Muslim women speak out against the hijab as an element of political Islam

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I don't think PP was making an argument, She was simply stating how she views those wearing a hijab. Her assumption is that they are brainwashed. This is on par with those who say if they see a person who is markedly unkempt in public they assume they are either homeless or have mental health problems.

People do and must use heuristics or shortcuts that use outer appearance to make quick assessments of another's circumstances in order to process the world and decide on a next action without being overwhelmed. More information, though, may change the judgment made through the heuristic. PP's heuristic for a hijab wearer is brainwashed woman, not much gong on there, and, possibly, not worth my time and more deserving of my pity.

Hijab wearers may or may not care that people see the scarf and make a quick judgment that she is brainwashed or arrogant or of extremist views. But I am guessing that at least some of them think the hijab should be seen as a positive message of their love and respect for God and man. I think I can safely say that is probably not the default heuristic for the vast majority of Americans.

Original PP who used the word "brainwashed" here. If a woman wears a hijab, it indicates a particular religious belief that is anti-women. In order to believe in something that inherently devalues you as a person, I believe you have to be brainwashed. This is not remotely the same as assuming every unkempt person is homeless or mentally ill. The person is wearing the garment as an outward proclamation of a specific set of beliefs. People don't wear hijabs for other reasons to my knowledge. If they do, please enlighten.

I said I don't respect them for having those beliefs, but how does that extend to not being worth anyone's time or worthy of mercy or pity? I also never said that a person wearing a hijab is automatically an extremist. Whoa. You need to step back and stop putting words into other people's mouths. I am talking about something that is anti-women, and it is you who is extending it to these additional views.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In America, we respect the right for others to dress as they choose. We allow for freedom of religion. Therefore, if you want to wear oppressive clothing, I won't stop you. I won't say anything to you about it. I would not refuse to serve you at my business, nor would I practice or support discrimination against you.

But in the privacy of my thoughts, I will have no respect for you and will view you as a brainwashed idiot.

Unless hijab is worn by both men and women, it is oppressive to women, period, and I will despise it.

Why are your feelings important? Who exactly is clamoring for your respect?

I knew some idiot would respond with this. I don't really care who wants my respect. It's just an opinion. It's what we write here. If you don't care to know about it, go elsewhere.

It's not that I don't care to know it (although I don't), it's the sheer ridiculous value in you using your feelings as an argument that you think holds any weight. "You should agree with me! If you don't, I won't respect you and think you're an idiot!" Yeah, that's definitely going to win the hearts and minds. Not.

I am not presenting my feelings as an argument. There is no argument to be had here; there is no possible way you can prove to me that wearing hijab is not sexist and not oppressive. You cannot. Wearing hijab is ridiculous. My post is merely to point out that the only reason I tolerate it is because I believe in the rights we have as Americans. I support the freedoms of American even when it means tolerating something I find repellent. Do you understand now?

Probably not.

Actually, that's not true. The reason you tolerate is that the laws of the land don't give you any other options. I mean, what are you gonna do? Spit across your shoulder and spin around three times when you see a hijabi? Read three Hail Marys out loud? Charge at a covered woman and tear her scarf off? In what possible way would you be able to "not" tolerate it?

Are you being purposely obtuse. Go read the news and see the myriad ways people are not tolerant of other people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don't think PP was making an argument, She was simply stating how she views those wearing a hijab. Her assumption is that they are brainwashed. This is on par with those who say if they see a person who is markedly unkempt in public they assume they are either homeless or have mental health problems.

People do and must use heuristics or shortcuts that use outer appearance to make quick assessments of another's circumstances in order to process the world and decide on a next action without being overwhelmed. More information, though, may change the judgment made through the heuristic. PP's heuristic for a hijab wearer is brainwashed woman, not much gong on there, and, possibly, not worth my time and more deserving of my pity.

Hijab wearers may or may not care that people see the scarf and make a quick judgment that she is brainwashed or arrogant or of extremist views. But I am guessing that at least some of them think the hijab should be seen as a positive message of their love and respect for God and man. I think I can safely say that is probably not the default heuristic for the vast majority of Americans.

