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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reasons Muslim women wear the hijab

1. It is required by law
2. Their families or husbands force them to
3. They (erroneously) think their religion requires them to
4. Peer pressure from their friends
5. Protection from harassment in the street (Muslim majority countries only)
6. Desire to show they are pure
7. Increase marriage prospects with men who want pure women and take the hijab as a sign of that
8. To wear a symbol that proclaims Islamic pride
9. To wear a symbol against Western neo-colonialism
10. As a show of Islamic feminism that believes the hijab is a rejection of the objectification of women
11. A mortification practice that they believe brings them closer to God.

Reasons 1 through 7 probably cover 90 percent, likely more, of the cases and are the reasons why most of the posters on this thread dislike the hijab. Reasons 8 through 10 are tiresome, but okay. Only 11 would be legitimately religious but even then one would have to say why this particular practice? Why not fast one day a week as a non-hijabi Muslim woman I know does? How about engaging in good works? Giving extra zakat?

Have I left out any other reasons?

12. Because as a woman you can't enter a mosque without one (only explains a part of Fridays)

13. It's easier to get away with doing things you are not supposed to because your parents suspect you less (teenagers only)

14. They look cute with those skinny jeans and skin-tight long-sleeved blouse, accessorizing nicely with the eye makeup and lipstick colors.

15. Hijab means never having a bad hair day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In November, Saudi Arabia sentenced a Palestinian poet to death for renouncing Islam and criticizing the Saudi royal family.

Saudi Arabia is one of the most repressive regimes on the planet. It is an authoritarian, theocratic monarchy that bases its laws on an extreme interpretation of Sharia (Islamic law). Its Wahhabi (Sunni extremist) ideology and frequent use of beheadings have led it to be compared to ISIS. Algerian journalist Kamel Daoud described Saudi Arabia as “an ISIS that has made it” in a November op-ed in The New York Times.

These appear to be false charges, at least based on the CNN story and the linked poetry. The first judge dismissed the charges of blasphemy (they are not supported by the poetry seen in the linked translation). However, the prosecutor appealed--sounds like we need some double jeopardy protection in Sharia.

The story mentions nothing about criticizing the royal family, and the poems do not appear to do that either. He did get a sentence for fraternizing with women--apparently he had pictures on his cell of himself with women he said he met at an art gallery. It appears that someone accused him of blasphemy to settle a personal score--an all too unsettling development that has happened numerous times in Pakistan. One wonders about the political clout of his accuser.

Life is much, much worse in ISIS land that it is in Saudi Arabia.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/29/middleeast/saudi-arabia-poet-ashraf-fayadh-death-sentence/

Who cares if it's only "bad.' Does that make living under certain conditions acceptable?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In November, Saudi Arabia sentenced a Palestinian poet to death for renouncing Islam and criticizing the Saudi royal family.

Saudi Arabia is one of the most repressive regimes on the planet. It is an authoritarian, theocratic monarchy that bases its laws on an extreme interpretation of Sharia (Islamic law). Its Wahhabi (Sunni extremist) ideology and frequent use of beheadings have led it to be compared to ISIS. Algerian journalist Kamel Daoud described Saudi Arabia as “an ISIS that has made it” in a November op-ed in The New York Times.

These appear to be false charges, at least based on the CNN story and the linked poetry. The first judge dismissed the charges of blasphemy (they are not supported by the poetry seen in the linked translation). However, the prosecutor appealed--sounds like we need some double jeopardy protection in Sharia.

The story mentions nothing about criticizing the royal family, and the poems do not appear to do that either. He did get a sentence for fraternizing with women--apparently he had pictures on his cell of himself with women he said he met at an art gallery. It appears that someone accused him of blasphemy to settle a personal score--an all too unsettling development that has happened numerous times in Pakistan. One wonders about the political clout of his accuser.

Life is much, much worse in ISIS land that it is in Saudi Arabia.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/29/middleeast/saudi-arabia-poet-ashraf-fayadh-death-sentence/

Who cares if it's only "bad.' Does that make living under certain conditions acceptable?

No, but comparisons like this have the effect of minimizing how cruel life is under ISIS. The 8 million people under their control could only hope they lived in Saudi Arabia instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In November, Saudi Arabia sentenced a Palestinian poet to death for renouncing Islam and criticizing the Saudi royal family.

Saudi Arabia is one of the most repressive regimes on the planet. It is an authoritarian, theocratic monarchy that bases its laws on an extreme interpretation of Sharia (Islamic law). Its Wahhabi (Sunni extremist) ideology and frequent use of beheadings have led it to be compared to ISIS. Algerian journalist Kamel Daoud described Saudi Arabia as “an ISIS that has made it” in a November op-ed in The New York Times.

These appear to be false charges, at least based on the CNN story and the linked poetry. The first judge dismissed the charges of blasphemy (they are not supported by the poetry seen in the linked translation). However, the prosecutor appealed--sounds like we need some double jeopardy protection in Sharia.

