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.

Rayann, one thing you and your fellow train passengers share in common is your ignorance of Islam. To say that Islam was once viewed as a religion of peace means you haven’t read the blood-stained pages of your Qur’an lately. And don’t be disappointed at people whose views about the wearing of the hijab remain set in concrete because your views about the wearing of the hijab are likewise set in concrete.

It’s time your group stepped out of the shadows and became a stentorian group. You need to conduct a speaking tour of muslim enclaves in Australia. You should address male muslims and tell them that just as your group thinks its OK to wear the hijab, it’s also OK for women to find no attraction to wearing the hijab.

You’ll need a very generous slice of good luck because the male-dominated religion of Islam doesn’t share the rostrum with its female members

"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."

Come on now cornflower. I'm a "western feminist" and I have no dreams of cultural imperialism. I'm not a cultural relativist though if that's what you mean. I don't think culture is ever an excuse to oppress and enforce tyrrany, whether it's in "Islamic" countries or on Australian soil with people preaching that women shouldn't wear the hijab because it's going against "our" values.

I also don't think less of any woman who chooses to be a stay-at-home mum.

Then we've reached a connundrum. Either your stereotypes are wrong, or I'm an exception. I would go for the first one. Bashing feminists as a coherent group has the same problems as bashing muslims as a coherent group.

The real issue is,I believe not about dress but about personal freedom. In Islam a woman can be forced to wear particular clothing and this brings the religion into serious conflict with the values of the west. A conflict where it is hard to see a middle ground as the Islamists believe the directive is the very word of God.

I have no real problems with the hijab- while I don't think that women need to cover their hair to be 'modest', I do respect the choices of those who wear it due to their religious convictions, much in the same way I don't see the point of the Jewish skullcap but I have no problem with someone wearing it.

However, I do find the burqa and any other form of Islamic dress where everything but the eyes are covered as troubling and confronting. My workplace receives a lot of overseas tourists, and lately I have noticed an increase in women wearing such clothing. As much as I try not to let it bother me, it does in a way because whilst the person may be standing right in front of you, it is like they are not really there and I find it impossible to interact with them.

Cornflower, enough with the feminist-bashing already. I am a feminist, and I want flexibility and choice- to marry whom I want, when I want, to have as many children as I want, to use contraception if I wish, to have a satisfying and fulfilling career if I wish. But you can’t have flexibility and choice if your only option in life is to marry and have children (not that I think those are the only options open to young Muslim women in this country). Nor do I hate all men. When are you going to stop using inaccurate generalisations and start engaging in real debate?

Excellent to hear from a Muslim woman...thank you! And: for me, there is a vast difference between a headscarf and the Ned Kelly look, where all you can see is eyes, and those barely. Scarf....fine; Ned Kelly helmet...wierd, disconcerting, don't like.

Not rational, of course, but visceral nevertheless.

Would love to hear Rayeed's commentary on this distinction.

"...why would anyone bother..."

Another valuable contribution from Citizen Leigh, who must have been champing at the bit for his first curmudgeonly spray of the week.

On topic: nice, insightful article that provides an all too rare Muslim woman's voice in the current 'culture wars'. Muslim women, like all people, are allowed to wear what they like in Australia. People who disapprove of the hijab are perfectly entitled to refrain from wearing them.

Indeed, such freedoms are integral to my understanding of our much-touted values.

like I said Sage - half baked historians like your self come out of the wood work like cock roaches on a dark night with selected snippetts of information designed to denigrate - Islam is the whipping boy of the moment

The writer, who's heart seems in the right place, fails to accept responsibility for the teachings she follows.

Wife beating, among other things, is permissable in Islam, and has been used by misoginists to keep women down. Surely, when you look at the rights of women in the west, you see this?

But don't hate me for pointing out uncomfortable truths, hate those who force such dogma on you women.

It is the women in Islam with the open-mindedness, and they that need to bring Islam into the 21st century.

If you don't own up to this responsibility I fear that there will be major problems in Islam's survival.

For any philosophy that won't question itself is a doomed philosophy.

Sneekepeete claims Islam is the whipping boy of our day. Hard to know what you measure that by, certainly isn't indiscriminate murder of people through acts of terrorism is it....

Let Muslim women speak for themselves, hey?

We westerners are fine with that, but will your IMAM's and Mufti's let you?

One must also point out that any males that can cover women up by shaming them into believeing they are whores if they don't (and don't act like that isn't the reality, I know ex-Muslims who were brought up to think Aussie women are sluts, by default of wearing such a costume you believe you are purer than one who doesn't) and have women talking as if they are free have got some tricks up their sleeves!

Clasic case of "West meets East" but wouldn't it be nice if we could all meet in the middle and particularly if we could dump all this religious nonsense. On the Western side, we have bred a couple of generations where the only purpose in life seems to be chasing the almighty dollar to keep their designer kids happy. Mum has her SUV to transport their average looking kids to school, kids who look anything other than average after school hours with the girls wearing ridiculously short skirts, their podgy little tummies hanging out over the top, silly little tops, meant I suppose, to accentuate their near non existant breasts since they are after all, only 10 to 14. The boys are no better as they fail miserably to emulate their chosen soap star idols by wearing the most stupidly oversized shorts, or should I say long pants that were made for a fat kid with very short legs, American base ball cap turned backwards. They're so silly, they don't know which way is correct anyhow and all displaying "attitude" gleaned from an expensive American gangstar rap (crap) film clip. On the other side we have Muslim women getting about in burqas and dresses designed more for keeping out the desert sun and sands than for our Aussie climate of sunshine and green urban landscapes. Their men sport long flowing beards and occasionally long dress like creations as well as the women, yet all in all, the Muslim children appear as "middle ground" as you can get. Western people are stuck in the mindset of American soap operas, while Muslims are stuck in the centuries not long after Christ. Wouldn't it be nice if our two cultures could ease a little from both directions and meet in the middle.

You are right Rayann: Let Muslim women speak for themselves. That's why I appreciate this video that shows Arab-American Psychologist Wafa Sultan on Al Jazeera:

http://switch5.castup.net/frames/20041020_MemriTV_Popup/video_480x360.asp?ai=214&ar=1050wmv&ak=null

I can also recommend this Guardian-article by Houzan Mahmoud. She is a London-based activist with the Organisations of Women's Freedom in Iraq. Born in Iraqi Kurdistan in 1973, Mahmoud came to the UK in 1996. For the article, please go to http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/houzan_mahmoud/2006/10/wearing_the_veil_has_never_bee.html

I can also recommend the book 'The Trouble with Islam' by Irshad Manji, a Muslim woman who defends the right to be critical of her own religion.

I fully agree with you that a woman has the right to choose for herself if she does or does not want to wear the veil. The problem is that I don't know what to believe if a woman says she wears the veil out of her own free will. If her father, bothers, mother, family and friends all say she should wear the veil, I do not know how much value I can attach to the words 'It's my own free choice'.

