Hijab/headscarf for Muslims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you are all about logic, then it was equally as bad to post a story about a supposed Muslim friend with covered hair and a controlling husband. I countered by another story to show that individual stories are a dime a dozen and prove nothing. But because HER story fits your cliche, you are bringing up the nonsense of "millions of other women" while my story is dismissed because it doesn't. You have an agenda.

No one has the life they want exactly; that includes you.

It's also impossible to approach "having the lives they want" from an evidence perspective. I mean, what evidence is there that anyone, anywhere can have the life they want? How would you even know what one wants?

Good grief. I didn't post either story.

What is this new logical fallacy? You can't possibly think your bizarre equation makes sense:

1. Nobody has their perfect life ==> 2. it's ok to limit women's choices to home making, esp. if you know happen to know one woman you think is happy with that.

And btw, how did you get from the thread topic, which is DCUM's opinions on hijab, to the above bizarre non sequitur?

Your game is to pick fights on DCUM. It must somehow make you feel better about yourself, and strengthen your resolve, especially when you're so assiduously trying to avoid any discussion of the absence of a Quranic mention of hijab.

I have no interest in helping you with your childish, angry endeavors to find a negative rationale for your hijab. Good bye.

[Anonymous]

I see a lot of ignorance flying here. The beauty of America's constitution is freedom of religion. If someone wants to wear headscarf or turban or walk half naked, no one has a damn right to judge their choices. Majority here have negative views of Muslim woman and especially those wearing the scarf. Now quit being such a hypocrite, and next time you walk in a hospital or see your doctor: MAKE SURE to ask them about their religion if you are not too sure because chances are you are being cared by a Muslim doctor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should think twice about wearing the scarf to cover your hair. I am not a Muslim, and I used to think of it as an accessory. I became friends with a Muslim woman who would cover her hair, young and foreign born but got along well with Americans. Over time, I learned that she was so controlled by her husband. There was the scarf, she had to wear very baggy clothes, she had to call him if she were going out to lunch with others, he wouldn't let her drive out of state by herself, and other things. And if you met him you would never guess about all the little and big things he controlled. They seemed normal except she wore the scarf.

There are decent guys that are Muslim, but they are also very influenced by their families and they get social pressure to go with what the family does.

You are an idiot, go take a walk through GW hospital hallways and count all the hijabi doctors and residents you will see.

My thought, exactly. As soon as you walk in to GW hospital you see young female doctors wearing a scarf.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of ignorance flying here. The beauty of America's constitution is freedom of religion. If someone wants to wear headscarf or turban or walk half naked, no one has a damn right to judge their choices. Majority here have negative views of Muslim woman and especially those wearing the scarf. Now quit being such a hypocrite, and next time you walk in a hospital or see your doctor: MAKE SURE to ask them about their religion if you are not too sure because chances are you are being cared by a Muslim doctor.

More than 50% of doctors are Muslim? And none of these Muslim-origin doctors are now atheists, like my former boss? Who knew?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should think twice about wearing the scarf to cover your hair. I am not a Muslim, and I used to think of it as an accessory. I became friends with a Muslim woman who would cover her hair, young and foreign born but got along well with Americans. Over time, I learned that she was so controlled by her husband. There was the scarf, she had to wear very baggy clothes, she had to call him if she were going out to lunch with others, he wouldn't let her drive out of state by herself, and other things. And if you met him you would never guess about all the little and big things he controlled. They seemed normal except she wore the scarf.

There are decent guys that are Muslim, but they are also very influenced by their families and they get social pressure to go with what the family does.

You are an idiot, go take a walk through GW hospital hallways and count all the hijabi doctors and residents you will see.

My thought, exactly. As soon as you walk in to GW hospital you see young female doctors wearing a scarf.

Quite the exaggeration. I didn't see a single veil at Sibley recently, either.

[Anonymous]

I sorry to say this, but all this silliness about hijabis at GW makes you look silly, and vulnerable to the very same anecdotes you object to you when they're used against veiled women. I'm also sorry to say, it makes you look dishonest because some of us have seen GW with our own eyes.