Original PP who used the word "brainwashed" here. If a woman wears a hijab, it indicates a particular religious belief that is anti-women. In order to believe in something that inherently devalues you as a person, I believe you have to be brainwashed. This is not remotely the same as assuming every unkempt person is homeless or mentally ill. The person is wearing the garment as an outward proclamation of a specific set of beliefs. People don't wear hijabs for other reasons to my knowledge. If they do, please enlighten.

I said I don't respect them for having those beliefs, but how does that extend to not being worth anyone's time or worthy of mercy or pity? I also never said that a person wearing a hijab is automatically an extremist. Whoa. You need to step back and stop putting words into other people's mouths. I am talking about something that is anti-women, and it is you who is extending it to these additional views.

PP here. Sorry if my analogy of unkemptness was poor--writing quickly--but I do think your heuristic for someone wearing a hijab is brainwashed. I have no problem with that at all and somewhat share that belief, but I actually see additional possibilities like arrogance and extremism, but neither of them automatically. I put those bits in the last paragraph where I was generalizing away from (or at least was intending to if it was not clear) your views to what others at large may shortcut to when they see a woman wearing a hijab.

As for not being worth your time or deserving of pity, I did qualify that with "possibly" as I am not sure how others interact with those they view as brainwashed.

You seem to see the hijab as purely anti-women. I think it is to a very large extent, but I also know that there are some cases where it has actually helped women. I don't want to over-emphasize this or lend any credence to the view that somehow the hijab is a feminist statement, but I do know that in some areas families let their daughters attend university only if they wear a hijab. They think that somehow this will protect her purity in a co-ed environment. So their daughters put on a hijab so they can receive an education. For these girls the hijab has nothing to do with their religious beliefs. It's just something they have to do to fulfill their ambition to better themselves.

[Anonymous]

I posted way way earlier in the thread. My family is from Egypt and I would like to add that the proliferation of the hijab has occurred in parallel with many ugly, ugly developments in the culture. My mother used to be able to walk around in a miniskirt in peace, now women are routinely harassed and assaulted on the street no matter what they are wearing. The country's increasing piousness has done little in the way of curbing crime, corruption, or deeply ingrained misogyny. The progress that women had made up until the 70's basically halted.

Here are pictures of women in Egypt from the 1960s, similar to pictures I have of family at home:





And today. Notice women who are not wearing hijab also dress very conservatively in public:



The hijab may have some theological significance, but in practice, it basically makes men feel that women are responsible for their sexual urges, that women who are uncovered are "asking" for it. There continue to be religious debate about whether unrelated men and women can even work together. There was even a famous incident where a scholar issued a fatwa saying that women would have to breastfeed their coworkers so that unrelated men and women working together would be proper. I really have no faith in Islamic "scholars." Personally, I have seen in my life nothing in modern Islam except a destructive, backwards force ruining people's lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I posted way way earlier in the thread. My family is from Egypt and I would like to add that the proliferation of the hijab has occurred in parallel with many ugly, ugly developments in the culture. My mother used to be able to walk around in a miniskirt in peace, now women are routinely harassed and assaulted on the street no matter what they are wearing. The country's increasing piousness has done little in the way of curbing crime, corruption, or deeply ingrained misogyny. The progress that women had made up until the 70's basically halted.

Here are pictures of women in Egypt from the 1960s, similar to pictures I have of family at home:





And today. Notice women who are not wearing hijab also dress very conservatively in public:



The hijab may have some theological significance, but in practice, it basically makes men feel that women are responsible for their sexual urges, that women who are uncovered are "asking" for it. There continue to be religious debate about whether unrelated men and women can even work together. There was even a famous incident where a scholar issued a fatwa saying that women would have to breastfeed their coworkers so that unrelated men and women working together would be proper. I really have no faith in Islamic "scholars." Personally, I have seen in my life nothing in modern Islam except a destructive, backwards force ruining people's lives.

How is it even possible to breastfeed your coworkers if you don't have a baby at home? Basically, only mothers of infants could work, and I'm sure the fatwa didn't mean that. "Scholar" indeed.

