Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see burkas downtown and in gtown all the time.

I doubt you know the difference between a burqa, hijab and niqab, or even a kaffiyeh for that matter.

Not the PP. I do, and see burkas in No. VA every day. Go to Tysons II mall and it's full of 'em - usually Saud

That's not a burqa. That is a niqab. Jesus, if you're going to be an islamophobe, do it properly.

Full black robes with only their eyes showing?

Right, that's a niqab. A niqab is not a burqa is not a chador and calling one the other makes you sound ignorant and islamophobic.

Listen, I think the sexually unbalanced covering of women's whole bodies and faces is moronic (as I find the unbalanced garb of Amish, Orthodox Jews etc equally offensive on a feminist level), but this making them "other" doesn't do anything but further alienate them as people and as a culture. Do you remember the recent "burqini" ban in France? Do you know why Muslim women hated that so much? Because the burqini, while wildly oppressive by our eyes (or excellent sun protection, depending how you feel), allowed those women to go to the beach and partake. Same thing here: stupidly oppressive outfit by Western standards, but it allows them to leave their homes.

Don't forget that just because they look anonymous under there doesn't mean they aren't people.

Um, not knowing the difference between a burqa and a niqab is not islamophobic. Ignorant of the difference between the two, yes, but not islamophobic. I don't know the difference between different types of yarmulke or kippah or what have you, but that doesn't make me an anti-semite. Just uninformed. And I think Catholic priests and Protestant ministers wear different types of collars, but I couldn't tell you what they are--that doesn't make me anti-Christian.

And PSA: ignorance is not a terrible thing. I am ignorant of lots of things, but I try to be open-minded and learn about things of which I am ignorant. People throw around the term "ignorant" like it's this great insult, when it's really not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see burkas downtown and in gtown all the time.

I doubt you know the difference between a burqa, hijab and niqab, or even a kaffiyeh for that matter.

Not the PP. I do, and see burkas in No. VA every day. Go to Tysons II mall and it's full of 'em - usually Saud

That's not a burqa. That is a niqab. Jesus, if you're going to be an islamophobe, do it properly.

It's Islamophobic to point out I see Saud women in full Islamic garb when we are being told they don't exist here?

I doubt you are seeing Saudis.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see burkas downtown and in gtown all the time.

I doubt you know the difference between a burqa, hijab and niqab, or even a kaffiyeh for that matter.

Not the PP. I do, and see burkas in No. VA every day. Go to Tysons II mall and it's full of 'em - usually Saud

That's not a burqa. That is a niqab. Jesus, if you're going to be an islamophobe, do it properly.

Full black robes with only their eyes showing?

Right, that's a niqab. A niqab is not a burqa is not a chador and calling one the other makes you sound ignorant and islamophobic.

Listen, I think the sexually unbalanced covering of women's whole bodies and faces is moronic (as I find the unbalanced garb of Amish, Orthodox Jews etc equally offensive on a feminist level), but this making them "other" doesn't do anything but further alienate them as people and as a culture. Do you remember the recent "burqini" ban in France? Do you know why Muslim women hated that so much? Because the burqini, while wildly oppressive by our eyes (or excellent sun protection, depending how you feel), allowed those women to go to the beach and partake. Same thing here: stupidly oppressive outfit by Western standards, but it allows them to leave their homes.

Don't forget that just because they look anonymous under there doesn't mean they aren't people.

Full Islamic Garb is a awesome neopunk band.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see burkas downtown and in gtown all the time.

I doubt you know the difference between a burqa, hijab and niqab, or even a kaffiyeh for that matter.

Not the PP. I do, and see burkas in No. VA every day. Go to Tysons II mall and it's full of 'em - usually Saud

That's not a burqa. That is a niqab. Jesus, if you're going to be an islamophobe, do it properly.

It's Islamophobic to point out I see Saud women in full Islamic garb when we are being told they don't exist here?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see burkas downtown and in gtown all the time.

I doubt you know the difference between a burqa, hijab and niqab, or even a kaffiyeh for that matter.

Not the PP. I do, and see burkas in No. VA every day. Go to Tysons II mall and it's full of 'em - usually Saud

That's not a burqa. That is a niqab. Jesus, if you're going to be an islamophobe, do it properly.

Full black robes with only their eyes showing?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A federal judge struck down as unconstitutional a provision of Utah's anti-polygamy law that prohibited multiple cohabitation.

It's pretty hard to legally prohibit cohabitation.

What about cults? Are they acceptable, too? brainwashing? abuse of women and children?

all acceptable, I guess

Thanks, USA, for being so open-minded!

Um, those are in no way the same things as cohabitation. Those involve coercion and abuse.

But there is no way to legally keep consenting adults from sleeping with each other, or with sharing a house.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A federal judge struck down as unconstitutional a provision of Utah's anti-polygamy law that prohibited multiple cohabitation.

It's pretty hard to legally prohibit cohabitation.

What about cults? Are they acceptable, too? brainwashing? abuse of women and children?

all acceptable, I guess

Thanks, USA, for being so open-minded!

Anonymous wrote:A federal judge struck down as unconstitutional a provision of Utah's anti-polygamy law that prohibited multiple cohabitation.

It's pretty hard to legally prohibit cohabitation.

A federal judge struck down as unconstitutional a provision of Utah's anti-polygamy law that prohibited multiple cohabitation.

Why don't we rock the casbah? Is it because Shareef don't like it?

We ban polygamy and I'd love it if we banned that shit. You all do realize a few decades ago none was covering themselves up in the Middle East. At least nothing like now. This isn't exactly old school religion here.

Anonymous wrote:So you can hate properly ...

so many ways to oppress women

so little time to decide which to wear . . .

decisions, decisions

I guess I'm a hater.

Anonymous wrote:So you can hate properly ...

Regrettably it omits the shayla, chador, khimar and al-Amira. You'll have to wing it on those.

So you can hate properly ...