And finally, please allow me to quote one Muslim man, Psychiatrist and writer Dr. Tanveer Ahmed, as quoted in The Australian, 28 Oct 2006:

'Dr Ahmed rejects the argument that women wear the veil because "it's their choice". "You see children aged five wearing it. Are we seriously arguing there is an element of choice, when you sexualise a child in that way?"

Madam, perhaps you should go talk to your fellow Muslims and not waste time with us stupid infidels. They need to learn tolerance more than we do. From their talk and actions, they are the ones that believe that clothes shape the identity - and that not wearing a blanket makes a woman eligible for rape.

Or perhaps you could consider the fact that by wearing the hajib, you contribute to this loathsome mentality, and to the actions of male Muslims. Try that thought on and see if it fits.

I support your right to wear a hajib, a Burka or even a mini-skirt. I also support free speech and human rights. Too bad Muslims don't. They always want to subjugate non-Muslims. That, of course, is what your dear prophet told Muslims to do, isn't it?

The fact that you wear the hajib shows that you take Islamic ideology seriously. So then tell me if the hate and anger in the Quran bother you? Tell me if the vile deeds of your prophet cause any hesitation when you 'PHUM' him? Does barberic torture like this (read verse 261) trouble you.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/052.sbt.html

Please give me you views on these things. What DO you say when people ask if Islam permits wife beating? Do you tell them that your prophet beat his 9 year old wife?
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/004.smt.html#004.2127

Do you believe that women are deficient in religion and intelligence, as your dear prophet said? Are they worth half the value of men?
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/006.sbt.html#001.006.301

These questions are, as you say, a chance for Muslims to clear up 'misconceptions'. So please let me know your feelings about these three passages linkled above.

John Arthur Kactuz

PS: I enjoy hearing Muslim explain away Mohammed beating Aaisha. My favorite excuse so far was here, in which a Muslim basically said "He hit her but did not beat her; he caused her pain but it did not hurt".
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/paul_hamilos/2006/06/post_126.html

How can you reason with people like this?

Also note how well Muslims understand (not!) both their own scriptures and Western ideals:
http://www.donaldsensing.com/index.php/2006/10/04/1243/

WOW.. Sneeky is hunting me down even when I haven't been in this thread :) I better join.

All religous garb, symbolizes difference. It also symbolizes the history of the particular tradition of that faith.
The habits of Nuns in the RC tradition has symbolic effect. Reminding those outside the Catholic faith of the Inquisition, and the English of a 'rebellious mob of Irish' or the historical wars between Cromwell and the Royalists, and the various attempts to Catholicize or Anglicanize England etc.. Dog collars on Anglicans just seem weird to me.. the whole idea of 'religious' clothing is more suggetive of the human desire for membership in an organization than of personal piety to me.

The Biblical picture is unambigious, though it refers primarily to general vanity.

Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided_ hair and the wearing of gold_jewelry and fine_clothes. Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit..." ~1 Peter 3:3-5

This surely applies to all areas of life. You can wear a hijab, a burkah, a habit or a name tag saying "Elder SoandSo".. but what matters is the innner beauty, love for God and compassionate spirit.
The Jews who ran the opium trade in China wore their Hamulka's 'religiously'....
Islamic dress symbolizes Mohammed's various acts of invasion, torture and political assassination, and the 'if they insult the prophet killll them' mentality which we saw during the cartoon thing.

Let our faith be known by our love, our community spirit, and our faithfulness to that which is good ! Let our actions be heard rather than our clothing speak.

I know...I Know... "but ur so HARSH on poor innocent refugees" etc...
Actually.. I'm passionate about good policy, and no matter what we come up with.. SOMEone will have their nose out of joint, mostly the legal aid funded lawyers :)

Soooo..
Jews
Catholics
Anglicans
Muslims
Kalathumpians...

Lose the outward, and focus on the inward.

Nice sentiment Wildcat and well argued.

But I ask, isn't that what "diversity" is supposed to be all about? Not the bringing of all of us to one homogenous middle, but being tolerant of all, particularly of those, who are on the diametrically opposite fringe?

On topic - "Let Muslim women speak for themselves", argues Rayann Bekdache, and you won't get any arguments from me about that. But it is both illuminating and revealing that some posters above, peculiarly women who declare themselves feminists, certainly don't want Muslim women speaking up for themselves. Oh no! Not if this is their message. They'd rather have them shut up or drowned out with noise, unless of course, Muslim women speak the same feminist-sexist left-wing rhetorical rubbish that they do.

But some women don't need empowerment, they're just naturally powerful - and beautiful - like Rayann here.

Oops! Probably shouldn't have said that.

Rayann - you go girl! And please, make a lot more noise.

kactuz, I think you will find that the majority of Muslims have the same relationship with the Koran as Christians do with the bible. Very few Christians take the bible literally, I think Rev. Lovejoy said it best when he argued that technically, Christians aren't even allowed to go to the bathroom. Sorry for the Simpsons reference, but it has about the same amount of relevance as kactuz's. No Muslim I know beats their wife and uses the Koran as justification. Just as no Christian I know actually believes the Earth was created in a week.

In terms of fundamentalist crazies, all sides have a significant number, unfortunately, most fundamentalist Christians are seen as harmless, while fundamentalist Muslims are seen as the death of western civilisation. Neither is the case. Both should be reduced to insignificance through rational debate, and the marketplace of ideas. Any rational person should see that a global caliphate is impossible, and those aiming to produce it do so to increase their own personal power, not their personal faith. Terrorism is a blip on the radar of global threats. Perhaps we should have a war on drink driving, it causes far more deaths, and is probably more easily preventable.

However, every person should have the right to criticise any religion on rational grounds, even if they are not a member of the club. This is necessary to increase understanding and to encourage reform. Islam is not the same as it was 1000 years ago, nor will it be the same in 200 years time.

"But it is both illuminating and revealing that some posters above, peculiarly women who declare themselves feminists, certainly don't want Muslim women speaking up for themselves. Oh no! Not if this is their message. They'd rather have them shut up or drowned out with noise, unless of course, Muslim women speak the same feminist-sexist left-wing rhetorical rubbish that they do."

Care to point out where that happened on this comment thread Maximus? Or is it a habit of yours to create fictitious exchanges to provoke a response?

A definite call for sympathy and an arrogant and defiant political statement disguised as usual in religious ideologies – similar to the latest stunt from the top Imam Hellali…

Anything to get free publicity and keep the dialogue open to try to impress “us” about their beautiful and peaceful religion.

If it is true that the Hijab is not a sign of women oppression or an act of Islamic defiance; why don't the silly women of Islam insist on wearing it in our free society?

The answer is they don't have a choice.

Their semi-god prophet, their imams and muftis, their fathers, grand-fathers, brothers, cousins, uncles and husbands have decided the women’s fate from the time they are born.