[Anonymous]

+1 to Egyptian PP's photos and sentments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don't think PP was making an argument, She was simply stating how she views those wearing a hijab. Her assumption is that they are brainwashed. This is on par with those who say if they see a person who is markedly unkempt in public they assume they are either homeless or have mental health problems.

People do and must use heuristics or shortcuts that use outer appearance to make quick assessments of another's circumstances in order to process the world and decide on a next action without being overwhelmed. More information, though, may change the judgment made through the heuristic. PP's heuristic for a hijab wearer is brainwashed woman, not much gong on there, and, possibly, not worth my time and more deserving of my pity.

Hijab wearers may or may not care that people see the scarf and make a quick judgment that she is brainwashed or arrogant or of extremist views. But I am guessing that at least some of them think the hijab should be seen as a positive message of their love and respect for God and man. I think I can safely say that is probably not the default heuristic for the vast majority of Americans.

Original PP who used the word "brainwashed" here. If a woman wears a hijab, it indicates a particular religious belief that is anti-women. In order to believe in something that inherently devalues you as a person, I believe you have to be brainwashed. This is not remotely the same as assuming every unkempt person is homeless or mentally ill. The person is wearing the garment as an outward proclamation of a specific set of beliefs. People don't wear hijabs for other reasons to my knowledge. If they do, please enlighten.

I said I don't respect them for having those beliefs, but how does that extend to not being worth anyone's time or worthy of mercy or pity? I also never said that a person wearing a hijab is automatically an extremist. Whoa. You need to step back and stop putting words into other people's mouths. I am talking about something that is anti-women, and it is you who is extending it to these additional views.

PP here. Sorry if my analogy of unkemptness was poor--writing quickly--but I do think your heuristic for someone wearing a hijab is brainwashed. I have no problem with that at all and somewhat share that belief, but I actually see additional possibilities like arrogance and extremism, but neither of them automatically. I put those bits in the last paragraph where I was generalizing away from (or at least was intending to if it was not clear) your views to what others at large may shortcut to when they see a woman wearing a hijab.

As for not being worth your time or deserving of pity, I did qualify that with "possibly" as I am not sure how others interact with those they view as brainwashed.

You seem to see the hijab as purely anti-women. I think it is to a very large extent, but I also know that there are some cases where it has actually helped women. I don't want to over-emphasize this or lend any credence to the view that somehow the hijab is a feminist statement, but I do know that in some areas families let their daughters attend university only if they wear a hijab. They think that somehow this will protect her purity in a co-ed environment. So their daughters put on a hijab so they can receive an education. For these girls the hijab has nothing to do with their religious beliefs. It's just something they have to do to fulfill their ambition to better themselves.

I was specifically thinking of women here in American who supposedly wear them by choice.

Your extension to women being allowed to go to university because they wear one just makes me sad. Why is a woman's purity ever an issue when she is attempting to get an education? It may appear to "help" them in that instance, but really it is again indicative of being trapped in a culture that does not value them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don't think PP was making an argument, She was simply stating how she views those wearing a hijab. Her assumption is that they are brainwashed. This is on par with those who say if they see a person who is markedly unkempt in public they assume they are either homeless or have mental health problems.

People do and must use heuristics or shortcuts that use outer appearance to make quick assessments of another's circumstances in order to process the world and decide on a next action without being overwhelmed. More information, though, may change the judgment made through the heuristic. PP's heuristic for a hijab wearer is brainwashed woman, not much gong on there, and, possibly, not worth my time and more deserving of my pity.

Hijab wearers may or may not care that people see the scarf and make a quick judgment that she is brainwashed or arrogant or of extremist views. But I am guessing that at least some of them think the hijab should be seen as a positive message of their love and respect for God and man. I think I can safely say that is probably not the default heuristic for the vast majority of Americans.

