The following article brings enough dismality without the added slur of the author:
BRUSSELS – Since she started wearing a full Islamic veil six weeks ago, Selma said, she has been stared at, frowned at, muttered to, mocked as a “ghost” and forced by a policeman to lift her veil to show her face.
These are uneasy times for the estimated 15 million Muslims of Western Europe, not only for fundamentalists such as Selma, but also for the vast majority who want to find their place as Muslims without confronting the Christian and secular traditions of the continent they have adopted as home. [Source]
Fundamentalists.
Either the journalist is scouting for histrionics or is exceptionally ignorant: the very word is laden with negativity, stereotypes and a hysterical phobia of all things religious and non-Christian.
Which defeats the point of the article: that the Muslims of Belgium have had their religious freedom curtailed is a result of the very bigotry that aligns donnance of the veil with security threats.
A better term would have been “not only for observant Muslims such as Selma,” rather than the tripe that has been published.
Jeez, even The Daily Mail would have raised an eye-brow at the copy desk.
As an aside, yesterday The Man and I visited a restaurant in town and seated outside were a gaggle of ladies, push-chairs parked and niqabs fluttering in the evening breeze.
As locals meandered in discreetly goggling at the ladies’ kohled eyes and animated conversation over grilled chicken, I could not but help admire their dignity and beauty.
They were beautiful in their determination not to be fazed by stares and even more wonderful for their determination to observe and not be cowed by society’s prejudice.
As Belgium constricts the right to religious expression I cannot help but regret that such sights will disappear from our terraces and streets.
Diversity is stunning, not a threat.
And observance is a quality, not a word to be interchanged with ‘fundamentalism’ and ‘radicalism’.
I hope women has choice not only muslimah. but also their right living in Europe..
As ppl not seen niqab they would feel awkward thats why.. I don no.. I would feel like that if Ive never seen 
….
On the other hand as exapmle, when those police or ppl who against the veil covering, would they go and force to wear veil covering if they must ? They would think “why ? do we have to ? ” … I hope they can see both side of nagative + positive way for religions and community as EU is vast field countries
Culture & aspect of society is so curious.. Thanks alot for this article
What a really great article. Thanks for sharing
To be completely, technically, correct, “fundamentalist” shouldn’t be “laden with negativity, stereotypes and a hysterical phobia of all things religious and non-Christian.” Fundamentalism, from a religious studies standpoint, has no connotations of scary people out to do you harm: to quote Wikipedia “Fundamentalism refers to a belief in a strict adherence to a set of basic principles (often religious in nature), sometimes as a reaction to perceived doctrinal compromises with modern social and political life.” And there are plenty of Christian Fundamentalists. The Amish are fundamentalists and I don’t see anyone shying away from them. In fact, the term was first used to describe certain Protestants in the US. Just drop by my neck of the woods and you will encounter MANY of them. And, to be honest, I’d much rather fraternize with veiled women than those guys.
But you are very right when saying that the term has taken on a lot of hysteria. Most people now don’t know the difference between a fundamentalist and a suicide bomber. Which is sad. One shouldn’t be ashamed of being a fundamentalist, of dedicating themselves to something with more substance than MTV and popular fashion. We live in confused times.
Anyway, I really just wanted to say thanks for your post. I think it’s hard for a lot of non-Muslims to understand that there are individuals behind the veils. But we need to remember that we don’t always have to understand something to accept it’s place.
Women covering their faces may indeed be referred to as ‘fundamentalism’ in its truest (and perhaps only real) sense. However, it’s quite something how the term has been ‘hijacked and injected’ with a negative connotation such that it’s now somewhat synonymous (in the minds of some) with ‘extremism’. A seemingly good job on behalf of those with such a sickening agenda.
http://www.islamfundamentals.com
Awesome article! You’re so right- it just makes me so angry when people label Muslims as fundamentalist and radical.
Whether you want to wear a niqab or not is your own choice- the same way that it’s your choice as to whether to wear sandals or slippers. Nobody can condemn you for choosing one of them. It’s your personal preference, and you shouldn’t have to provide explanations for it.
Once again, great post.
Thank you so much for the distinction between the two words — observance and fundamentalism. There is such an important difference. Mind you, observance has its own traps as well, but it is key that we separate the two terms.
This is the age of misinformation as much as it is the age of information, unfortunately. And journalists definitely have to be called on their mistakes and their misuse of language as much as any politician or religious ‘authority’.