No amount of self-pity is going to change the truth about the written laws and Islamic misogynistic customs of the Qur'an that unfortunately (for Muslems) we all have access to and can read, judge and decide for ourselves.

The West knows how oppressed Muslem women really are – even if they don’t know it themselves or so unskilfully deny it.

The Qur'an defines a woman as half the value of a man.

A woman needs 4 (four) "male" eye witnesses to have their day in court against an unfaithful husband - while he only needs to repeat the words "you are divorced" 3 times - and she is a goner.

Some freedom and equality hey?

'When non-Muslim Australians approach Australian Muslim women who wear the headscarf on trains, in the streets, at university and in various other public spaces, this is a positive step towards breaking down misconceptions on all sides of the spectrum. It is also a means by which Muslim women articulate their views and bring new light to the complexities of Islam and Muslims in the Australian context'

That statement is just so positive, so true and so Australian. I know I've done it too and was also enlightened, positively and my misconceptions evaporated, by responses from also not so articulate and some heavily accented Australian Muslim women.

To coin and re-word an old quote 'Wear what you want and be dammed'.

I don't care what anyone wears it's their business not mine.

Good on you Rayann,

I think its good to encourage muslim women to speak for themselves more.
I have seen cases where hijab is the woman's choice and other where it was the parent or husband choice. We should debate both.

Regardless, what people chose to wear is a personal choice. A woman wearing a veil is no different from a Orthodox Jewish female or a nun. If they will be judged as 'defiant', then they have as much right to critique other women as defiant (I have seen elder women wearing 'age defying' make-up).

The world will be in chaos if we start judging each other on what we wear. Its what we do for the society and each other is what should matter.

look guys lets face it, in Western society you can pretty much dress or undress as you please, and fair enough, others may or may not comment accordingly...who cares??
The issue here is that someone, or groups of someones, in fact rather large and surprisingly powerful groups, are acting, very violently, based on how others act, dress and behave...women in particular.
This is the problem and this is why the author of this article is getting some air space, otherwise, really, no one ( in western society that is) would honestly give a damn.
So, you can't have your cake and eat it, if in a particular climate you choose to wear a garment that identifies you with a particularly vocal group at the time you can expect to get some attention.

Western feminists have hit the wall trying to rationalise their brand of feminism with multiculturalism.

Western feminism is overwhelmingly about women’s antagonistic relationships with men: and ways men subjugate women for their own ends. Men are stereotyped as violent lying rapists who would trick and cheat women to exploit them. Women are seen as innocent, vulnerable victims, hopelessly outgunned in a ‘class’ war waged ruthlessly by the ‘patriarchy’ of men and boys.

Western feminists are livid at the intransigence of feminists from other cultures not knuckling down to their brand of feminism. Sure, ego is at risk, however the threat to Australian (Western) feminists is that direct and indirect public funding for the feminist industry could dry up. There are thousands of careers and research grants built up over forty years at risk.

No wonder Western feminists are feeling threatened, especially those who enjoy sinecures in academia and the federal public service.

Gender feminism in particular is abhorrent to other cultures, where their feminists do not share the same obsession with the struggle between men and women. So the old favourite conversation starters, such as single parenting, career, lesbian masculinity, domestic violence, divorce, child support and prostitution are not working as well as expected to stir up righteous indignation.

It is also a fact that many migrant women are used to real struggles such as holding a family together in a war zone or working to make ends meet on a subsistence farm. They could be excused for not wanting to be portrayed as helpless victims.

It is interesting reading the patronising responses of Western (fundamentalist?) feminists as they talk down to Eastern feminists:

Eastern feminist “Excuse me, you may be drawing some wrong conclusions about me by looking only at my clothing”.

Western feminist, “You can talk?! Well that is a good start, now tell me, some bl**p of a man made you dress like that, right?”

Cornflower, no offence but I don't think you know too much about "Western feminism" - I put it in quotes as there are many schools of thought within that label.

If anything "western feminists" have a much more positive view of men than many fundie religious zealots, men's rights activists and the rest of their ilk who profit off the subjegation of women in all cultures. Feminists see men as having agency and the ability of self control, whereas those mentioned above tend more towards the idea that men are inherently abusive wife-bashing rapists and should just be able to be without the obstruction of those pesky feminazis. No, feminists think of men as actually having humanity and those who are cruel and abusive as being socialised by a society that puts too much importance on proving 'manhood' and masculinity and heterosexuality through violence or blokey-manliness at the expense of both men and women.

Feminists don't hate men. You are creating a straw feminist, a figure that doesn't exist and you are playing on an old stereotype. Feminism is about balance, not about women taking over the world because we hate men.

There has been some criticism of western feminists preoccupation with the veil as a symbol of oppression whilst ignoring the very real problems that women in developing countries face (i.e the veil is the least of their problems) that's a fair enough criticism and one that "Western feminists" reflect on and debate within their own ranks. So stop being so goddam obnoxious- you're trading on a fallacy.

Dear sister,

I have nothing but respect for you. I am least bothered what you wear viz. hijab/jijab/veil etc.

However, when I found the reason for wearing such things, which the sheik and many islamic scholars reiterated, I have no respect for the veil.

Do you know sheik once said:

"The two cheapest things in Australia are the flesh of a woman and the meat of a pig," .

And he compares white women (or women in general) to meat. He says all muslim men are like cats.

If uncovered meat (women without veils exposing legs/hands/faces) are kept outside (walking on road, travelling in train/bus, in beach)
cats (muslim men) will eat (rape) meat (women esp. white women). So, it's the meat's fault.

This statement was established again and again by many muslim rapists; when they were questioned in courts, they say these "white-women" deserve rape for not wearing veils.

Go.. figure..

I know this sounds simplistic in a way, it is simplistic! Sometimes I just wonder why we don't simply let people be.

There is so much judgement and generalisation toward Islam. There are many beautiful and terrible things about it, like the veil. It can be used in a sacred or oppressive way. But please lets not assume anything!

Once I asked a muslim friend of mine why muslim women wore the veil. She explained to me that in her family, it was a choice. Her mother and eldest sister wore it, she did not nor did her other older sister and nor did her baby sister.

She continued to explain that her eldest sister chose to wear the veil as an act of LOVE to her husband. It was her gift to him to spare her beauty for his eyes and the eyes of God.

Doesn't it make the notion that Australian muslim women are all oppressed seem ignorant and childish?

Besides, I wonder what business it is of mine whether someone wears the hijab, whether it is a choice or not? This is a matter of culture and anothers culture is none of my business.

We do live in a free society - there is plenty of support within our lovely society to protect peoples rights no matter what their religion is.

So why do we not just leave Australian muslims alone and butt out? Is it really our place to impose our values in a cultural context? Remember, we are already in a free society and thank god that leaves room for differences. Surely muslims, free or oppressed will figure out their own internal problems sociologically in there own time without us causing such a fuss about it.

I do deeply value freedom and tolerance. I've never known otherwise. And I do question these crusades to change cultures and nations we really know nothing about.