As you've seen in this thread, there are plenty of DCUMers who want to wish you well. However, you need to engage with us maturely and honestly.

[Anonymous]

I was the first person to respond to OP and my post was deleted.

My post said that I felt she was being dishonest if she thought no one would think differently once she started wearing hijab and that her intentions in starting this thread were questionable.

Pretty clear now huh?

I guess this post will get deleted too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hijabs doesn't bother me.

Niqabs actually really bother me. I feel that its an aggressive political statement in some ways seeing as its quite extreme to hide your face in that way.

After all as a society, we place a lot of value in facial expressions and non-verbal cues. I would not feel especially encouraged to start a conversation with someone in a niqab. Its sort of a Do Not Disturb sign.

+1. The niqab is a patriarchal cultural relic turned into a political statement. Some dispute that the Quran requires a woman to cover her hair.

Don't be ridiculous. It's a cultural relic for sure, but that culture is stemmed in class, not patriarchy. Rich urban married women used to cover their faces to protect them from the sun and most importantly, show that they don't have to work. Women working the fields never cover their faces. You pretty much couldn't work with your face covered, and upperclass women wore them to show they didn't have to.

This is incorrect, though nicely spun.

Full on niqab and burka came about as a necessity to prevent wives and women from being stolen. It was (and still is in in some parts) common practice in the Islamic world for the Caliphs and Emirs to steal the wives of others whenever and however wanted. How do you think those harems got so filled with hundreds of women? Did they apply for the position? LOL.

The triple talaq aided in this since it was easy to force or torture the husband into a super simple divorce if necessary.

What an idiot. Where do you get your information from, A Thousand and One Nights?

First, no, the niqab did not come about to prevent wife-stealing. Get into your thick head that you cannot kidnap and enslave other Muslims. So while slavery and human trade, primarily in women, was commonplace in the Islamic world, none of these women were Muslim as you cannot enslave other Muslims.

Second, harems were filled with non-Muslim women captured during wars. The triple talaq provision does not apply to prisoners of war because the act of capture invalidates marriage, and because only Muslims divorce via talaq. Captured women were non-Muslim, and their divorce practices were different.

Finally, triple talaq is a non-Muslim illusion since a single talaq suffices for divorce. There is no need for a triple utterance.

Name calling. Nice.

No, I get my information from historical facts. I can list them for you but Jeff always deletes the posts that I put historical facts in and the sources from which these historical facts can be found, so I'm not going to bother explaining facts to you. Especially since your so quick to call people idiots.

I will simply state that you don't know your historical facts. While yes, as you so proudly state only non-Muslims are taken as slaves , you seem to overlook the fact that Muslims have been fighting with one another as to who is a "true" Muslim since Mohammed's death. So those deemed "not true" or "not the right type'' of Muslims were not spared from having their wives and women stolen and kidnapped on a regular basis. Especially in the Middle East after most of the non-Muslim population had converted to Islam or fled for the lives.

And you know this, but you seem to think the rest of America is too dumb or ignorant to know this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are all about logic, then it was equally as bad to post a story about a supposed Muslim friend with covered hair and a controlling husband. I countered by another story to show that individual stories are a dime a dozen and prove nothing. But because HER story fits your cliche, you are bringing up the nonsense of "millions of other women" while my story is dismissed because it doesn't. You have an agenda.

No one has the life they want exactly; that includes you.

It's also impossible to approach "having the lives they want" from an evidence perspective. I mean, what evidence is there that anyone, anywhere can have the life they want? How would you even know what one wants?

Good grief. I didn't post either story.

What is this new logical fallacy? You can't possibly think your bizarre equation makes sense:

1. Nobody has their perfect life ==> 2. it's ok to limit women's choices to home making, esp. if you know happen to know one woman you think is happy with that.

And btw, how did you get from the thread topic, which is DCUM's opinions on hijab, to the above bizarre non sequitur?

Your game is to pick fights on DCUM. It must somehow make you feel better about yourself, and strengthen your resolve, especially when you're so assiduously trying to avoid any discussion of the absence of a Quranic mention of hijab.

