To Veil or Not to Veil: Is that the Question?

[FruitandNut]

I was wondering if there were any nudist MPs who might request that constituents remove all clothing because "it helps communication".

It would certainly help in the case of identity

 

[Azrael]

And who gets to define what's a *good* reason? You?

I'm hardly alone in thinking such accusations of Western depravity are condescending bollocks. Unless we're to get into tedious moral relativism here, some reasons are stronger than others.

Certain Muslims who claim everyone but them is "depraved", and thus the opinions of non-Muslims (or even Muslims not of their liking) are of no account, shut themselves off from any debate. And you have the cheek to imply I'm arrogant!

 

[Badger Kitten]

I have posted a comment on th OP's blog

Hi Nafeez, interesting article, good to see lots of wide debate about the subjects for which the veil is a lightning rod. I noticed part of the article had appeared on urban 75, (if that is you posting as 'reprehensor'.)

I wanted to pop into tell you that you may have inadvertently run aground of the site ethos again - the way the site works is that people contribute their own opinions fresh onto the site, not repost, cut and paste or link to other sites. There are already several threads about the veil - what would work better would be if you joined in and contributed, rather than start a new thread without checking what the site members are already discussing. Especially if the post starting a new thread is just a C&P from the blog, as that is seen as very bad manners on urban 75.

Why? See the FAQs, but basically...

It's a very big, busy site and it works because of original and engaged content; if everyone just posted links it would not be the same, hence the rules.

I wanted to come by and say this, because I think you could be a valued contributor to the site if you posted on it, especially in the politics and middle east forums. Unfortunately, simply linking to outside sites, even if they are your own original research, is seen as spamming. You can just about get away with it if you have a repuataion as a prolific contributor and if you are mid-thread and have just blogged something highly pertinent, but even then you are still expected to comment, paraphrase and stay involved with the discussion, to avoid being charged with spamming.

It may be that you don't have time or inclination to post on the site with new content, in which case, it probably isn't the site for you. But I would like to see you on there.

so I hope he will take that on board as he is a very interesting chap and has a lot he could contribute on politics and ME stuff, if he just stops the C&P thing,

 

[FridgeMagnet]

I don't think it is him - Nafeez knows about the Urban rules given the *last* time, this particular person has done this before on other topics, and in fact has PMed me when I binned one of them as spam.

Come to think of it, I told him not to C&P here as well...

We have a general policy that long C&Ps with links to other sites, particularly if there's a specific book for sale involved, are frowned upon as potential advertising (for the book and/or the other sites). These are discussion forums; quotes and extracts followed by some analysis for other people to read and comment on are the ideal, a big chunk of text from somewhere else isn't.

Perhaps I should have just left it at "frowned upon", though I was referring to a particular thread I suppose.

 

[Pigeon]

I'm hardly alone in thinking such accusations of Western depravity are condescending bollocks. Unless we're to get into tedious moral relativism here, some reasons are stronger than others.

Certain Muslims who claim everyone but them is "depraved", and thus the opinions of non-Muslims (or even Muslims not of their liking) are of no account, shut themselves off from any debate. And you have the cheek to imply I'm arrogant!

Wind your neck in. "Certain Muslims" have made no claims about anything here. tbaldwin- who, granted, does Speak For The People- has declared that Muslim women weraing a veil and going to Jack Straw's surgery view the west as depraved.

On the basis of that, you've said, effectively, that they should consequently fuck off back to wherever they come from. Which makes you look something worse than arrogant, IMHO.

 

[Jessiedog]

so I hope he will take that on board as he is a very interesting chap and has a lot he could contribute on politics and ME stuff, if he just stops the C&P thing,

So do I BK.

Thanks for your persistence.

Here's hoping.



Woof

 

[Jessiedog]

I don't think it is him - Nafeez knows about the Urban rules given the *last* time, this particular person has done this before on other topics, and in fact has PMed me when I binned one of them as spam.

Come to think of it, I told him not to C&P here as well...

Perhaps I should have just left it at "frowned upon", though I was referring to a particular thread I suppose.

D'oh!

As you were.



Woof

 

[Dhimmi]

Here's an interesting perspective regarding Pakistan and the Veil.

The Hudood Ordinances of Pakistan expose how Generals past and present have used the regulation of female sexuality to their strategic advantage.

On February 22, 1979, the then President of Pakistan General Zia-ul-Haq began his infamous "Islamisation" campaign and promulgated four separate ordinances collectively known as the Hudood Ordinances. The Hudood Ordinances (plural for the singular Hadd, meaning limits), which cover theft, adultery, rape, and bearing false witness, amended Pakistan's laws to make sexual offences crimes against the state. The number of women in Pakistan's prisons swelled from 79 on the date of the promulgation to several thousand in the months and years that followed.

more:
http://www.altmuslim.com/perm.php?id=1765_0_25_0_C

 

[Azrael]

Wind your neck in. "Certain Muslims" have made no claims about anything here. tbaldwin- who, granted, does Speak For The People- has declared that Muslim women weraing a veil and going to Jack Straw's surgery view the west as depraved.