Original PP who used the word "brainwashed" here. If a woman wears a hijab, it indicates a particular religious belief that is anti-women. In order to believe in something that inherently devalues you as a person, I believe you have to be brainwashed. This is not remotely the same as assuming every unkempt person is homeless or mentally ill. The person is wearing the garment as an outward proclamation of a specific set of beliefs. People don't wear hijabs for other reasons to my knowledge. If they do, please enlighten.

I said I don't respect them for having those beliefs, but how does that extend to not being worth anyone's time or worthy of mercy or pity? I also never said that a person wearing a hijab is automatically an extremist. Whoa. You need to step back and stop putting words into other people's mouths. I am talking about something that is anti-women, and it is you who is extending it to these additional views.

PP here. Sorry if my analogy of unkemptness was poor--writing quickly--but I do think your heuristic for someone wearing a hijab is brainwashed. I have no problem with that at all and somewhat share that belief, but I actually see additional possibilities like arrogance and extremism, but neither of them automatically. I put those bits in the last paragraph where I was generalizing away from (or at least was intending to if it was not clear) your views to what others at large may shortcut to when they see a woman wearing a hijab.

As for not being worth your time or deserving of pity, I did qualify that with "possibly" as I am not sure how others interact with those they view as brainwashed.

You seem to see the hijab as purely anti-women. I think it is to a very large extent, but I also know that there are some cases where it has actually helped women. I don't want to over-emphasize this or lend any credence to the view that somehow the hijab is a feminist statement, but I do know that in some areas families let their daughters attend university only if they wear a hijab. They think that somehow this will protect her purity in a co-ed environment. So their daughters put on a hijab so they can receive an education. For these girls the hijab has nothing to do with their religious beliefs. It's just something they have to do to fulfill their ambition to better themselves.

I was specifically thinking of women here in American who supposedly wear them by choice.

Your extension to women being allowed to go to university because they wear one just makes me sad. Why is a woman's purity ever an issue when she is attempting to get an education? It may appear to "help" them in that instance, but really it is again indicative of being trapped in a culture that does not value them.

I agree it is sad and indicative of a culture where the "purity" of a woman is more highly valued than her education or the contribution she can make to society (apart perhaps from her ability to birth boys).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted way way earlier in the thread. My family is from Egypt and I would like to add that the proliferation of the hijab has occurred in parallel with many ugly, ugly developments in the culture. My mother used to be able to walk around in a miniskirt in peace, now women are routinely harassed and assaulted on the street no matter what they are wearing. The country's increasing piousness has done little in the way of curbing crime, corruption, or deeply ingrained misogyny. The progress that women had made up until the 70's basically halted.

Here are pictures of women in Egypt from the 1960s, similar to pictures I have of family at home:





And today. Notice women who are not wearing hijab also dress very conservatively in public:



The hijab may have some theological significance, but in practice, it basically makes men feel that women are responsible for their sexual urges, that women who are uncovered are "asking" for it. There continue to be religious debate about whether unrelated men and women can even work together. There was even a famous incident where a scholar issued a fatwa saying that women would have to breastfeed their coworkers so that unrelated men and women working together would be proper. I really have no faith in Islamic "scholars." Personally, I have seen in my life nothing in modern Islam except a destructive, backwards force ruining people's lives.

How is it even possible to breastfeed your coworkers if you don't have a baby at home? Basically, only mothers of infants could work, and I'm sure the fatwa didn't mean that. "Scholar" indeed.

In Islam, just about anyone (or at least any man) can hang out his shingle and say he is an Islamic preacher and issue fatwas. As religion has become more powerful in the Middle East, there are more of these and many are just crazy.

There was one in Morocco who issued a fatwa that a man can have sex with his wife up to six hours after she died. In the past (eg the age Egyptian PP harks back to) there was no real benefit in making such pronouncements. You'd be ignored. But in today's more fundamentalist and politically opportunistic environment these preachers can gather a following and even have their fatwas inspire pronouncements that are equally crazy but more deadly by ISIS.

I agree with PP it is almost impossible to point to any recent development in modern Islam that has been positive. Can the decline of this once noble religion go any further?

[Anonymous]

Didn't Khomeini issue a pronouncement about whether it's permissible to have sex with chickens? Shia, of course.