I have no interest in helping you with your childish, angry endeavors to find a negative rationale for your hijab. Good bye.

If you didn't post either story, why are you responding?

My equation makes perfect sense.

Poster 1. Head cover is awful because I know one girl who covers and her life is, like, awful. Therefore no one should cover.

Me: Well, I know one woman who covers and her life is awesome. Therefore you should not make generalizations of things you know nothing about.

I didn't post anything about the Quranic mentions and I'm not the OP. Also, I am not Muslim and I don't cover. Go beat that dead horse somewhere else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Name calling. Nice.

No, I get my information from historical facts. I can list them for you but Jeff always deletes the posts that I put historical facts in and the sources from which these historical facts can be found, so I'm not going to bother explaining facts to you. Especially since your so quick to call people idiots.

I will simply state that you don't know your historical facts. While yes, as you so proudly state only non-Muslims are taken as slaves , you seem to overlook the fact that Muslims have been fighting with one another as to who is a "true" Muslim since Mohammed's death. So those deemed "not true" or "not the right type'' of Muslims were not spared from having their wives and women stolen and kidnapped on a regular basis. Especially in the Middle East after most of the non-Muslim population had converted to Islam or fled for the lives.

And you know this, but you seem to think the rest of America is too dumb or ignorant to know this.

That Jeff, he's on some kinda personal vendetta against historical facts. One wonders why he feels compelled to delete your posts if they are just so well reasoned and packed with "historical facts". Hmmmm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Name calling. Nice.

No, I get my information from historical facts. I can list them for you but Jeff always deletes the posts that I put historical facts in and the sources from which these historical facts can be found, so I'm not going to bother explaining facts to you. Especially since your so quick to call people idiots.

I will simply state that you don't know your historical facts. While yes, as you so proudly state only non-Muslims are taken as slaves , you seem to overlook the fact that Muslims have been fighting with one another as to who is a "true" Muslim since Mohammed's death. So those deemed "not true" or "not the right type'' of Muslims were not spared from having their wives and women stolen and kidnapped on a regular basis. Especially in the Middle East after most of the non-Muslim population had converted to Islam or fled for the lives.

And you know this, but you seem to think the rest of America is too dumb or ignorant to know this.

That Jeff, he's on some kinda personal vendetta against historical facts. One wonders why he feels compelled to delete your posts if they are just so well reasoned and packed with "historical facts". Hmmmm.

Nope, I don't blame Jeff at all. My guess it's posters like you that report my posts. I have no angst against the general Muslim population, I do have problems with political Islamists. Unfortunately people like you simply deem anyone that can accurately point out your false statements and disqualify them, as Islamophobic.

Simply report me as such and my posts disappear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I always try to smile at them because I figure someone, somewhere, gave them a dirty look or a nasty response.

Haha, me too. Though I do have a knee-jerk reaction to judge that a woman wearing a hijab is submissive and oppressed. I kind of want to take her under my wing and free her from religion. I know that sounds horrible and I always internally tell myself to stop, but it's what I feel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Name calling. Nice.

No, I get my information from historical facts. I can list them for you but Jeff always deletes the posts that I put historical facts in and the sources from which these historical facts can be found, so I'm not going to bother explaining facts to you. Especially since your so quick to call people idiots.

I will simply state that you don't know your historical facts. While yes, as you so proudly state only non-Muslims are taken as slaves , you seem to overlook the fact that Muslims have been fighting with one another as to who is a "true" Muslim since Mohammed's death. So those deemed "not true" or "not the right type'' of Muslims were not spared from having their wives and women stolen and kidnapped on a regular basis. Especially in the Middle East after most of the non-Muslim population had converted to Islam or fled for the lives.

And you know this, but you seem to think the rest of America is too dumb or ignorant to know this.

That Jeff, he's on some kinda personal vendetta against historical facts. One wonders why he feels compelled to delete your posts if they are just so well reasoned and packed with "historical facts". Hmmmm.