The story mentions nothing about criticizing the royal family, and the poems do not appear to do that either. He did get a sentence for fraternizing with women--apparently he had pictures on his cell of himself with women he said he met at an art gallery. It appears that someone accused him of blasphemy to settle a personal score--an all too unsettling development that has happened numerous times in Pakistan. One wonders about the political clout of his accuser.

Life is much, much worse in ISIS land that it is in Saudi Arabia.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/29/middleeast/saudi-arabia-poet-ashraf-fayadh-death-sentence/

Who cares if it's only "bad.' Does that make living under certain conditions acceptable?

No, but comparisons like this have the effect of minimizing how cruel life is under ISIS. The 8 million people under their control could only hope they lived in Saudi Arabia instead.

I'm not sure I understand your point. Yes, the Syrians would prefer to just go about their lives being Syrians, rather than being subject to ISIS, which is an appallingly brutal regime, or Assad, which is a more-moderately-brutal regime. But they wouldn't want to live in the KSA, either, which is pretty brutal, and sometimes very arbitrary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In November, Saudi Arabia sentenced a Palestinian poet to death for renouncing Islam and criticizing the Saudi royal family.

Saudi Arabia is one of the most repressive regimes on the planet. It is an authoritarian, theocratic monarchy that bases its laws on an extreme interpretation of Sharia (Islamic law). Its Wahhabi (Sunni extremist) ideology and frequent use of beheadings have led it to be compared to ISIS. Algerian journalist Kamel Daoud described Saudi Arabia as “an ISIS that has made it” in a November op-ed in The New York Times.

These appear to be false charges, at least based on the CNN story and the linked poetry. The first judge dismissed the charges of blasphemy (they are not supported by the poetry seen in the linked translation). However, the prosecutor appealed--sounds like we need some double jeopardy protection in Sharia.

The story mentions nothing about criticizing the royal family, and the poems do not appear to do that either. He did get a sentence for fraternizing with women--apparently he had pictures on his cell of himself with women he said he met at an art gallery. It appears that someone accused him of blasphemy to settle a personal score--an all too unsettling development that has happened numerous times in Pakistan. One wonders about the political clout of his accuser.

Life is much, much worse in ISIS land that it is in Saudi Arabia.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/29/middleeast/saudi-arabia-poet-ashraf-fayadh-death-sentence/

Who cares if it's only "bad.' Does that make living under certain conditions acceptable?

No, but comparisons like this have the effect of minimizing how cruel life is under ISIS. The 8 million people under their control could only hope they lived in Saudi Arabia instead.

I'm not sure I understand your point. Yes, the Syrians would prefer to just go about their lives being Syrians, rather than being subject to ISIS, which is an appallingly brutal regime, or Assad, which is a more-moderately-brutal regime. But they wouldn't want to live in the KSA, either, which is pretty brutal, and sometimes very arbitrary.

in other words - You'll still be raped, just not by your father.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reasons Muslim women wear the hijab

1. It is required by law
2. Their families or husbands force them to
3. They (erroneously) think their religion requires them to
4. Peer pressure from their friends
5. Protection from harassment in the street (Muslim majority countries only)
6. Desire to show they are pure
7. Increase marriage prospects with men who want pure women and take the hijab as a sign of that
8. To wear a symbol that proclaims Islamic pride
9. To wear a symbol against Western neo-colonialism
10. As a show of Islamic feminism that believes the hijab is a rejection of the objectification of women
11. A mortification practice that they believe brings them closer to God.

Reasons 1 through 7 probably cover 90 percent, likely more, of the cases and are the reasons why most of the posters on this thread dislike the hijab. Reasons 8 through 10 are tiresome, but okay. Only 11 would be legitimately religious but even then one would have to say why this particular practice? Why not fast one day a week as a non-hijabi Muslim woman I know does? How about engaging in good works? Giving extra zakat?

Have I left out any other reasons?

I think it's weird that you have such strong opinions about every possible reason why some women - who aren't you - might wear what they wear. It's like you think they ought to justify it to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
You obviously haven't been following this thread or you would know the posters here wouldn't swallow this statement.

The majority of Muslim women in the US do not wear a hijab. Many Muslim women in majority Muslim countries do not wear a hijab unless it's required by law, although their numbers are becoming less. It has been amply demonstrated that earlier generations of Muslim women in most these countries did not wear a hijab, which is a modern innovation.

You don't know how many Muslim women in the U.S. wear hijab, and what percentage of the total they make. There is simply no data to support this statement one way or the other, so whatever you say, don't forget to add "in my opinion" so that someone innocent doesn't think it's fact.

Your second statement is also your opinion, not fact. If you replace "hijab" with "headscarf", it may not be true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You obviously haven't been following this thread or you would know the posters here wouldn't swallow this statement.