....and behold, God did look down upon ugly swarthy woman and declare..."holy crap, get a bag on yer 'ead NOW"
Yeah baby!

You have all missed one important point....

The veil/hijab was used, even in pre-Islamic times, to "protect" oneself from sight. It was also used as a symbol of status - "high class" persons, even men, used to veil-up in order to separate themselves from the lower classes i.e. slaves and prostitutes.

So, Islam came along... and this "custom" was kept, but re-framed so that women, in particular, were "protected" from others seeing(and desiring) them. However, it should be noted that in those times (in B.C. Assyria, Mesopotamia & Persia), women were largely treated as chattels (or "meat")

How this translates into the C21st is now somewhat convoluted. It appears to be one of paternalistic, chauvinistic and sometimes violent ownership. (You can't see the bruises underneath a hijab! - and who cares as long as the cow can still beget sons!)

In the end, it is up to the wearer of the veil/hijab. If he/she wants to state his/her religious conviction so starkly, so be it. He/She shouldn't, in return, expect a rational response to such irrational (as is all religion) behaviour.

I do not have any problems with hijabs. However, I have read numerous times that the hijab is not an ancient form of head covering, but was invented in Iran during the 1970s as a protest against the westernisation of the country under the Shah.

So in actual fact, it *is* a protest against Western society. Muslim women are wearing a head dress that was originally created as a symbol that the wearer is against western customs and values.

If Western women go uncovered in Islamic societies, they are regarded as showing contempt for Muslims and refusing to obey the customs of the country.

So how are we to regard a person who wears an item of clothing that was created as a symbol of resistance to our values and way of life?
Do hijab-wearers regard it as simply an outward sign that they are devout Muslims, or do they wear it to symbolise their rejection of Western values? I would truly like an answer to this question.

" .. once, Islam was believed to be a religion of moderation and peace."

How can a religion that refuses to accept any other belief be regarded as either peaceful or moderate? Wherever Islam reigns, non-Muslims are persecuted and classified as 'dhimmis' and refused the rights that are granted to Muslims. This has never changed.

Christians and other non-Muslims are forbidden to practice their religions in Islamic countries, often on pain of imprisonment or even death. How can this be regarded in any way as 'moderate' or 'peaceful'?

Perhaps when Islamic countries allow Christian churches, synagogues and temples to be built alongside mosques, and their congregations to worship in freedom, the 'peaceful, moderate' description will be valid.

Albs

“Cornflower, no offence but I don't think you know too much about "Western feminism".”

No problem, critics of Western feminism are used to the standard defensive ploy wherein they immediately abuse the critic. So I expected personal sledging. I was not to be disappointed.

“If anything "western feminists" have a much more positive view of men than many fundie religious zealots, men's rights activists and the rest of their ilk who profit off the subjegation (sic) of women in all cultures.”

You may say that when it is convenient for your argument, however it doesn’t take much reading of ONO and papers to get the drift that Western feminists would willingly sodomise the nearest man with a pineapple if they got the chance. Sorry to be frivolous but Western feminists, especially those ensconced in academia, lost contact with women long ago.

”Feminists don't hate men.”

Maybe you should read some of the feminist authors contributing to ONO.

”There has been some criticism of western feminists preoccupation with the veil as a symbol of oppression whilst ignoring the very real problems that women in developing countries face (i.e. the veil is the least of their problems) that's a fair enough criticism and one that "Western feminists" reflect on and debate within their own ranks.”

Demonstrably, Western feminists, in particular those spearheading gender feminism, are most unattractive to Eastern feminists because they:

Hate and exclude men (apart from the odd trained trophy mangina);

Hate family;

Put career, materialism and conspicuous consumption ahead of motherhood and family;

Trash spirituality;

Trash any sense of community, advocating individualism and ‘greed is good’; and

Purport to destabilising and hopefully destroying the political systems of which they are part.

To cap it all off, Western feminists talk down to and patronise Eastern feminists. This should come as no surprise because that is the usual modus operandi of Western feminists.

“So stop being so goddam obnoxious- you're trading on a fallacy.”

Eastern feminism is attractive to many Western women too, who welcome their affirmation of feminine strength, spirituality and positive, incrementalist approach to change.

It is interesting in this day and age in which 'feminism' is supposedly passe (if you read some of the posts on OLO), that again the debate tends to focus on the apparent subjugation of women, something that exists in almost every society. The outward trappings of women's 'uniform' is again a tool used for power purposes whether it is for religion or capitalism. By the way, I saw a television program made in France which consisted of interviews with women who wear the veil. The overall result was that the women interviewed thought that they looked nice or that they wore it to please their husbands. I don't remember any of them saying they wore it on religious grounds. While this is only a microcosm of women, it was very thought provoking.

As for 'eastern' or 'western' feminism; that is one being better than the other, let's not forget why feminism is in existence. It is because women still do not have the choices and flexibilities they should have notwithstanding the gender mainstreaming of public policy. The way policy is set up these days, if you are not in the market you are devalued which is something the socialist feminists have been arguing for decades. As for raising a family then having a career, in this day and age you are dooming yourself to a life of low paid work and caring duties until you are 65 and then if you are lucky, an age pension. The way work and superannuation is set up, if you want to live decently when you are older it is 40 years full time employment. As women mainly work part time or casually, they are disadvantaged in policy if they have children.

It is typical that debate focuses on the outward manifestations of a perceived problem. I would have thought the primary objection people have with the muslim religion is because it uses terrorism to prove its point and to obtain power.

Hello Rayaan,

This muslim woman Shakira speaks for herself.

My eyes are opened now as a muslim woman Shakira speaks about her experiences:

Eyes opened by Islamic chauvinism

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20673860-601,00.html

" Mustafa - tried to drag her under their control in the name of Islam."

" As soon as we made contact, he said I should be living under my father's roof, or with my grandmother, or an aunt.

"I didn't realise how serious he was. I just told him that I wasn't interested."

"He (Mustafa) would berate me about that, in part because she was Jewish, but also because I was living out of home," she said.

"Eventually I told him to get lost, mind his own business. But he would come to the house, knocking on the door, to insist I come home with him, to live under our father's roof."

"where a young man, a relative, would decide how I should live, or dress, or behave."

"We should know from London that young Muslim men are feeling disenfranchised - they do not fit into their own cultures, or into Western cultures - and we should not have leaders encouraging them toward this frightening, controlling behaviour."

I am sure this is happening in almost all muslim families.

I grew up in South Africa, and for 30years of my life lived under the Aparthied regime. Needless to say, that experience has left me deeply scarred.

My life in Australia became a learning curve, learning to trust people from a Caucasian background was a huge challenge for me personally, I learned that in this country which prides itself on giving everyone a fair go, a country that has modelled itself on mateship, is not immune to racism, in fact it is just as rife here as it was in South Africa, the only difference being it is not legislated, yet. If a referrandum should be held tommorow to legislate against freedom of religious expression or identity, Islam will be banned, Talk back Radio will make shore of that.