Really, I don’t think I can understand the tendency of the more xenophobic inhabitants of the European continent to label a personal choice by some women to wear a religious garment as “oppression” of women. The only oppression I see happening in Belgium and France at the moment is the constant push to restrict the right of women to express their religious belief through a private, personal choice.
Hello,
My main concern with the various bans is the fact that the leaders of those countries are claiming to “free” women who are forced to wear the veils.
In all honesty, after “freeing” them, what are they going to do with those women?
I mean, lets say such a woman who is “freed” by the ban is thrown out of her home, or beaten or abused by their “oppressor”, what measurements are the governments of those countries putting into place to give the women somewhere to go? What safe guards do they have to ensure that the woman in question is able to live a productive life that they never had before?
Of course, there are those of us who will keep having to explain that we wear a veil through our own sense of freedom, we do not commit crimes nor do we go out of our homes with the intension to offend, scare or threaten others. We just leave to go about our everyday lives like everyone else.
Would our oppinions count?
Would our choice to sit on buses, trains and use services because we need them be such an affront purely based on it offending strangers?
I have a question to those who are in favour the ban:
Apart from the tired old arguements about security, being frightened, feeling that veils do not have a place in what ever country you are from, feeling that “Muslims are taking over the world”, what problems do you see MUSLIM WOMEN commiting or being a part of that makes you (as individuals or groups or countries),feel that wearing the veil a problem for you? Is it just the face covering that causes offence to you or the whole attire that we wear? Does it depend on the color, the person’s skin color or even their counrty of origin?
These are genuwine questions that I would like a balanced and calm answer to please.
As someone who does wear the veil, I ask this to many people so that I can better understand the “whys and hows”
Thank you Ms Layla for your article and I hope that the feed back brings some sort of understanding on all sides.
Hey maryam,
Nice post. Here’s my view on your questions, basically, you answered it yourself – security, fear. Muslim women perse mean no offence, just in particular their “face covering”. I’m sure it wouldn’t make much of a difference whether their skin colour was different, or even their country of origin – just how they present themselves through a full veil.
Yes , different cultures are accustomed to different acts. For example, slurping while eating – rude? Through American mannerism yes, however, through some asian cultures it’s a sign of gratitude. You would do what suits best depending on the place you’re at. Just a few extracts -
Bill Housley – “mask over your face – bad people also mask their identity. We fear masks and those who wear them. We can’t see who you are. The staring is fear and hatred of the unknown.” Exactly.
Rod – “How do Arab nations treat foreigners in their territory when it comes to conflicts of cultures? I think it should apply to them when they come to territory of others, too.” They would request for women especially, to cover up.
Aimee – “I feel it is rude to talk to someone when your face is covered. I want to see their face and their expressions.” Just like slurping to some, we find this act rude because we are accustomed to direct facial contact when interacting with others. Face-covering is similar to looking away, or turning your back on someone. It’s a barrier.
I believe that the burqa condemns women to a life at the bottom of the social ladder, with no voice and no power. It’s bad for society because it teaches children that it’s normal for women to be invisible and voiceless. With the many different veils such as Niqab, hijub, jilbab, al-amira, shalaya, khimar, tchador, burqa, I’m sure most people find the Niqa and burqa to be the most offensive as almost everything is covered if not seen through a net hole.
I hope this helps !
Hi Me,
Based upon your answer, does that mean that items such as make up, sunglasses, hair extensions, wigs, heeled shoes, false eye lashes, cosmetic surgeries, and all other forms of covering the face or parts of it need to be banned too?
I do not see a person who plasters their face with chemicals as showing me their “true” face.
What is offensive to you, may not be offensive to me. It is a personal perception.
EG: A person tells a joke ( lets use skin color or a person’s accent as an example), I may “choose” to find it offensive and you may choose to find it funny. Does that make either one of us right over the other?
What barometer is used to measure what is offensive?
Why do you need to see a person’s face before you feel safe?
Because, through this internet, we are communicating but I don’t know what you look like, should I feel threatened?
What if we were chatting on a phone but I’ve never met you? Should such means of communicating or “social cohesion” be banned because we cannot see each other?
Should all blind people feel threatened because they cannot see people’s faces?
Test: Next time you’re on the streets, look at every single person and remember their face.
Ask your self how many of those people are a threat to you because you can tell just by looking at their face.
