to that the ramblings of a few Islamic nut cases ( and there a few few of those) - a bit like a Muslim Rev Ian Paisley - unapologetic and bigoted - and the entire debate is distorted.

Contributors like the indominatable Boaz David start to develop codes of conduct to fence in behaviours and customs that once were tolerated and even celebrated by some - when really we should simply leave the bastards alone.

And then you have others who lacking the generosity of those like BD - that refer to the hijab as a Clown Costume - you have to ask your self in what sort of foul soil is that prejuduice rooted? - does it inform the debate? No. Except maybe to underline that much of the opposition to the hijab and other outward displays of religion are simple bigotry and ignorance

We have also freeze framed our understanding of Islam into a a few news bite sized slices dealing with fundamentalsim and terror in the 21st century; Some have scoured Wikipeadia and other sources to find acts of violence by mulsims to paint a picture of habitual violence and aggression - ignoring the strong intellectual and cultural history of the ancient and not so ancient world of Islam -igoring also the reign of terror that has accompanied most organisedd religions at one time or another in their histories -

what the hijab means and doesnt mean is for muslims to determine and no one else.

Rayann, you have hit the nail on the head. Muslim women like you need to be much more articulate. That has been the problem in the past, we have not heard the point of view of Muslim women, whether or not they wear the veil. All we have got in the media has been the misogynistic ravings of fundamentalist muftis because that is what makes news. You need to take the opportinity which currently presents itself to make yourselves heard and seen on television talk shows and radio talkback programs. The opportunity may not present itself again.

It isn't only Muslim women who need to be more articulate either. The Muslim men who support a more moderate form of their religion should also be making their voices heard more, otherwise the followers of Islam will continue to be marginalised.

<em>The author is keen on denying that she is looking for sympathy. Just as well, because she will not get any sympathy from most people. If she wishes to look odd, in a modern setting, she will have to take the consequences, and sympathy is the very last emotion she will receive.</em>

I was unaware that a national uniform code had been acquired in Australia. Damn, I was just walking around in, like, clothes, that are different to everyone elses.

Are you a commie Leigh?

Rayann is making a plea on behalf of all non-Western women to be able to define and pursue their own concept of feminism. They want to keep what is good like the family and their communication with their menfolk, while asserting their freedom where it really matters.

Fair enough, it will take time but they will not alienate themselves as women from the many worthwhile, though challenging elements of femininity. Having children, managing a family and finding comfort and enlightenment in their spirituality are not mutually exclusive from pursuit of freedom and career. They want flexibility and choice. An essential part of that is keeping what is good from their culture. Who can blame them for being forthright and assertive about that?

But who would want to follow in the jackboot footsteps of Western feminists who are like cows in a china shop, trashing all that is before them? Many women do not care for the egocentrism, materialism and gender politics of Western feminists.

Rayann talks of people asking her about her garb, but what about the feminists' put downs of women who choose to have children first and career second and of women who find enjoyment and empowerment in raising a family? Anyhow, what is the worth of a life where you are obliged to hate 50% of the world's population of gender grounds?

Western feminists are cultural imperialists and would use multiculturalism as the trojan horse for their own brand of conformity and tyranny against those who are seen to quibble with them.