Before 9/11/2001 the spot light was on the Asian communities, they were blamed for everything that ailed this country, all the same rethoric, not assimalating, not speaking English, highest crime rate, now it's people of Middle Eastern appearance (Muslims).

To the Muslim women I say do not compromise your right to wear whatever you choose to, to all those women who believe in the rights of others, to choose for themselves their destiny, and their own makeup, I say power to you.

No dee the hijab or some sort of veil as de riguer for Muslim women since the 2nd Century for what ever reason

And Benjamin a whippng boy is a scapegoat, a patsy, a fall guy or some one punished for the wrong doing of others historically apparently it a was a boy who took the cuts in lieu of a prince for example when he made a mistake.

I have used it very loosely here to descibe the habits of some who vilify wops, spics, dagoes, kykes, mulsims, polacks, irish, wogs and asians - and when there is nothing left the defaualt position of aborignal bashing kicks in -

it is a cyclical kind of thing - I havegone on to define this as...a tendency to vilify wops, spics, dagoes, kykes, mulsims, polacks, irish, wogs and asians - and when there is nothing left the defaualt position of aborignal bashing kicks in. Get it

Islamophobia will pass with the attendant pain like a renal stone through the urethra of life - we will then find another whipping boy - they will probably wear different clothes and eat funny food - the usual suspects

sneekeepete,

I hope many muslim women will get free from the oppression in their families, mosques & muftis. But, it may end in disasters.

However, I see there is no hope/future for muslim women as for now. I have 2 questions for them:

1. How can you follow a paedophile mohammed(cbuh), a person who took a 9 yr old girl as his 14 th wife and also took his adopted son's wife as his wife once he saw her naked?

2. I dont care what you wear. Infact, I dont look at muslim women at all. But, when I am walking on a street, if a woman was walking in a black-dress with 2 small holes, then all the attention will be on that woman.. the reason is: A person completely covered in black dress gets more attention than a person whose face is exposed. Isn't it true?

p.s : I wont lust after women just by seeing her face. I am devoted to my partner and I will never betray her.

Good for you tit for tat - your fidelity is praiseworthy indeed;

As for point one I am no serious student of the Koran - but there are a lot of people masquerading as such, cherry picking bits and pieces here and there to suit their arguement -

but when it comes to filandering behaviour read the bible - there was quite a bit of giving up on infertile wives and slipping one to the younger sister and one thing and another - 9 year old brides were probably quite common in those days - I dont know - I am just very sceptical about any johnny come lately supposed Koranic scholars who happened to be largely white anglo saxon and middle class;

Where were they twenty years ago when the first wave of Muslims rocked up? If all the bad things said about Islam was true now they were true then - did we see any of this stuff then -Nope we did not much of what we see is in response to the supposed threat of terror - my 12 year old is ,more scared of global warming than being blown up and so am I (but I am not very scared )- the real threat is a disportionate resposne to what terrorism we have had, further marginialisng an other wise benign population to the poijt where they react - it is happening now -

As for point 2 sure people will look at the different but there is a great deal of difference between looking at and placing a whole bunch of meanings to why they wear the gear

Cornflower, my goodness but you're one heck of a fiesty woman.

I cannot tell you, how good it is to have a real woman like yourself on board, fighting for the betterment of ALL of humanity, especially our precious kids. I do hope you speak freely to other women about these matters and open their eyes to the nonsense perpetrated by the "progressive" hate sisters and their brothers of the "revolution".

I really wish I knew who you are, but I don't.

Only through these pages, I can say, it's a pleasure to know you. I know your family is in good hands. To you and yours, all the very, very best in life.

sneekeepete,

I am not surprised by your reply. It's the typical answer - to compare and bring some other thing rather than answering the question.

I have always condemned, ridiculed, criticized, questioned all the paedophile catholic priests and I am right in doing that.

Here, no one is beyond criticism. However, I am appalled when muslims say that the paedophile mohammed was the perfect man and a role-model for all humanity. Dont you think so?

Sneekeepete - 'the hijab or some sort of veil as de riguer for Muslim women'

I know there has been some form of veil worn by Muslim women since ancient times but I am particularly curious about the hijab. I found some interesting information at:

http://www.womeninworldhistory.com/essay-01.html

Seems that we may both be correct:

In the Middle Ages numerous laws were developed which most often placed [Muslim] women at a greater disadvantage than in earlier times. In some periods, such as under the Mamluks in Egypt, repeated decrees were issued, urging strictness in veiling and arguing against the right of women to take part in activities outside their home.

The real surge toward donning hijab came with Iran's revolution. Women were seen as key elements in achieving changes in public morality and private behavior. Unveiled women were mocked, called unchaste "painted dolls," and were punished if they appeared in public without proper covering. In countries beyond Iran in the 1970s, demonstrations and sit-ins appeared over opposition to the required western style dress code for university students and civil servants.

Muslims in their first century at first were relaxed about female dress. When the son of a prominent companion of the Prophet asked his wife Aisha bint Talha to veil her face, she answered:

"Since the Almighty hath put on me the stamp of beauty, it is my wish that the public should view the beauty and thereby recognized His grace unto them. On no account, therefore, will I veil myself."

That is sad! From Aisha bint Talha to the chador.

Those Muslim women who are honestly speaking out about the oppressive nature of Islam are the precursors of a feminism that in ten or twenty years will be regarded as most heroic in all of female suffrage. They have a battle in front of them that women born of democratic society will never know. Existing womens organizations need to support these women and girls now. Courts need to step in and exert their authority over religious social dictates. The only way Islam is going to change is if the courts compel them to adhere to established social principles and laws. Of course there is nothing to be done for those who are happiest with things as they are, just as little can be done for the fellow who is happiest institutionalized. Being solely responsible for thought and deed is very intimidating.

obozo, I read that article too, but I'm not as sure as you are that it is happening in "almost all Muslim families".

For a start, the extremist brother, as mentioned in the article, didn't even speak Arabic and wasn't raised in a Muslim country. The article sets out a situation where the brother's oppressive extremism seems to spring from a total alienation from any culture: whether Muslim, British or some admixture of the two.

I share your certainty that some Muslim families are as depicted in the article, just as I am sure it is true of some Seventh Day Adventist, Christian Brethren and other such families. In any case, it is unacceptable in our culture.

But consider this study released today into the attitudes of young Australian men towards their future wives and housework. Is it fair or right to conclude from the below that these attitudes are happening in almost all Anglo families?:

<selected quote>
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/market-does-the-work-men-wont/2006/10/31/1162278139146.html
"My lady is doing the cleaning," said Mike, a year 11 student from Sydney. "I'll just be on the porch having a beer."

Many young men already had tactics in mind for minimising how much housework they will do. Some will use flattery. "[I'll] suggest my wife is a good cleaner," said Smithy, 17.

