On 12/27/2013 3:48 PM, Warp wrote:
> (This is, by the way, the main reason why I oppose the burkha as a
> matter of principle. The politically correct segment of our society
> wants to think of it as "freedom to dress in whatever way you want."
> However, that's not what the burkha represents at all in muslim cultures,
> and what's worse, the PC segment knows this perfectly well, but still
> deliberately ignores the fact. The burkha in most islamic cultures is
> a sign of submission. To these cultures, only a woman dressed in a
> burkha is chaste and virtuous, while a woman "exposing herself" is
> a whore. Not in all islamic cultures, of course, but in many. The
> burkha pretty much represents the exact *opposite* of "you are free
> to dress in whatever you want." More blatantly, it's only imposed on
> women; men are free to do whatever they want. And that is why I oppose
> the custom as a matter of principle. It's sexist and in direct opposition
> to the most basic concepts of freedom and equality.)
>
This I 99% agree with. I have trouble wrapping my head around the people 
that propose the idea of taking the symbol and using it to empower. It 
might empower "them", but it doesn't do a damn thing for the rest of the 
women around the world. But, then, in the long run, there "might" be 
value in turning it into a meaningless costume, instead. Just.. its no 
wear close to that, and its not going to become that, *until* is really 
is choice, not forced on them, either by religion, or their own false 
sense of modesty/shame. Its no better if you oppress yourself, and in 
the process, perpetuate the stupid ideas that allowed it to become a set 
of chains, holding you down. We get a lot of the same stupid things even 
in Western culture, where "choices" are made, not based on what woman 
want, but are taught to think they should "expect", or "be like". They 
are just not so violently enforced, but, never the less, when, say.. a 
rape happens, the first thing trotted out is a long list of excuses 
about what she wore, did, thought, where she was, what she did/didn't 
say, etc. And, worse, juries fall for that crap, including other women.

>> That said, the other factor, specific to Western education, is culture
>> shock. The openness of the West runs very contrary to what most of these
>> people ever dealt with
>
> Note that many, if not most, of those muslims had been born in the west
> and lived and studied their whole lives here. It shouldn't be as much a
> cultural shock to them.
>
True, but in such cases its usually the religious lie that they fall 
for, "The bad things you see wouldn't exist, if everyone followed these 
other, supposedly, perfect rules." Some people find that thinking very 
tempting, especially if you can manage to give them something they don't 
have, then isolate them from people who might, say.. point out the flaws 
in the logic.

Post a reply to this message