Safe areas to live in as apparent Muslim woman

130 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, MikeMelga said:

So you found a rare example and you want to make it the rule? And you ask me to ignore the rule and consider the OP an example? Does that even make sense?

You hide nonsense in the middle of a sad story.

 

How many women would you need so that you choose to be convinced of anything? Why do you think it is you who needs to be convinced anyway? That would be pretty patriarchal actually. Why do you need to develop a rule about how some women exist? Do you have rules / generalizations as such about women who don't wear a headscarf? Please share. 

 

And what happens when someone, anyone, doesn't demonstrate support for patriarchy with their  clothing really? (Which may be inesacapable in a lot of examples though. It's the bras.) If people are existing in a manner that even consciously supports it, what changes when their clothes don't show it? Shall we feel relaxed because it's not showing or what?

 

When you see women on the street, do you evaluate their clothes, the way they look etc to see how much they support patriarchy? What am I supposed to look at when I see men on the street - or are they exempt from supporting patriarchy? Or did women who came up with the concept have only a particular set of men (Saudi men?) in mind do you think? 

 

If I said all women are like that woman in their determination to reject patriarchy, you would have a point perhaps. Not that they have to, more than other women clothed in whatever fashion. But I'm saying that what you see may not be what you choose to understand.  It's not about those women actually. It's about you. So we are still at the original point. It is up to you to bring forth an argument that differentiates between "this is what it demonstrates" and "this is what I understand from it" I guess.  If you are curious about numbers though, it's sad that you have never managed to come across any independent female with a niqab (in real life or in your readings etc) although you sound rather sure about these things.  

 

I don't think we are having a debate about freedom right now anyway. We are actually speaking about political fear in a covert way, which treats a subject as phenomenon, a reality without reality if you like.   

 

 

6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, MikeMelga said:

So lesbians don't use makeup or shave their armpits, huh? There goes your theory.

Cmon, took me 5 seconds to think of an answer!

 

There are feminists who are not lesbians who do not shave or wear makeup.   It is surprising you have never met any.  

 

This book (summary below) makes some good arguments and is written by a Rhodes Scholar who is not a lesbian (and wears makeup sometimes).  

 

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2005/oct/18/classics.shopping

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SA618 said:

 

There are feminists who are not lesbians who do not shave or wear makeup.   It is surprising you have never met any.  

 

This book (summary below) makes some good arguments and is written by a Rhodes Scholar who is not a lesbian (and wears makeup sometimes).  

 

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2005/oct/18/classics.shopping

I did not say that all feminists are lesbians, nothing like that, don't twist what I said. What I said is that women like to feel pretty, even if it is to please other women (or to make them envy also!). So shaving and makeup is not a patriarch thing. Actually, regarding makeup, a lot of men don't like it as it is deceiving.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, MikeMelga said:

So lesbians don't use makeup or shave their armpits, huh? There goes your theory.

Cmon, took me 5 seconds to think of an answer!

 

Could you explain what you meant by this remark ?  It seems like you were specifically referring to lesbians as the group which does not embrace make-up and shaving.   

 

There was no grand theory here, but rather pointing out that different cultures exert control in different ways and it may be a choice or an illusion presenting itself as choice.   The OP "chooses" to look the way she looks the same way that shaved / cosmetic laden women "choose" to look pretty.   Some men are against their wives and daughters wearing various coverings and headgears in the same way that some men prefer little or no makeup.  

 

I see very little difference in these situations and certainly not to the point to classify one (wearing headgear) as oppression and the other (wearing make-up/shaving) as free will.  

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, zeino said:

I don't think we are having a debate about freedom right now anyway. We are actually speaking about political fear in a covert way, which treats a subject as phenomenon, a reality without reality if you like.   

Maybe freedom of religion will end one day, if this stupid conflict keeps escalating. Personally I would prefer for religion to fade away within decades, but that does not seem possible anymore.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SA618 said:

 

Could you explain what you meant by this remark ?  It seems like you were specifically referring to lesbians as the group which does not embrace make-up and shaving.   

Actually the opposite. I just disassociated the idea that makeup is only to please men.

 

1 minute ago, SA618 said:

 

There was no grand theory here, but rather pointing out that different cultures exert control in different ways and it may be a choice or an illusion presenting itself as choice.   The OP "chooses" to look the way she looks the same way that shaved / cosmetic laden women "choose" to look pretty.   Some men are against their wives and daughters wearing various coverings and headgears in the same way that some men prefer little or no makeup.  

 

I see very little difference in these situations and certainly not to the point to classify one (wearing headgear) as oppression and the other (wearing make-up/shaving) as free will.  