Others planned to make a healthy contribution early on and then scale back as their partner "relaxed". "You should be able to help for the first few years [of marriage] then it might wear off," said Kevin, 17, from a country high school.
</selected quotes>

obozo, there is no doubt some Muslim families oppress their women. But what makes you so sure it is happening in almost all Muslim families? I suggest your certainty arises from the same bigotry that causes some Muslims to believe that Western women are "sluts and whores" for the way they dress.

And it is noisome bigotry, on both sides of this debate, that is preventing us from getting on with building a tolerant society, based on mutual understanding and respect.

Just observe here with this joker, Sheik Taj el-Din al Hilaly and now with Rayann Bekdache and her religious uniform. Gawwwwd, is the mufti saying that Muslims cover their cat's meat with the hijab? Seems that this idea takes us back to pre-refrigeration days, and that's where that hijab belongs, ...... the primitive days, the days of medieval religious dumdums with archaic control rules. Any modern woman who values themselves with enough independent spirit should stay away from these women-hating superstitious playpens with their apartheid in the bedrooms. Villainous "men" who rely on an ancient book to justify their insecurity and codify their domination of women are incapable of understanding women on equal terms.

Be it Christianity or Judaism or Islam or Hinduism, it just seems such grandiose stupidity to have let the world fall sucker to these religious dumdums with their most dishonest concepts, their cultural codification of ancient superstition and magical thinking, their solipsistic dream, their drug, their noxious and malignant influence. AND, look how easy it is for people to disregard the major issue of guardianship of the planet with these pathetic little religious wars on everything. We should now stop being so damned respectful of this belief in teddies (i.e. gods) because it can be and often is lethally dangerous nonsense.

Deep space, the billions of years of life's evolution, the microscopic workings of biology and heredity, the enormous data bank our tiny lonely planet has bequeathed us, all contain more beauty and wonder and are a trillion times more important and interesting than myths, pseudosciences, the ritual of sacharrine adoration and flattery of imagined teddies (gods) that dumdums are so attracted to. Just seems we have to manage the change over from living with the disasters of the religious past to an understanding that we live in a brilliant material universe where there are real enticement rules that you do get to vote on.

The only thing I didn't get from your interesting article, Rayann, is why you personally wear the hijab.
I am all for any person wearing whatever they like - although I find the burkha personally terrifying and it induces a sympathetic claustrophobia in me that is actually physically nauseating - but the reasons I have heard given for wearing the much less restrictive and disturbing hijab, also leave me disquieted.
I have mostly heard that women wear it to protect themselves from male attention - which implies that women should take responsibility for male responses, when surely men should do that? It is terribly patronising to men to assume that women must take responsibility for the "weak" males supposedly uncontrollable emotions. I wear no hijab, but, at almost 50, certainly don't find myself overwhelmed with male attention, so if that is so, why must little girls and older women wear one? Another reason given, as has been expressed here, is that it is worn to "please" the husband. So what does her husband wear to please her, then, I ask myself, or does this pleasing only work one way?
I wish I'd hear that it is worn to get up the nose of westerners, or because it flatters the wearer, or, even, because it declares the wearer's religion publicly, but I always hear the old chestnuts about women having to control or please men, instead of themselves.

I came to this very late, and support those who thank the writer for a frank, interesting and engaging letter. When I was young Catholic nuns all covered themselves from head to toe, with only part of the face open, and there were many of them. That's just the way it was, and it would never have occurred to me, or anyone else at that time (1950s) to suggest that nuns shouldn't wear their habit.
What people wear is simply up to them. Nor do I want to know why the writer, or anyone else, wears what she wears. We learn eventually that what we wear makes some sort of statement about ourselves and those we interact with, and we learn to modify our dress if we realise that that statement is getting in the way of the outcome we want. Otherwise, it's one of the privileges of living in an open society — and long may it remain so!

Hey Mercurius,

I am really impressed with your post. The point "He cant speak Arabic" is wonderful. Do you think that muslims who speak Arabic are the real muslims?

Anyways, Ms. Shakira has written an article. I hope that answers all your rants. You comparison of some 11-yr old boy saying My girl should be in home cannot be equal to the point Shakira was making.

Have you ever heard of Muslims raping white-women for not wearing veils in muslim/non-muslim countries? I can give you 'n' number of links if you wish to see.

I haven't heard/saw a non-muslim raping a muslim girl in a non-muslim country for not following some of his custom/religious rules. Have you?

Sure, its shallow, but most of the girls I met at Uni wearing hijab were doing it 'cos it can look really cute - frames the face, gives you another item to accessorise, you can mix and match it with the rest of your outfit... One girl I sat next to for a while had a gorgeous black chiffon scarf with delicate beading on the hem... I wish I could find a shop that sells such beautiful scarves, and in this current climate, the guts to wear it.

Surely the recent kerfuffle around the wearing or otherwise of hijab is only going to have people clinging to their traditions further? Out of sheer bloody-mindedness

Why do I wear the hijab? First and foremost, every person wears it for different reasons and I can’t speak for anyone other than myself. I chose to wear the hijab because for me it's a reminder that there is a supreme being who I owe my life to. And that might seem a little absurd, but it's a reminder that I'm not at the centre of the universe. I certainly don't wear it to detract male attention because the hijab is supposed to be worn in praise of god not in an attempt to prevent unwanted attention, although many may wear it for that reason. Like many on the forum have expressed, men should be able to control their actions just as well as any female and any argument against this is sheer nonsense. Wearing the hijab for one's partner is quite hypocritical because essentially you're not really choosing to wear it out of devotion to god but in an attempt to please another person. And yes, I did choose to wear the hijab, indeed when I did come home wearing it, my parents were a little worried wondering whether I was ready to take on the responsibility.
And thanks for the diversity of comments.

Oh god, who has been poisoning this poor bint's mind? I'm sorry, but when I read a sentence like "representations of veiled Muslim women have permeated western feminist, racial, gendered, orientalist and religious discourses" I reach for my revolver. Who has been poisoning this young woman's brain with all this tosh? Hun, you are being so indocrinated by western "discourse" par excellence - leftist pomo cultistudi tosh.

Darl, rather than whingeing about "orientalist discourses" why don't you actually read some Orientalists. They will blow your brain in a way that the low-rent Foucault, Deleuze, and tragic Edward Said could never dream of.

You poor, poor dear. You don't know whether your Fatima or Ahmed. but you are tedious. I am tired of debate in Australia being constantly brought down by this confused Arab Muslim bints. They do not improve Australia and we would do well to alter our immigration policies accordingly.

I hope this helps.

After the tragedy of this thread thank GOD for Shakira. She rocks.