Then: Read your local paper and tell me how many reports of crimes you find. In them, how many people are reported to be wearing a burka or veil?
Do you actually know the difference between the burka and veil?
Do you realise that no one in Europe wears the burka?
What makes it obligatory for you to see everyone’s face?
Why should a person show you a part of their body that they do not want you to see just to make you feel comfortable?
Your slurping example, should the person slurping be forced to stop just because you find it offensive or is it their right to do so?
How many women do you know of who have told you that they are condemned to a life on the bottom of the social ladder because they wear a veil?
In what way does a woman who wears a veil present herself?
What kind of life do you think women who wear the veil are not conforming to that makes their choice of clothing offensive?
I find it offensive to see men with their trousers hanging below the waist bands of their underwear, should I campaign to get that banned or women who wear such low tops that their breasts are in danger of falling out of them, should there be a ban on that?
Where does it stop?
Where does people’s freedom start and dictator ship end?
Sorry, also, events like mardi gras where masks are worn or halloween, would they all need to get banned?
What about weddings and the veils some women choose to wear for the event?
Since most weddings take place in some from of public areana, would all of that need to be banned or policed?
I hope you see where I’m going with my questions because to me, it calls for a lot more things to to banned to stop people being fearful.
If you hate something because you do not know what it is, then everyone must live in constant fear because you don’t know what is going to happen to you in the next ten seconds let alone next few hours, days, months, years etc.
Great post Layla. I too have admired the dignity and pride that Muslim women carry themselves with, but also have questioned both the theology and philosophy behind the veiling of Muslim women. Despite the fact that many of the women themselves would argue that they see nothing wrong with wearing the full veil, for me the fact that such a religious rule is an imposition by a male dominated religious authority means that, whether they realize it or not, these women are slaves.
Should these women truly have the choice to wear or discard the veil with no reprisals or violence from their families or their religions, I truly would embrace it as a demonstration of rich cultural diversity, but such a choice is rarely given.
While I have the utmost respect for my Muslim neighbors and count many as close friends, I feel the same way about veils and burqas as I do about the neck lengthening of the Kayan women or the lip plates worn by the women of the African Mursi tribes. While many consider these rich expressions of cultural diversity, I find them simply ways for men to impose standards of control of the ways women are allowed to express their beauty.
salamualaikum…
First of all, owsum job on the article…keep it up…
I totally agree with you…eventhough life is problematic for muslim girls and women living in western countries, they are the only ones that are much more sheltered than all the non-muslim girls…
They aren’t looked at with eyes that could harm them…but rather as someone that doesn’t attract people at all cuz they aren’t asking for it…
If people in european countries think that Islam opresses muslim women…Y is it that their own women are attracted towards islam and are accepting it rapidly…They sure know what oppression and true liberation is, apparently…
God bless you…
I am a Mormon, a religious devote of a different stripe. Let me give you a little bit of my take on this as a Chritian Conservative.
You wear the consealing clothing for religious reasons, I respect that, as do many other christians who see the decedence of our society growing all around us.
The mask over your face is part of that, and I think I understand the role that it plays.
Our problem is that bad people also hide their identity and the identity of their captives and slaves behind masks.
We fear masks and those who wear them. For us cowards wear masks of various kinds to prevent taking personal responsibilty for their actions.
There are some athiests among the people in your culture who use your religion and its strictures to enslave women and societies and who do not espouse the diversity that you speak of. Sometimes we know who some of these people are…and not all of them are men. When we see you behind your mask, we want to know who you are so that we can know that we are safe and that you are where you want to be.
When we can’t see who you are, we are afraid. The staring that you see is fear and hatred of the unknown.
The veil and niqab are bigoted as worn by Muslims and signify some false, imposed, self-respect that is in direct opposition to the various styles adorned by non-Muslim women (or as Muslim women refer to them – sluts, whores, prostitutes, etc.). Except that Queen in Jordan who has no need for such coverings, or Miss America who no one would know if she were a good, veiled Muslim.
Well said !
There is far too much paranoia and xenophobia whipped up my the media, and misusing words such as “fundamentalist” certainly doesn’t help.
The fact is that anything “out of the ordinary” will attract the attention of local people in a community.
I am British and my wife is Chinese, so I am used to the looks I get from the locals when we are in China… it was to be expected because, to them, I am a curiosity. Children will happily try out their (one word of) English on me.. “Hallo !”. Some of the more brave, normally with the permission of their parents, will attempt a small conversation. I admire them for it, and always respond slowly, clearly, and with a smile to both them and the parent.