On the basis of that, you've said, effectively, that they should consequently fuck off back to wherever they come from. Which makes you look something worse than arrogant, IMHO.

I said no such thing. Keep your libellous insinuations to yourself.

What I did say was that I've no time for people making wild allegations about this country, and, if they find a culture so "decadent", questioned why they want to be a part of it. This applies regardless of creed or place of birth. My comments about certain Spanish ex-pats, and how Muslims making allegations of Western decadence are often hardest on their co-religionists, clearly passed you by in your rush to denounce me.

 

[Bear]

Serious question,

I'm not taking the piss or trolling but how do women who ware the veil go on dates?

I'm just wondering how they'd get married to anyone who wasn't from their closed conservative community since any non-muslim from outside that community almost certainly wouldn't go out with a person who's face they couldn't see. And I think that must separate those women and stop them mixing with males from outside the strick Islamic community and I think this not mixing is a bad thing.

 

[danny la rouge]

Leaving aside the fact that as Home Secretary and the Foreign Secretary Straw was an authoritarian xenophobe, there is a point to be debated.

I heard an irate Muslim spokeswoman saying Straw's request to remove their veil makes Muslim women feel undermined. Well, presumably not being able to see the face of the person he is talking to makes him feel undermined. So where does that leave us? I had the distinct feeling that the spokeswoman felt her view should take precedence since it was a religious view, whereas Straw's was not. That is exactly the kind of thing I fear we face when we try to discuss things with religious people.

So, on balance, I think I agree with Straw on this one.

 

[TonkaToy]

When I get to be an MP, if I find anyone wears clothing that covers themselves up, I'll just insist on meeting them looking like this:

Any complaints and the next time, the surgery will be held in one of these:

 

[JoePolitix]

Leaving aside the fact that as Home Secretary and the Foreign Secretary Straw was an authoritarian xenophobe, there is a point to be debated.

I heard an irate Muslim spokeswoman saying Straw's request to remove their veil makes Muslim women feel undermined. Well, presumably not being able to see the face of the person he is talking to makes him feel undermined. So where does that leave us? I had the distinct feeling that the spokeswoman felt her view should take precedence since it was a religious view, whereas Straw's was not. That is exactly the kind of thing I fear we face when we try to discuss things with religious people.

So, on balance, I think I agree with Straw on this one.

Straw's argument was that Muslim women who wear the veil (the niqab - not the far more common hijab) make him feel unconfortable, he then went on to state that he thought women shouldn't wear the veil at all. Yet Straw has been representing a constituency with a large Muslim community for over two decades - one has to ask why now of all times has he choosen to draw attention to the issue of Muslim dress? This is at a time when hostility to Muslims is at the greatest its ever been in this country and this is the community that is most targeted by the fascists, the media (both rightwing and liberal) and the state - the torrent of abuse that Muslims have had to endure in the wake of Straw's remarks were obvious to anybody with a sense of social and political context.

So on balance I'm more inclined to be concerned about those on the sharp end of racist bigotry than to the awkwardness suffered by the head of the Ministry of Imperialism in confort of his surgery.

 

[danny la rouge]

Straw's argument was that Muslim women who wear the veil (the niqab - not the far more common hijab) make him feel unconfortable, he then went on to state that he thought women shouldn't wear the veil at all.

I've read the piece. He claims it is only a request, and that he states that it is absolutely up to the person he asks. They can refuse.

And, as you correctly say, the niqab is pretty rare in this country.

Leave aside the fact that it is Straw for now. Why should someone not say the niqab makes them feel uncomfortable? Why should someone say in an ideal situation the niqab wouldn't be worn by anyone? And bear in mind that (some) Muslim women have argued just that, in this country, in this climate, recently.

 

[danny la rouge]

I'm off to bed now. But I just wanted to leave a marker that my concern is that it is becoming increasingly difficult to criticise religions without them howling 'foul'.

And to remind people that criticism of the niqab also comes from within the Muslim community.

And that there is an interesting debate to be had around self-oppression. I know 4thwrite is interested in that.

 

[Fullyplumped]

he then went on to state that he thought women shouldn't wear the veil at all.

No he didn't.

 

[reprehensor]

What's your opinion please?Sounds a bit like religion to me.

My opinion is that there should be open and frank discussion about this and other topics.

I think Straw is testing the water, stirring the pot, but not seriously belling the cat.

 

[reprehensor]

No I'm not Nafeez Ahmed. That wasn't a "large" cut 'n' paste. Am I even allowed to post a bloody link here?

 

[TonkaToy]

No I'm not Nafeez Ahmed. That wasn't a "large" cut 'n' paste. Am I even allowed to post a bloody link here?

Yes you are as long as it ain't to a hostile site (e.g. Nash/Fash) and that you actually bother to make a comment yourself AND not copy and paste too much.

Don't you understand plain English?