No tit f'tat I am far from typical

Q - 1. How can you follow a paedophile mohammed(cbuh), a person who took a 9 yr old girl as his 14 th wife and also took his adopted son's wife as his wife once he saw her naked? - I cant answer the question in part becoz I dont follow the guy

In addition I have no idea about the veracity of that claim - But I am sure there will be those usually white anglo saxon protestant johnny come lately Koranic scholars I referred to that will crawl out from under their rocks and quote me chapter and verse to prove it - or cut and paste in a squillion web addresses to prove M'med was a bad man and that Islam is eeevil

But how can Christians follow a god ( and or prophet if you believe Jesus was god mande man etc) who teased his most ardent follower Abraham - asking him to kill his son indeed!, or a god who is a flagrant child abuser - sent his son to die on the cross - or permits the Carlton football club to continue trading when we all know it is insolvent - or let people produce things like dancing with the stars - or a god who drowned the known world - or turned a curious woman into a pillar of salt - it is all in the spin

And even if AaaaaLLLL the bad things we wish to think about Islamism are true - what muslims wear is their business - I dont care who it offends or affronts or scares

Ahhh fraggit coach. If you're going to compare Rayann's comments to those of the sheikh hilaly, I may as well compare yours to Hitler. Of course that's extreme and stupid, but that's kind of my point.

Clearly, you're not willing to belief Islam represents anything other than an affront to your extremist christian values.

Hmmph. Sorry. I'll try and calm down for the rest of this post.

I couldn't agree more Rayann, though the only issue I have is that we don't seem to be getting many hijab-covered spokeswomen, so all we have left are those purporting to speak on their behalf.

Posting this article is a great first step, but we need vocal people out there spreading this message.
Granted, the media are more interested in attention grabbing aggressive muslims, but perhaps the sensible muslim majority needs to figure out how to attract the right kind of attention though a concerted effort. Attention grabbing ideas anyone?

Coach,

I just noticed you had 398 comments only about Islam.(newsflash : you are not a muslim!).

Can you share the reason behind the grudge? ie dumped by a veiled sweetheart at school? a Sheikh stepped on your tow at kindie? 'Lost' a son to Islam?

On a humourous note : Islam is as Australian as Lamb..try it:

Islam is pro-nounced "Is-Lamb". It does not get more Aussie than this:):)

Chill and hope you had a happy Ramadan,

PS: wish you a happy Christmas fasting (I believe you are starting on 27 November for 44 days..is this correct or am I 'mis-informed'.

Hi snakepete,

You are a hypocrite (100%). You are the typical bend-over PC who led us to this state.

I asked a simple question: Q - 1. How can you follow a paedophile mohammed(cbuh), a person who took a 9 yr old girl as his 14 th wife and also took his adopted son's wife as his wife once he saw her naked?

You replied: I cant answer the question in part becoz I dont follow the guy.

If you dont know why the hell are you answering the question.

Have you brought a relavant comparison like catholic paedophile priests? No.

You did talk about hypocritical stuff like (But how can Christians follow a god ( and or prophet if you believe Jesus was god mande man etc) who teased his most ardent follower Abraham - or a god who drowned the known world - or turned a curious woman into a pillar of salt - it is all in the spin) etc.. the same stuff believed by your loving muslims..?

And finally.. you said : "what muslims wear is their business - I dont care who it offends or affronts or scares " . This is Western business and they should follow the business rules . Use this moral using western dress in islamic countries and try some bali picnics. I hope you experience the 'LOVE BLASTS' . ok?

aaah tit 4 tat! you have caught me in a playful mood - perhaps my Lithium levels are low

I answered the question in a manner that I hoped would indicate what a dumb question it was - my crest has fallen. I have failed; You still seem to think it a question worthy of a serious answer

I can make reference to catholic paedophiles if you like - you seem to like references to paedophilia - whatever floats your boat - but what would it mean? because there are catholic religious peadophiles the entire catholic church is somehow a flawed? That is about as sensible as the assertion all men are rapists - I dont get your point

You then go on to tell me you hope I experience the "Love Blasts" = does that mean you wish harm to befall the sneeekemeister? - is a love blast a euphemism for turning me in to pink mist? (another of the more beautiful euphisms referring to vaporised human body parts)

You must really dislike my point of view to go to that extreme - or have I totally misread you?

And the Western rules bit - sheeesh; if you are referring to attire, who cares?

You also regurgitated my stuff concerning some of the contradictions about god - but I noted you left out the reference to the Carlton Football club - One of Gods biggest mistakes; that and of course the size of the pip in an avacado - But I digress.

I will say it again - just give me time to climb aboard my hobby horse : ahem!

this is a pogrom! - nothing less - it is a loosely connected form of mass hysteria aimed at demonising a small minority in our community - there are two reasons (a) it keeps up support for fraudulent Iraqui war by fostering nascent patriotism (b) and it keeps the masses pre occupied (c) it serves to fill the void left by the Asians when we got tired of hating and fearing them

as usual hypocrite snakepeete, your reply is 100% hypocritical.

"I answered the question in a manner that I hoped would indicate what a dumb question it was - my crest has fallen. I have failed; You still seem to think it a question worthy of a serious answer."

Yes, snake this is the most important question- a question which points to the chore aspect of islam - How can a paedophile be a perfect man and a role model?

you have no problem with muslim's beliefs but you do have with non-muslims; hypocrite at it's best.

"You then go on to tell me you hope I experience the "Love Blasts" = does that mean you wish harm to befall the sneeekemeister? - is a love blast a euphemism for turning me in to pink mist? (another of the more beautiful euphisms referring to vaporised human body parts)"

No buddy; as you say that what muslims wear is their business; then apply the same logic to westerners in islamic countries- what westerners wear is their business; atleast try once in Saudi/Bali/Egypt and please share your 'loving' experiences here.

If any locally, the problem with hidjab is hypocrisy and dual standard of its supporters: hidjab would have to provide as much "freedom to articulate in English" in the West as it does in Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia nowadays.

While playing with a boyfriend on Williamstown barracks shores / smoking cigarettes, hidjab is a mockery of faith rather than “following a belief” necessity.

I take no blame for very grounds of Islam, and so even Sheikh Hillali-in this case particularly.

What is a pogrom?

Tit fer; I think I mean what I say;- I struggle with your assesment of me as a hypocrite - and as I tried to point out I have no problems with a muslims beliefs partly because I, unlike sooooo many others, do not profess to be an expert on Islamism.

I know how I interacted with muslims pre 9/11 and how I do now; I also know that all this post 9/11 resentment is just a form of mass hysteria - not dissimilar to that which over took germany about the Jews in the pre war years - so any assesment of what is and isnt Islamic values today is made through a very distorted prism.

And as it happens I do not have a problem with non muslims creeds - I used some of the stupid contradictions of the christian faith to point out - obviously badly - how anything can be read into anything at all - hence the foolishly of your resentment and that silly question being based on your understanding of islamism - and I would contend it is a seasonal resentment - if it were not for 9/11 etc you wouldnt care if muslim women wore sugar bags or prada -

And I am not interested in the intolerance of other nation states - let them be that way - that is no reason for me to be so intolerant - patience and acceptance will eventually win -

tit for tat: "No buddy; as you say that what muslims wear is their business; then apply the same logic to westerners in islamic countries- what westerners wear is their business; atleast try once in Saudi/Bali/Egypt and please share your 'loving' experiences here."