I cannot be sure what the thoughts of adults are when they look at us, I would guess that there is a mixture of positive and negative thoughts there, but I don’t let the possibility of negative thoughts put me off or upset me.
The same happens when we are in the UK, people look. I would guess some of them are probably thinking things we would probably not know about, but that is their problem, not ours. Only once has my wife been approached by an English girl who wanted to try out her Mandarin on her, and to her credit (apparently) the girl was very good. My wife was very impressed.
Yes, I look when I see a Muslim lady wearing a full veil, because it is still an unusual occurrence where I live. That doesn’t mean I associate it with anything threatening or distasteful… it’s just something different and, in a way, something to be admired.
The author of that Washington Post article seems to want to talk about what he sees as two groups of Muslims in Europe—”such as Selma” and “the vast majority”. You’re saying that he’s maligning the first group by calling them “fundamentalists”, but if he used the formulation you prefer (“observant Muslims such as Selma”), wouldn’t he be maligning the other group (saying that none of them are “observant”)?
That’s a good point. Of course, piety doesn’t always take the same form.
“Either the journalist is scouting for histrionics or is exceptionally ignorant: the very word is laden with negativity, stereotypes and a hysterical phobia of all things religious and non-Christian.”
negativity, stereotypes and a hysterical phobia – yes, yes and yes.
of all things religious and non-Christian – um no. “Fundamentalist” was first used as an insult against (as you would put it) “observing” Christians, and still primarily refers to them. In the same way that you have “male nurses” (because most are considered female) you have Islamic fundamentalism.
I agree that can’t be interchanged with “radicalism” (think the Armish), but it’s hard to be a religious radical without being fundamentalist. Unfortunately, strictly observing the fundamentals of a religion is by definition fundamentalist, and attracts that insult.
“but it’s hard to be a religious radical without being fundamentalist.”
This isn’t true. “Modernizing movements” are often violent. Take, for example, Liberation theology that came out of South America in the 1970s and 80s. This was a response to the Second Vatican Council which was trying to find ways to keep the Catholic church relevant in a modern, multicultural world.
These things seem to come in waves. In the 70s and 80s, everyone thought you had to be a progressive to be a radical. Now everyone thinks you have to be a fundamentalist. The truth is that anyone can become a religious radical- radicals just need to feel they (or their larger community) have been wronged and that can come as easily to a progressive as it can to anyone else.
I dislike for people to think I’m a bigot, I never understood why anyone would wear a burqa, or how it could possibly be acceptable. Of course, every country has its own social standard, in which society must conform to to the status quo. However, for someone to wear a burqa is reminiscent to me wearing a trent coat.
You may be overly critical here:
Wikipedia says e.g.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalism)
Other sources I have seen give similar definitions and explanations, with the pejorative sense being optional. Certainly, there are Christians who self-identify as fundamentalists.
This is truly a beautiful read!
Isn’t diversity the spice of life? It truly IS observance and selfless worship that inspires Muslim women to cover, though it’s them against the world!
They’re an inspiration to us all!!!
Bravo. Your observation is right-on. It must have been very upsetting to the women wearing niqab who were forced to show their faces; what exactly was the point of that?
I agree with Aisha that for many people who are not accustomed to seeing women wearing niqab, it is strange, intimidating, and fascinating. It’s such a bold statement (in the context of a place where niqab is uncommon) and requires people to reorient in some sense. It seems that many of us are accustomed to looking at faces and we get a lot of information from faces that helps us connect. Those who become uncomfortable may do so because they are not sure how to feel connected to someone whose face they can’t see (I’m talking about ‘connection’ on the most basic, even sub-conscious level). Perhaps if we could all talk about these things–openly-without insisting on convincing the other what is right and what is wrong, we’d all feel more at home with one another.
The word fundamentalist is often applied to Christians but only in response to their IDEAS never in response to their appearance.
It’s a terrible violence to intrude upon another’s relationship with the Sacred. Hopefully, many more people will come to realize that public displays of piety need not be feared. Indeed, they may even be *respected*.
Great post.
Kelly
I would say “fundamentalist” is a largely accurate word choice for a Muslim who chooses to wear the niqab. It is not worn by millions of Muslim women, who nonetheless are “observant.” They just interpret the Quran and Islamic doctrine in a different way. Those who support the wearing of niqab are taking a stricter interpretation of the religion.