Nope, I don't blame Jeff at all. My guess it's posters like you that report my posts. I have no angst against the general Muslim population, I do have problems with political Islamists. Unfortunately people like you simply deem anyone that can accurately point out your false statements and disqualify them, as Islamophobic.

Simply report me as such and my posts disappear.

I'm not Muslim and I've never reported a post in all the years I've graced DCUM with my presence. It might just be general stupidity on your part that makes Jeff remove your scribbles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Name calling. Nice.

No, I get my information from historical facts. I can list them for you but Jeff always deletes the posts that I put historical facts in and the sources from which these historical facts can be found, so I'm not going to bother explaining facts to you. Especially since your so quick to call people idiots.

I will simply state that you don't know your historical facts. While yes, as you so proudly state only non-Muslims are taken as slaves , you seem to overlook the fact that Muslims have been fighting with one another as to who is a "true" Muslim since Mohammed's death. So those deemed "not true" or "not the right type'' of Muslims were not spared from having their wives and women stolen and kidnapped on a regular basis. Especially in the Middle East after most of the non-Muslim population had converted to Islam or fled for the lives.

And you know this, but you seem to think the rest of America is too dumb or ignorant to know this.

That Jeff, he's on some kinda personal vendetta against historical facts. One wonders why he feels compelled to delete your posts if they are just so well reasoned and packed with "historical facts". Hmmmm.

Nope, I don't blame Jeff at all. My guess it's posters like you that report my posts. I have no angst against the general Muslim population, I do have problems with political Islamists. Unfortunately people like you simply deem anyone that can accurately point out your false statements and disqualify them, as Islamophobic.

Simply report me as such and my posts disappear.

I'm not Muslim and I've never reported a post in all the years I've graced DCUM with my presence. It might just be general stupidity on your part that makes Jeff remove your scribbles.

Ok, continue with the name calling.

Just know not everyone here buys into your theory that the niqab is some sort of dress for the upper class society women to prove they didn't have to work (that would be a new one for the SAHM/WOHM wars on here! LOL) and that hijab is written in the Koran. I guess that makes me stupid in your eyes or your eye slits, then so be it.

To the OP- did you get what you wanted out of this thread?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Name calling. Nice.

No, I get my information from historical facts. I can list them for you but Jeff always deletes the posts that I put historical facts in and the sources from which these historical facts can be found, so I'm not going to bother explaining facts to you. Especially since your so quick to call people idiots.

I will simply state that you don't know your historical facts. While yes, as you so proudly state only non-Muslims are taken as slaves , you seem to overlook the fact that Muslims have been fighting with one another as to who is a "true" Muslim since Mohammed's death. So those deemed "not true" or "not the right type'' of Muslims were not spared from having their wives and women stolen and kidnapped on a regular basis. Especially in the Middle East after most of the non-Muslim population had converted to Islam or fled for the lives.

And you know this, but you seem to think the rest of America is too dumb or ignorant to know this.

That Jeff, he's on some kinda personal vendetta against historical facts. One wonders why he feels compelled to delete your posts if they are just so well reasoned and packed with "historical facts". Hmmmm.

Nope, I don't blame Jeff at all. My guess it's posters like you that report my posts. I have no angst against the general Muslim population, I do have problems with political Islamists. Unfortunately people like you simply deem anyone that can accurately point out your false statements and disqualify them, as Islamophobic.

Simply report me as such and my posts disappear.

I'm not Muslim and I've never reported a post in all the years I've graced DCUM with my presence. It might just be general stupidity on your part that makes Jeff remove your scribbles.

Ok, continue with the name calling.

Just know not everyone here buys into your theory that the niqab is some sort of dress for the upper class society women to prove they didn't have to work (that would be a new one for the SAHM/WOHM wars on here! LOL) and that hijab is written in the Koran. I guess that makes me stupid in your eyes or your eye slits, then so be it.

To the OP- did you get what you wanted out of this thread?

I've theorized that you're stupid. Now I know that for a fact - seeing as I've told you I'm not Muslim and yet you keep prattling about my eye slits.