She chooses to wear what she wears either because:

- she wants to please her patriarch culture

- for some reason she thinks it is a religious commandment

- she uses it as a protection against men. She knows her kind

 

In either case, it is a perpetuation of this backward culture.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, MikeMelga said:

She chooses to wear what she wears either because:

- she wants to please her patriarch culture

- for some reason she thinks it is a religious commandment

- she uses it as a protection against men. She knows her kind

 

In either case, it is a perpetuation of this backward culture.

 

How do you know that the choices are limited to options which you have elaborated?  You seem very certain.   

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, MikeMelga said:

OK, fair enough, let's hear her or others state more reasons.

 

or how about you just realize it's NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS?

6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, let's not limit this fascinating conversation to how ladies dress!  

Why do men wear coats and ties?  I hate the fucking things and would never wear either again given the choice; but lots of men enjoy wearing them because it makes them feel, well, debonair or something...  Therefore, while I believe that most men wear ties because of pressure from "the man", some men probably wear them because the believe that a nice jacket and tie make them more attractive to ladies...so maybe some kind of submission to matriarchal pressures?  

And those of us who prefer T-shirts and jeans?  No doubt a subversive statement against the upper classes, inequality, and authority generally?  Maybe all of T-shirt wearers are all anarchists at heart?  

And I don't see anyone on this thread complaining about women wearing mini-mini skirts, high heels, or teeny-weeny bikinis...no doubt that is because those clothing choices are an expression of what all women truly want to wear, right?  After all, who wouldn't love to wear high heels?!  But then again, maybe such fashion choices are also some kind of submission to the patriarchy--what men want from women--albeit a different type of submission than the choice to wear a burqa?  But presumably you're OK with that?

This is a long way of saying that this criticism of wearing a heardscarf or whatever is ridiculous; most people--men and women--dress in a certain way because that's how they want to dress, for whatever reason, good or bad.  Trying to deconstruct someone's fashion preferences according to your own peculiar prejudices about how people "should" dress betrays a failure to comprehend human nature and a high degree of arrogance--who made you the judge of what other people should wear?

 

 

8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lisa13 said:

 

or how about you just realize it's NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS?

When you start seeing Sharia polizei, when you start seeing young refugees harassing women on the U-Bahn, when my son's kindergarten teacher starts saying that her husband does not allow her to speak with other men , then yes, it is my business.

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, naberlin said:

After all, who wouldn't love to wear high heels?!

 

These guys apparently love to wear them:

 

 

 

 

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, MikeMelga said:

When you start seeing Sharia polizei, when you start seeing young refugees harassing women on the U-Bahn, when my son's kindergarten teacher starts saying that her husband does not allow her to speak with other men , then yes, it is my business.

 

 

ffs can you just take a moment to read that, in the context of your attempt to grill someone about what they WEAR?

 

No.  Her reasons for dressing as she does are NOT your business.  

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MikeMelga said:

 When you start seeing young refugees harassing women on the U-Bahn,

 

I genuinely believe you need to stop what you are doing because of this reason actually.  (I will also involve rape in it.)

 

This horrendous, deplorable, violent breach of a person's boundaries is one of the ultimate forms of reducing a full, wholesome human being into an "empty signifier", which is then filled with all sorts of things we feel entitled to see in them. They are not in our human category anymore - nobody has a problem with not harming humans most of the time. There is a mental process where some humans are exiled from this category, reduced to something else. Those attackers attacking women do not see them as human subjects. They are objects of their hate - an weaker ones in their eyes, so it's OK to attack them. That hate can be about anything but that woman. Under circumstances related with war and violence, this goes rather deep. I tend to think it's a war between men sometimes, practised via the female body. Some men feel "stronger" by attacking the "other's woman." Disgusting. But when you build a parallel between this, and a niqab wearer, you are also seeing a woman as "an other's woman", in this case a Saudi man's  probably. Which nobody has to be. Even when you say Saudi culture, that is more or less ineavitably (in your circumstances) the Saudi male culture. It's your choice to see it that way, ignoring Saudi female world, that is probably inaccessible to you without some special effort. It is indeed patriarchal to think that a culture consists only of its outspoken patriarchal elements. That does fortify patriarchy, not oppose it.   

 

When we pick a woman in a particular quality that says "this signifies/demonstrates/shows" this for me, we start practising the very thing that results in these attacks you mention in its ultimate form. Does this mean we are potential rapists, attackers? Hell no. But at the same time, I believe, if we have a wish that these things stop, we need to be conscious of not contributing to the social web, discourse, anger, the ever existing symbolic violence that makes these possible to a large degree because we exist in that web. 

 

This sort of classification is part of human nature in a way. But when we start using that as some form of social theory, it runs the risk of creating the consitions of the violent circumstances you mention. 