 

[JoePolitix]

Oh yes he did

No he didn't.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/07/nveil07.xml

 

[danny la rouge]

I love a good pantomime. But I'm a bit of a traditionalist: there should be male dames and a female principal boy. Now, we could assign those roles, or we could actually debate the issues...

 

[Donna Ferentes]

A tired old cynic writes

If you're an U75 traditionalist, you should know that "actually debating the issues" is extrmely unlikely.

 

[gingerdave]

A couple of years ago my wife worked in an area with a fairly high Muslim population (she's white, and isn't religious).

A muslim man ordered her to wear a headscarf. When she said she didn't have to, he threatened to rape her.

She left that job pretty fast.

 

[JoePolitix]

Get back to S**** F****

A couple of years ago my wife worked in an area with a fairly high Muslim population (she's white, and isn't religious).

A muslim man ordered her to wear a headscarf. When she said she didn't have to, he threatened to rape her.

She left that job pretty fast.

Just as I presume you'll be leaving this forum pretty fast.

 

[belboid]

I've read the piece. He claims it is only a request, and that he states that it is absolutely up to the person he asks. They can refuse.

yeah, right. A woman - a constituent - goes into see the Home Secretary, or the Father of the House of Commons. ie, an important, high up man, in a position of (supposed) power. He asks you to take off your veil - before asking anything else. It would hardly be surprising to beleive that many women would do so simply because they think they would get a better response from him, and that to refuse might mark them out and have negative consequences. Hardly a 'free choice' is it? And thats not to get into Straws claim - which can only be a lie - that nearly all the women felt 'relieved' that he had asked them to remove an item of their clothing.

Leave aside the fact that it is Straw for now. Why should someone not say the niqab makes them feel uncomfortable?

and why should someone not say having two gay men (for example) in their office makes them feel uncomfortable? Cos they're meant to be a public servant maybe? THEY are the ones supposedly at our beck and call not the other way round.

Why should someone say in an ideal situation the niqab wouldn't be worn by anyone? And bear in mind that (some) Muslim women have argued just that, in this country, in this climate, recently.

I'm sure plenty have, but this is far far from being an ideal world, so what would the point be?

There is, of course, a perfectly valid debate to be had around the question of veil wearing. I dont believe for a second tho that Straw was doing so in order to get a 'fair debate' going tho, he was shit-stirring to promote his Deputy Leader credentials, pure n simple.

 

[scawenb]

I spent a lot of time leafletting in the Asian estates of Blackburn in the early 1990s. Jack Straw had the Muslim leader sewn-up but he rare entered the community I think I once saw him drive through with a megaphone just before an election. He never did anything about the Labour council's segregation of communities into all-Asian and All white estates. He has equally never spoken out against the un-Islamic ban on women using the Mosques.

It is not credible that this is just a personal concern - it is timed to launch a debate just as we go into the Leadership election by someone who is seen as politically dead. Nor as a defence of Muslim women - there is no evidence to show its forced on them by men, in fact quite the opposite. Nor the argument that this is what prevents community cohesion - as most Islamophobia is directed against men with beards but he couldn't raise that! Even the personal problem of they coming to his constituence is dodgy - partly as he lied that they had all agreed to take it off when asked - would he ask someone who face was covered by sunglasses to take them off if he spoke to them outside or a lad with a scarf or hoodie? It's all a nonsense.

The niqab isn't even a particular Muslim issue. It actually originate from Arab dress where men and women covered all but their eyes to protect themselves in the desert. There is nothing in the Qur'an and some Muslim countries ban it and in others its never worn. This is in contrast to the Christian West which had a very strong code for virgins and widows to wear a veil - symbolically continued by brides today.

 

[Pigeon]

I said no such thing. Keep your libellous insinuations to yourself.

What I did say was that I've no time for people making wild allegations about this country, and, if they find a culture so "decadent", questioned why they want to be a part of it. This applies regardless of creed or place of birth. My comments about certain Spanish ex-pats, and how Muslims making allegations of Western decadence are often hardest on their co-religionists, clearly passed you by in your rush to denounce me.

Clearly did.

Must've glazed over. x 5000000

 

[danny la rouge]

There is, of course, a perfectly valid debate to be had around the question of veil wearing.

As I've made perfectly clear, I don't like Straw and never have, and I certainly have no intention of defending him. But I am interested in the perfectly valid debate. So let's have that rather than discuss Straw, who we all agree is a twat.

 

[Fullyplumped]

As I've made perfectly clear, I don't like Straw and never have, and I certainly have no intention of defending him. But I am interested in the perfectly valid debate. So let's have that rather than discuss Straw, who we all agree is a twat.

I for one don't agree that Jack Straw is a twat. Why not just give him credit for starting an important and genuinely national debate?

 

[danny la rouge]

I for one don't agree that Jack Straw is a twat. Why not just give him credit for starting an important and genuinely national debate?

I'm judging him on his performance as Home Secretary and as Foreign Secretary. But especially as Home Secretary. It was he who started that bizarre war of xenophobia with Widdecombe about who was 'tougher' on immigrants.