Are you suggesting that our society should mimic Saudi society.

I'm in shock. That's the most unAustralian thing I've read all day.

"...Saudi/Bali/Egypt and please share your 'loving' experiences here"

Gee, what brilliant logic!

step one: They're intollerant prats

step two: We don't like intollerant prats

step three: We're about freedom!

step four: If we're in their country we won't have freedom

step five: Lets be intollerant prats TO THEM in OUR country THAT will show them how much WE ARE about FREEDOM!

Because, apparently, we're all about the rights of the individual to do as they please so long as it dosn't harm anyone UNLESS YOU'RE WEARING A PIECE OF FABRIC AROUND YOUR HAIR because THAT is really what is going to DESTROY OUR FREEDOM.

Sheesh.

Sorry for all the Boaz-esq capitals, but really, the logic that if people are mean to us, then we should be mean back because that will show how nice we are is just frickin' stupid.

Hi snakepete,

" I struggle with your assesment of me as a hypocrite .. I have no problems with a muslims beliefs partly because I, unlike sooooo many others, do not profess to be an expert on Islamism. "

That is the true nature of hypocrite. You have problems with non-muslim religions as you know them but you dont have problems with muslims as you dont know about islam. What a logic!

I suggest you to know/learn about Islam and then post your "non-hypocritic" posts.

"And I am not interested in the intolerance of other nation states - let them be that way - that is no reason for me to be so intolerant - patience and acceptance will eventually win - "

Hey you said " What muslims wear is their business (in western countries)."

But see the plight of non-muslims in muslim countries -

they are forced to wear islamic dress;
they will get raped if they wear no hijab and the rapists say they say deserve it;
they will be cursed by islamic women;

Finally sheiks come to our country and say western women are meat, when kept[??] outside uncovered, muslim men will come and rape them. Pc bend-over idiots say : "Hey We should give freedom to them; We should bend and get raped; We should allow them to live; let them curse us and let us wear hijab.. "

albs,

"Are you suggesting that our society should mimic Saudi society. "

I think, in near future, We should have to follow Saudi in terms of sharia law.

"I'm in shock. That's the most unAustralian thing I've read all day. "

Me too. When sheik said that white women are meat and deserve rape for exposing their face, hands, legs etc; I got a 1000W shock . Did you?

Laurie,

"step one: They're intollerant prats step two: We don't like intollerant prats step three: We're about freedom! step four: If we're in their country we won't have freedom step five: Lets be intollerant prats TO THEM in OUR country THAT will show them how much WE ARE about FREEDOM! "

1: They're intollerant, cruel
2: We dont like them
3: We are about freedom
4: If we're in their country we won't have freedom
5: Let us not allow our freedom to be hijacked by the intollerant sheiks to spread their intollerance.

Because we are seen as MEAT and they are CATS; Expose ur face/hands/legs and they say: Glad to MEAT You

Got it

"got it"?

No tit for tat not really. You see many muslim women were outraged at the sheik's assertions too. Many muslim women don't wear the hijab and many do and women on both sides denounced his outlandish claims. Did you miss the point of Rayann's article "Let muslim women speak for themselves"? Well you're just as bad as the sheik in trying to shut women up. You're rushing in all knight in shining armour "You're oppressed by your men muslim women- that should be no more" without actually listening to them and in doing so you are acting as western oppressor.

Of course what the sheik said is ridiculous but it's hardly the point here. Rayann isn't saying that all women should wear the hijab - just that you respect her choice to do so.

got it?

What is a pogrom?
(Posted by INKEEMAGEE2, Thursday, 2 November 2006 10:03:18 PM)

It is something like Eureka where Chinese were murdered for being Chinese, and Cronula – where not looking blonde enough had been running for their lives more recently.

A smart years-ago introduction of multiculturalism as then factual response to an anti-racist demand of non-UK-biologically-linked populous of the British Commonwealth and contemporary attempts to further bound the commons with “ethnic communities” perks and clergy at schools could provide just a light treatment against xenophobia and the Dark Ages notion of a religious rightness.

pogrom (Russian Yiddish)
an organized massacre of helpless people

Thanks. so i guess tit fer tat and a few oters really do seem to be nasty bastards who hate an awful lot.

i apologise. i meant to say others . not oters. at least phoneticaly they have morals.

>at least phoneticaly they have morals.
>Posted by INKEEMAGEE2, Sunday, 5 November 2006 11:24:54 PM

Exactly! Accent rules!

You can't argue for the right to be different if that right includes imposing your "difference" upon others. Democracy pretty much allows all but the most ignorant, or that which has proven not to erode the rights and freedoms shared by all. Koranic laws demand conformity.
As to some of the posts about the majority choosing to not be democratic as an example of democracy. Nice try. Choosing to be totalitarian is not an expression of democracy even if you vote to submit to your new authority. Suicide is not an affirmation of life. :-)

I think that some of you are missing the point.

Whilst I would argue that in our country, others have the right to be different, I would also point out to those who wish to be different, that many members of our society actually do object to them being different. In consequence of that, they then have to accept the slings and arrows which will be aimed at them.

However, in giving them the right to be different, we are not also giving them the right to arbitrarily impose their ways on us. That can only happen if they win a majority in the government (shudder).

Is that really the point? The writer was not asking us to wear the garment, only that we should allow her to decide whether or not she wore it.

You (VK3AUU) are right in implying that what we wear says something about us, and we learn in time that dressing simply to please ourselves (or wearing tattoos, body-piercing, adorning ourselves) can have negative impacts on others: they might choose not to employ us, or to choose us as friends or partners. But we are a diverse and pluralist society, and that is part of it. It is (thank heavens) up to us what we wear. In Chairman Mao's China everyone wore the same; that was not a great alternative. The headgear in question doesn't offend me any more than a nun's habit does, or a weird hairdo. Why is it a problem for others?

Don Aitkin
" The headgear in question doesn't offend me any more than a nun's habit does, or a weird hairdo. Why is it a problem for others? "

That is just the point, it IS a problem for others, the why or wherefore is immaterial, that is just their prejudice, so those who choose to wear hedgear, for whatever reason, just have to put up with the slack.

I don't like youths who wear caps with the peak to the back, I think they look dills, but that is my prejudice based on my perceptions of the behaviour of a few which in my brain illogically also translates to the many.

Getting back to the thread, it seems to me to be imperative that more Muslim women become vocal in defense of their views. Their silence on many issues comes across as acquiescence.

In international hallways female employers from Islamist world mentioned possibility to wear Western clothes as a very reason for all hardness such a travelling lifestyle of international bureaucrats brings about.

May I jump round streets naked – whether in the West or East? Eventually,YES - somewhere in areas requiring a special pass to reach only.

So, what is a problem, should it suite me?