More fundamentally, Islam is a religion that covers many aspects of life and law. The incursion of the beards into sex with chickens and dead wives is an extension of this. These pronouncements take the preachers way beyond the Quran, which doesn't go near the questions of sex with chickens and dead wives. It's unfortunate and unnecessary, but symptomatic of the control these guys are trying to grasp today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You are assuming the khimar may have been worn for protection from the sun instead of modesty reasons. We know that modesty is important in Islam because God asked women to use that cloak or shawl to cover women's breasts. He asked women to cover their adornments too. He didn't ask women to wear the khimar to protect themselves from the sun. Hair is often used to attract people of the opposite sex. It can be seen as a woman's adornment. As such, it can be assumed that covering it is in keeping with the modesty requirement.

If God had wanted women to cover their hair, wouldn't He have been clear on such an important issue? Why is it necessary to make assumptions about an important point like this? Further, why can't we make assumptions that go in a different direction, e g., that women aren't responsible for men's urges, but instead men should learn, as a religious duty, to control their own urges.

God didn't say women are responsible for men's urges. He also asked men to lower their eyes and control themselves.

Jesus said that. "But I say to you, anyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery in his heart. If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it away...." Harsh, maybe, but it puts the responsibility where it belongs. Is there a comparable Quranic verse?

Why SHOULD there be one? Why do you want Islam to be just like Christianity?

Of course not. But if there's no verse in the Quran, and no teaching by scholars, that men are responsible for their lust and their actions, then it is further proof that Islam is fundamentally anti-woman and not feminist. From what I know, which is probably less than most posters on this thread, women are unequal in Islam, lesser compared to men. A head covering is a visual part of that.

As PP has pointed out, there is a verse about men lowering their gaze. Given the times, Islam in my view cannot be construed as anti-women. It forbade the practice of infanticide, most commonly practiced on female babies. It guaranteed women the right of inheritance from both their husbands and their parents, giving widows and orphans some means to support themselves. The testimony of women was accepted legally. Women were given the right of divorce and the right to put whatever other conditions they wished in their marriage contracts.

Actually, we only have Islam's word on the claim that in pre-Islamic Arabia none of that was possible. And it is of course in the interest of Islam to paint the time before it with a dark brush. From the example of Mohammad's first wife, who grew up pre-Islam, we know that women before the advent of Islam had money, ran businesses, hired men, and proposed to candidates of their choosing directly. That doesn't sound like a bad deal to me.

His first wife also wouldn't let him take additional wives.

We don't know whether she wouldn't let him, or whether he didn't want to. Don't make things up.

He married others - after apparently being devoted to his first wife for many years - for political and religious reasons. to honor the dead men who fought in the name of Islam, to build connections with other tribes

So these women were simply props - no different from how they were used when they were married off for their dowries. But in this case, it was to further Islam.

You don't know WHY he married others. Don't make things up.

You also don't seem to know that in Islam, the dowry belongs to the woman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In America, we respect the right for others to dress as they choose. We allow for freedom of religion. Therefore, if you want to wear oppressive clothing, I won't stop you. I won't say anything to you about it. I would not refuse to serve you at my business, nor would I practice or support discrimination against you.

But in the privacy of my thoughts, I will have no respect for you and will view you as a brainwashed idiot.

Unless hijab is worn by both men and women, it is oppressive to women, period, and I will despise it.

Why are your feelings important? Who exactly is clamoring for your respect?

I knew some idiot would respond with this. I don't really care who wants my respect. It's just an opinion. It's what we write here. If you don't care to know about it, go elsewhere.

It's not that I don't care to know it (although I don't), it's the sheer ridiculous value in you using your feelings as an argument that you think holds any weight. "You should agree with me! If you don't, I won't respect you and think you're an idiot!" Yeah, that's definitely going to win the hearts and minds. Not.

I don't think PP was making an argument, She was simply stating how she views those wearing a hijab. Her assumption is that they are brainwashed. This is on par with those who say if they see a person who is markedly unkempt in public they assume they are either homeless or have mental health problems.