A similar phenomenon is seen in the Americas with Christians who believe women shouldn’t wear pants. Such Christians are using a stricter-than-average interpretation of the Bible and Christian doctrine, and can be accurately described as “fundamentalist.” Others who aren’t concerned with pants on women but who nonetheless have a very strict and conservative view of the religion–such as Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell or James Dobson–can be called fundamentalist.
Fundamentalist does not mean violent. This can be seen with the 3 aforementioned men. There are violent fundamentalists, and nonviolent ones, in every major religion. I absolutely think many of the recent developments in Europe infringe on the religious liberty of Muslims, including conservative/ fundamentalist Muslims.
But perhaps the negative connotation that “fundamentalism” has in the popular culture (that you reference in the post) is well-deserved: it does, after all, speak to a basically medieval worldview where women are of lesser value than men, where ancient holy texts are to be given more authority than modern science, and where my religion should enjoy special treatment by the government than yours.
If one wants to practice such act, do it in one’s home where it is welcomed i.e. their own country. Wherever we travel, we keep in mind the culture of the country we visit. To put it in simple terms, one wouldn’t wear thongs, singlet and short shorts in a Muslim based country regardless of heat. Why? because we would respect their views and practices. We would be the “visitor”.
Yes, to ban them entirely is a huge loss of their civil rights, however in places such as banks, and shops, it’s obvious as to why society would prefer to see their faces. We already allow and respect veils worn by women, but to take it to the next step of a full veil? It seems they’re taking advantage of our generosity…
It’s not so much the clothing that’s frowned upon, but the mere fact that their identity is hidden. If one doesn’t put limits, it could reach a point where armed robbers dressed with full veils would be allowed easy access every where including banks. It’s an identity issue, not the race/ clothing.
If we were to go to their country, we would dress appropriately to ensure we mean no disrespect, and if that means we’d have to put on a full veil, then so be it. We’re there as visitors. One doesn’t turn up to another country ignorant. The same should be done vise versa.
salaam, sister! I completely agree with you. great post!
It is fundamental, not “observant” as you would prefer. Muslim women need not wear the veil like that. It is their choice to do so.
That’s bull… the man says you wear it, and in islam, women have nothing to say.
http://nytriittaapoliitikot.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/muslimin-2-vaimoa1.jpg
.
To cover the face is not an Islamic requirement.. !
Yes it is!
It is a SUNNA in the very least to those who choose to wear it!
As the scholars have made clear, it is permissable to wear it if a woman CHOOSES to do so and should not be forced to take it off, nor should a woman who CHOOSES NOT to wear one be forced to either.
Further, the Prophet (SAW) did not make it forbidden to wear it, nor did he speak out against those who did.
The Qur’an states CLEARLY that as Muslims, we should follow Allah and HIS messenger, what ever has been made permissible should not be made impermissible and vice versa.
Just because there is no implicite verse that states that does not mean it is not part of Islam.
Some of the Prophet’s own wives used to wear it, some of the women from the Ansar tribe (as a starting point) wore it in front of the Prophet (SAW) and he did not order them to take it off.
Culturally, it was worn many years before Islam was established and was worn by women of high societal status.
Even if some people do not want to wear it (as muslims), they have that choice and it should be upheld, if some of us choose to wear it, that should be upheld too.
If you have any evidence to support your view, I’d like to read it as a learning point.
Thank you
Wearing a veil, as I understand, is religious culture. Culture. A people’s culture, never the less. How do Arab nations treat foreigners in their territory when it comes to conflicts of cultures? I think it should apply to them when they come to territory of others, too.
I have not been to Arab territories. But if I do, surely, I”ll be doing things and acting like any of them and shelve my native cultures while I’m there. It would be offensive if I don’t. If I cant, then I have no reason to go there in the first place.
Offending hosts is what it is. Expect to reap what is sowed.
Interesting! I like your blog : )
I think that you’re not only right about “observance”, but Islam in general has become a term interchangable with “extremist”.
Much of the socially visible resistance to Muslim culture and dress seems to come from Christian groups – who should embrace other cultures as a means of enriching their own, not resist tolerance and understanding, the very things they claim to hold a monopoly over.
If someone wants to observe their religion or beliefs and is not causes harm to others, they should be allowed. Christians wear crosses and Catholics wear rosaries, even many secular individuals.