The majority of Muslim women in the US do not wear a hijab. Many Muslim women in majority Muslim countries do not wear a hijab unless it's required by law, although their numbers are becoming less. It has been amply demonstrated that earlier generations of Muslim women in most these countries did not wear a hijab, which is a modern innovation.

You don't know how many Muslim women in the U.S. wear hijab, and what percentage of the total they make. There is simply no data to support this statement one way or the other, so whatever you say, don't forget to add "in my opinion" so that someone innocent doesn't think it's fact.

Your second statement is also your opinion, not fact. If you replace "hijab" with "headscarf", it may not be true.

old data - but still useful

There are about 1 million Muslim women in America; 43 percent of them wear headscarves all the time, according to the Pew Research Center. About 48 percent — or half a million women — don't cover their hair, the survey found.

http://www.npr.org/2011/04/21/135523680/lifting-the-veil-muslim-women-explain-their-choice
Lifting The Veil: Muslim Women Explain Their Choice

[Anonymous]

43% is hardly a convincing majority, is it? more like half?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:43% is hardly a convincing majority, is it? more like half?

It says 48% don't cover. And apparently, 9% don't know whether they do or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reasons Muslim women wear the hijab

1. It is required by law
2. Their families or husbands force them to
3. They (erroneously) think their religion requires them to
4. Peer pressure from their friends
5. Protection from harassment in the street (Muslim majority countries only)
6. Desire to show they are pure
7. Increase marriage prospects with men who want pure women and take the hijab as a sign of that
8. To wear a symbol that proclaims Islamic pride
9. To wear a symbol against Western neo-colonialism
10. As a show of Islamic feminism that believes the hijab is a rejection of the objectification of women
11. A mortification practice that they believe brings them closer to God.

Reasons 1 through 7 probably cover 90 percent, likely more, of the cases and are the reasons why most of the posters on this thread dislike the hijab. Reasons 8 through 10 are tiresome, but okay. Only 11 would be legitimately religious but even then one would have to say why this particular practice? Why not fast one day a week as a non-hijabi Muslim woman I know does? How about engaging in good works? Giving extra zakat?

Have I left out any other reasons?

I think it's weird that you have such strong opinions about every possible reason why some women - who aren't you - might wear what they wear. It's like you think they ought to justify it to you.

I hope you are not the PP who keeps exhorting non-Muslims to ask Muslim women who wear a hijab why they do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:43% is hardly a convincing majority, is it? more like half?

It says 48% don't cover. And apparently, 9% don't know whether they do or not.

Or maybe they just cover when they attend mosque.

Such surveys are pretty unreliable as the total number of Muslims in the US is not really known--no census data on that. Pews number run a lot lower then other estimates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You obviously haven't been following this thread or you would know the posters here wouldn't swallow this statement.

The majority of Muslim women in the US do not wear a hijab. Many Muslim women in majority Muslim countries do not wear a hijab unless it's required by law, although their numbers are becoming less. It has been amply demonstrated that earlier generations of Muslim women in most these countries did not wear a hijab, which is a modern innovation.

You don't know how many Muslim women in the U.S. wear hijab, and what percentage of the total they make. There is simply no data to support this statement one way or the other, so whatever you say, don't forget to add "in my opinion" so that someone innocent doesn't think it's fact.

Your second statement is also your opinion, not fact. If you replace "hijab" with "headscarf", it may not be true.

Guess you didn't see photos PPs posted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:43% is hardly a convincing majority, is it? more like half?

It says 48% don't cover. And apparently, 9% don't know whether they do or not.

Or maybe they just cover when they attend mosque.

Such surveys are pretty unreliable as the total number of Muslims in the US is not really known--no census data on that. Pews number run a lot lower then other estimates.

It's true Pew's numbers are much lower than the massive-conversion-to-Islam scenario somebody here posted a while back. But that person never posted her own sources, despite many requests to do so. If you have other reputable sources, please post them!

[Anonymous]

Reputable sources hedge their bets because the number simply isn't known. Here is a note by the US Embassy in iraq:

"The size of the Muslim-American population has proved difficult to measure because the U.S. Census does not track religious affiliation. Estimates vary widely from 2 million to 7 million."

http://iraq.usembassy.gov/resources/information/current/american/statistical.html

There appears to be a better handle on the number of Islamic centers--perhaps because they register with the IRS?

"A 2010 Pew report on mosque-building controversies shows that the number of mosques in the United States has increased from 1,209 to 1,825 in the decade since the 2001 report."

http://www.cfr.org/united-states/muslims-united-states/p25927

Let us suppose there are now 2,000 mosques in the US with an average of 1500 members each. I know some of these, like some churches, are tiny, so 1,500 may be generous. That would get you to 3 million. But many Muslims in the US aren't particularly religious and may not bother with membership. So maybe 4 million?