 

Any "woman" you are seeing in any form is not demonstrating support for anything more so than you demonstrate support for things you probably very much disagree with through the very way you look, you walk, conduct your body, exist. If you wish to start working against patriarchy, start from yourself. Not because you are a man. I as a woman have to start from myself for instance - I think this is especially important for women because bonds of childcare etc make us "educate" children into socialization. Women transfer this culture from generation to generation, so does language. Ultimately, both men and women are victims and producers of it. It's neither a sin, nor a good/bad division. It's an ingrained thing that has no pure categories. That's why, we need to look at ourselves everyday. Can there be something as "I've cleansed myself from patriarchy completely"? I personally don't think so. 

 

This hierarchy does not exist between men and women only. It manifests in lesbians, it manifests in transsexuals. Some female- to- male transsexuals who don't choose to be politically active, out etc state particular difficulties during transition because of the new language that has to be learnt - body, words, levels of voiced empathy, everything. Many of the transsexual people I know (in both directions) started this journey by wanting to never be publicly out after the transition phase but changed their minds during this journey because the language transition felt too meaningless and not preferable for them under their circumstances where they thought it would mean a leap that they didn't prefer. It may be a different experience elsewhere. 

 

Where would you place a Saudi trans in a niqab in terms of demonstrating support for patriarchy? Surely neither the "rule" (have transsexuals ever been the rule anywhere?) nor the majority. That doesn't mean they should be excluded from theoretical existence though, does it? 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MikeMelga said:

OK, fair enough, let's hear her or others state more reasons.

 

Like I said, that's why hijabi women rarely participate in these forums -- it is inevitably demanded of them that they mount a defense before the inquisitory panel of their personal choices.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, MikeMelga said:

Maybe freedom of religion will end one day, if this stupid conflict keeps escalating. Personally I would prefer for religion to fade away within decades, but that does not seem possible anymore.

 

The idea that religion, including highly conservative forms of religion (whichever religion) with gender role prescriptions, are simply going to fade away was always a fantasy.  What is more likely to happen is that a modus vivendi will have to be established between communities who want to live that way and communities who want to live in newer ways. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, lisa13 said:

 

IT'S RIDICULOUS to spend so much time responding to people who will NEVER "HEAR" YOU.  Same people say the same things over and over and over again.  Come on!  It's saturday night!  FFS. 

 

 

I've been an internet hobby-arguer for literally decades.  I don't do it because I expect to convince my opponents, anymore than Schulz expects to convince Merkel to join the SPD!  I do it, among other things, to ensure that opposition is duly registered, as it constantly must be.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MikeMelga said:

when my son's kindergarten teacher starts saying that her husband does not allow her to speak with other men , then yes, it is my business.

 

It is indeed very much your business. I also believe it's "our business", that is you should not be left alone in your battle against it because children raised this way become producers of a world that we all live in and are affected. If I was a parent at your child's school, I would join you in all talks with the admin with the full mouth I have. If we decided to sue the school at one point, I would say "no, no, let's not sue just the teacher, let's sue all the admin and split the costs." But that's about any educational action that goes against the principles of what we have chosen for children - which should be shared with parents right from the start I guess. 

 

But, honestly, is this not an inequality issue in an educational environment where some administrators are responsible? What are this school's educational values, goals and how do their teachers carry these to their classrooms? What has it got to do with a niqab wearer on the street? But if we will think "they are all like this", that's something very political. Ha, you are entitled to your politics as well, maybe you want zero foreign culture where you live, whatever you fill that foreign with. Your choice. But then don't you have a duty to carry on with your beliefs and actions without practising these on people at street-level in a very personal way? Especially if you appreciate democracy and the environment it creates, which means people don't have to be uniform lovebugs agreeing in everything but having the civil respect that comes with "bearing" someone. Is democracy a happy experience of the "same" celebrating each other, or is it sometimes an unpleasant experience based on accomodating difference as long as that difference does not violate your rights? 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, MikeMelga said:

Don't be naif, she does not dress like she dresses because she think it looks cool. The underlying reasons are part of the same patriarch culture of Saudi Arabia.

 

There are two issues: the reasons for choosing to wear a hijab and the reasons for forcing others to wear a hijab.  You don't know what namia's underlying reasons are, you cannot assume it, and she does not owe you an account of them so that you may be satisfied that she is not in some kind of permanent Vulcan mild-meld with the Saudi or Iranian religious police. 

 

As many posts have now pointed out to you, gendered dress codes are common as mud and the reasons behind them differ only in degree and details.  People are still allowed to have their boundaries, or should be, and the only thing you have a right to expect is that they won't actively impose them on you.

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MikeMelga said:

When you start seeing Sharia polizei, when you start seeing young refugees harassing women on the U-Bahn, when my son's kindergarten teacher starts saying that her husband does not allow her to speak with other men , then yes, it is my business.

 

 

Did the OP demand a sharia police anywhere?  I haven't seen it.

 

The sharia police thing is essentially an emotionally-satisfying form of trolling the wider society for some boys with personal dissatisfactions they want to take out on everyone else.  Hijab-wearing interns don't have much to do with it.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now