Slight correction- While observance is not always the same as fundamentalism, in this case they are synonymous, because what is being observed is inherently fundamentalist.
It always amazing to see good followers. But hope we can understand that we are Human Being first & then associated to any Religion. So we should all be Good Human Being first & then anything else.
There is a law in Belgium that says that you must be recognisable when you are out on the street. This has nothing to do with religion, culture or something of that kind.
Would the way a Muslim woman or man dress not be recognisable in Belgium?
What I mean is Muslims are encouraged to dress in a particular way that makes them easily stand out in a crowd or different from the majority of other religions so minus the veil covering the face (which I’m sure is what your refering to), are Muslims there not following the law?
Hey, I can’ t help it, increasingly I get AWAY from these chicks with the veils. They should stay within their own accepted societies and wear it, but when you go to another country, “do as the Romans do” s the old saying goes. Why should these chicks try to impose their secrecy upon others who are not used to it? It looks suspicious.
If I am on line in the grocery store and notice I am behind one of these in front of me, I will quickly change lines because they might have BOMB under their “dressing”. NO WAY.
Salam from Pakistan!
Great blog post, I completely agree!
You may have reflecting views with me on this issue so I hope you get time to read my post on it too :
http://hafsakhawaja.wordpress.com/2010/02/02/the-burqa-threat/
Blessings!
Strongly agree with you, Lalya, especially this part:
Diversity is stunning, not a threat.
And observance is a quality, not a word to be interchanged with ‘fundamentalism’ and ‘radicalism’.
Thanks for write a very nice posting about this, and salaam from Indonesia
I have to ask those who are saying that people who wear the veil should do so in their own countries:
“What if the person IS in her own country but that country is not Saudi Arabia, Afganistan etc?”
Are you (a general you), expecting those women to emigrate?
Would they not be accepted in their own country because they have adopted a style of dress more familiar to other countries?
Should they be removed from their own country because they fall into a minority group (based upon dress) and they are seen as oddities because the majority do not choose to dress in the same way?
Is it presumed that any person who wears the veil must be an immigrant or that the vast majority are?
Could it be possible that there are those from European or Western countries seeing that they like wearing the veil and also having the freedom to express them selves and are just following/ using that freedom?
This is a great post and it’s sparked a very lively debate.
I agree, the writer’s word choice was not the best one, considering what it means today. Even though the article’s angle is not to paint a negative light on “very observant” Muslims, I’m sure the word choice (and it’s juxtaposition with the rest of the article) was deliberate.
My main issue with this debate is that western countries are expected to embrace this new cultural/religious custom just as it embraces immigrants even though it is in direct conflict with the customs that have been in place in the west for hundreds and thousands of years. If I move to the middle east will I be allowed to wear shorts and a tank top because it’s hot? Sure, that’s not a religious matter, but it is a practical one, yet I’d still be required to cover up. I’m certainly not against the hijab or any other hat/scarf combination, and I applaud the women who proudly wear their scarves because being a middle eastern woman in a western country can’t be easy. However, the burka and the niqab go too far.
Seeing the face (the eyes, the mouth, the nose) is important for identification and is a cultural norm in the western world. When I enter a monastery, I remain silent, if I enter a Jewish temple, I’ll wear a yamaka, and if I enter a Japanese persons home, I’ll remove my shoes. I do these things out of respect and because it’s expected of me, I don’t ask them to bend to what’s normal for me. In the same vein, Muslim women should show their face in the western world. Wear the scarf, yes, but show their faces too.
Funny thing is, as much as it’s seemed to be religious fundamentalism, or the wanting to ban it is seen as “freeing” the women, the truth is much more simple.
It’s just human nature, especially within the western world.
A lot of people have been brought up with little to no knowledge of the niqab or people who would wear it. The first time you would see someone wearing it, it is quite shocking. As with anything that is new is. Part of our genes is being afraid of what we don’t know. It’s just how humans are. People are trying to ban it, which is wrong, especially as they are lying about the reasons for it.
I think, personally, it also comes down to the fact that it’s a little off putting not being able to see someone’s face, especially if you are talking to them and you are not use to it. And I’m sure it’s the same for a lot of people. It’s not down to wanting to ban it, or people being anti-islamic. It’s just the way people are.
I would not choose to wear a veil myself. I sometimes feel sorry for women wearing them, but other times I tell myself that I don’t know how they feel.