People do and must use heuristics or shortcuts that use outer appearance to make quick assessments of another's circumstances in order to process the world and decide on a next action without being overwhelmed. More information, though, may change the judgment made through the heuristic. PP's heuristic for a hijab wearer is brainwashed woman, not much gong on there, and, possibly, not worth my time and more deserving of my pity.

Hijab wearers may or may not care that people see the scarf and make a quick judgment that she is brainwashed or arrogant or of extremist views. But I am guessing that at least some of them think the hijab should be seen as a positive message of their love and respect for God and man. I think I can safely say that is probably not the default heuristic for the vast majority of Americans.

The default heuristic for the vast majority of Americans is determined by the behavior of the community first, and its dress code second. No one thinks badly about nuns despite their ridiculous outfits because nuns are famous for the good deeds (generalizing). If Muslims were known primarily for charity, top scientific achievements, kindness to neighbors and superior intelligence, no one would care what their women dress like. In fact, people would have looked up to the hijabis if that was the case. Right now Muslims have a bad rap, so their women share it. That's about it.

You are assuming that Muslim women performing great works of charity and performing brilliantly in the sciences and other spheres would be hijabis. Evidence to date suggest Muslim women doing those things do not wear the hijab. And that certainly may not be a coincidence.

At least I hope that is your assumption. Because if you are talking about Muslim men making these achievements but their wives are staying at home in their hijabs you are mistaken if you think people would look up to these women. And, yes, people would think less of these men for marrying brainwashed women.

Interesting that in your last sentence--"Muslims have a bad rap, so their wives share it"--the word Muslim is used to mean Muslim men. Kind of conveys only men are fully Muslim; women are just an appendage thereof that get the reflected glory or infamy. This points to a reading of your earlier comments as having the second meaning I described above.

This pretty much sums up just about everything that is dislikeable about the hijab.

Way to make up a hill of bullshit that wasn't in the post to fit your narrative. Wives staying at home? Brainwashed women? Their "wives" share it? Can you even read or do you just make it up as you go along?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I posted way way earlier in the thread. My family is from Egypt and I would like to add that the proliferation of the hijab has occurred in parallel with many ugly, ugly developments in the culture. My mother used to be able to walk around in a miniskirt in peace, now women are routinely harassed and assaulted on the street no matter what they are wearing. The country's increasing piousness has done little in the way of curbing crime, corruption, or deeply ingrained misogyny. The progress that women had made up until the 70's basically halted.

Here are pictures of women in Egypt from the 1960s, similar to pictures I have of family at home:





And today. Notice women who are not wearing hijab also dress very conservatively in public:



The hijab may have some theological significance, but in practice, it basically makes men feel that women are responsible for their sexual urges, that women who are uncovered are "asking" for it. There continue to be religious debate about whether unrelated men and women can even work together. There was even a famous incident where a scholar issued a fatwa saying that women would have to breastfeed their coworkers so that unrelated men and women working together would be proper. I really have no faith in Islamic "scholars." Personally, I have seen in my life nothing in modern Islam except a destructive, backwards force ruining people's lives.

1) Is it all Egyptian women or the urban elites? U sure?

2) If you want to point a finger somewhere, point it at your men. If they didn't support this, the idea of covering women wouldn't get very far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Didn't Khomeini issue a pronouncement about whether it's permissible to have sex with chickens? Shia, of course.

More fundamentally, Islam is a religion that covers many aspects of life and law. The incursion of the beards into sex with chickens and dead wives is an extension of this. These pronouncements take the preachers way beyond the Quran, which doesn't go near the questions of sex with chickens and dead wives. It's unfortunate and unnecessary, but symptomatic of the control these guys are trying to grasp today.

Shia, "of course"?

You are a fucking bigot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
1) Is it all Egyptian women or the urban elites? U sure?

2) If you want to point a finger somewhere, point it at your men. If they didn't support this, the idea of covering women wouldn't get very far.

I am the Egyptian pp, and my family was as far from urban elites as you can imagine, both geographically and culturally. We're also Christian, so you can't point at "my" men.