I have heard it said that these veils should be illegal.
Here in England there is a current fashion for young men to wear their trousers half-way down their hips, so that their underpants show. I think this fashion is very ugly (also silly). Maybe this should be illegal.
Also, I think those plastic shoes called Crocs are ugly. Maybe they should be illegal.
Today I saw a photo of somebody with green hair and maybe that shouldb be illegal.
Where does one stop, once one mode of dress is deemed so contrary to civil society that it is made illegal?
“Here in England there is a current fashion for young men to wear their trousers half-way down their hips, so that their underpants show. I think this fashion is very ugly (also silly). Maybe this should be illegal.”
Normally, I am against government intervention and regulation. Here, I would be inclined to make an exception.
It’s an identity issue, not one of disgust or personal preference. Okay, we’ve learned to accept the veil, but seriously, a full veil where no part of the face can be seen other than the eyes, or at times the outline of the face?
I always admore the courage of the women who decide to wear the veil and/or the rest. I know a lot of Muslim women through my mom who works at an adult education place. Some of them wear the veil and some don’t. One of them was telling us how she sometimes even wears short sleeves. I like that they get to be very personal in their choice of what is right for them. People and their ignorant misconceptions make me want to pull my hair out.
Plus, if you think they pose a “security threat”… why do you assume they have a bomb and not me? I wear long, loose-fitting clothing all the time. Or I have a big purse or a backpack. But because I’m not Muslim you don’t assume that of me.
Ugh. People are so messed up sometimes….
Perhaps if your identity was hidden, there would be much more superstition. Honestly, it’s not the “Muslim race” we’re against, it’s the fact that they’re hiding what should be seen.
I myself work in a bank. Yes, we’re cautious with everyone from big bags, to extremely baggy clothing, so we’re not just singling out Muslims. We read signs through facial expression. How can anything be seen through a full veil? It’s like allowing an unknown package to be delivered straight to your face with no description what so ever. That’s what I call messed up.
You mention that you work in a bank, considering the many ways that bank tellers use to identify a person, why is the face so important?
I’ll give you an example, my husband (self employed) went into a bank today for a student loan (going back to uni), after speaking to the teller, he was told that he would need to provide birth certificate, proof of address, statements verifying his business, passport and documents from the uni as forms of identification before they would approve any loans. Before he had even left the building, the teller told him that he would not need to bring all those documents after all because the information he had provided was enough for him to get £1000 instantly if he filled out a few forms!
No photo id, no proof of address no NOTHING!
Please advise me, was this teller doing his/ her job or is there something wrong with this picture?
My husband thinks something was not right because how could the bank teller know he was telling the truth or that the information he had given was not id theft?
Do you think that by looking at my husband’s face, judging him by his body language, the teller could make a on the spot decision to know that my husband was telling the truth enough to want to give him £1000 interest free?
I call that messed up too!
Ps, this is Maryam
I wanted to also ask you this from a proffesional point of view:
You said in a reply above to some questions that I asked that fear was one of the reason’s why people do not view women who wear the veil in a kind light (paraphrasing), and in your comment above you’ve mentioned that you work in a bank, I am presuming that your company has a policy that allows it’s workers to to able to identify customers as a matter of course, so if a woman wearing the veil came in, would you, in the capacity of your job, not already know that you are within your rights to ask the woman to show her face if you have a need to see it?
If the person became difficult after being asked in a polite, dutiful and warranted manner, would you not THEN become suspicious and get security involved or not serve the person?
Why would the presumption be, that the person has their face covered from the off set so “I must view them with suspicion” or “I have a right to see this person’s face because I view them as a threat”?
i never have understood the reason or the veil. i would thik it would not show the natural beauty of the woman. not good.
great blog. some interesting post on the veils. i personally have never understood the purpose of the veil.
I feel it is rude to talk to someone when your face is covered. I am not against the scarf or covering your hair in anyway, just the full veil as when I interact with people I want to see their face and their expressions.
Yes, the full face-veil can make social interaction extremely uncomfortable for someone who is not used to seeing it. Then again, the minute you leave your house, you’re bound to have awkward moments of some kind. It’s called being a member of society.
No truer word has e’er been said
Please should be left alone and allowed to ‘mind their own business’
whatever, worn out of free will, should be allowed
Pingback: Answer to bloggers. « Aspire to global peace