By Yvonne Ridley
Sunday, October 22, 2006; Page B01
LONDON
I used to look at veiled women as quiet, oppressed creatures -- until I was captured by the Taliban.
In September 2001, just 15 days after the terrorist attacks on the United States, I snuck into Afghanistan, clad in a head-to-toe blue burqa, intending to write a newspaper account of life under the repressive regime. Instead, I was discovered, arrested and detained for 10 days. I spat and swore at my captors; they called me a "bad" woman but let me go after I promised to read the Koran and study Islam. (Frankly, I'm not sure who was happier when I was freed -- they or I.)
Back home in London, I kept my word about studying Islam -- and was amazed by what I discovered. I'd been expecting Koran chapters on how to beat your wife and oppress your daughters; instead, I found passages promoting the liberation of women. Two-and-a-half years after my capture, I converted to Islam, provoking a mixture of astonishment, disappointment and encouragement among friends and relatives.
Now, it is with disgust and dismay that I watch here in Britain as former foreign secretary Jack Straw describes the Muslim nikab -- a face veil that reveals only the eyes -- as an unwelcome barrier to integration, with Prime Minister Tony Blair, writer Salman Rushdie and even Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi leaping to his defense.
Having been on both sides of the veil, I can tell you that most Western male politicians and journalists who lament the oppression of women in the Islamic world have no idea what they are talking about. They go on about veils, child brides, female circumcision, honor killings and forced marriages, and they wrongly blame Islam for all this -- their arrogance surpassed only by their ignorance.
These cultural issues and customs have nothing to do with Islam. A careful reading of the Koran shows that just about everything that Western feminists fought for in the 1970s was available to Muslim women 1,400 years ago. Women in Islam are considered equal to men in spirituality, education and worth, and a woman's gift for childbirth and child-rearing is regarded as a positive attribute.
When Islam offers women so much, why are Western men so obsessed with Muslim women's attire? Even British government ministers Gordon Brown and John Reid have made disparaging remarks about the nikab -- and they hail from across the Scottish border, where men wear skirts.
When I converted to Islam and began wearing a headscarf, the repercussions were enormous. All I did was cover my head and hair -- but I instantly became a second-class citizen. I knew I'd hear from the odd Islamophobe, but I didn't expect so much open hostility from strangers. Cabs passed me by at night, their "for hire" lights glowing. One cabbie, after dropping off a white passenger right in front of me, glared at me when I rapped on his window, then drove off. Another said, "Don't leave a bomb in the back seat" and asked, "Where's bin Laden hiding?"
Yes, it is a religious obligation for Muslim women to dress modestly, but the majority of Muslim women I know like wearing the hijab, which leaves the face uncovered, though a few prefer the nikab. It is a personal statement: My dress tells you that I am a Muslim and that I expect to be treated respectfully, much as a Wall Street banker would say that a business suit defines him as an executive to be taken seriously. And, especially among converts to the faith like me, the attention of men who confront women with inappropriate, leering behavior is not tolerable.
I was a Western feminist for many years, but I've discovered that Muslim feminists are more radical than their secular counterparts. We hate those ghastly beauty pageants, and tried to stop laughing in 2003 when judges of the Miss Earth competition hailed the emergence of a bikini-clad Miss Afghanistan, Vida Samadzai, as a giant leap for women's liberation. They even gave Samadzai a special award for "representing the victory of women's rights."
Some young Muslim feminists consider the hijab and the nikab political symbols, too, a way of rejecting Western excesses such as binge drinking, casual sex and drug use. What is more liberating: being judged on the length of your skirt and the size of your surgically enhanced breasts, or being judged on your character and intelligence? In Islam, superiority is achieved through piety -- not beauty, wealth, power, position or sex.
I didn't know whether to scream or laugh when Italy's Prodi joined the debate last week by declaring that it is "common sense" not to wear the nikab because it makes social relations "more difficult." Nonsense. If this is the case, then why are cellphones, landlines, e-mail, text messaging and fax machines in daily use? And no one switches off the radio because they can't see the presenter's face.
Under Islam, I am respected. It tells me that I have a right to an education and that it is my duty to seek out knowledge, regardless of whether I am single or married. Nowhere in the framework of Islam are we told that women must wash, clean or cook for men. As for how Muslim men are allowed to beat their wives -- it's simply not true. Critics of Islam will quote random Koranic verses or hadith, but usually out of context. If a man does raise a finger against his wife, he is not allowed to leave a mark on her body, which is the Koran's way of saying, "Don't beat your wife, stupid."
It is not just Muslim men who must reevaluate the place and treatment of women. According to a recent National Domestic Violence Hotline survey, 4 million American women experience a serious assault by a partner during an average 12-month period. More than three women are killed by their husbands and boyfriends every day -- that is nearly 5,500 since 9/11.
Violent men don't come from any particular religious or cultural category; one in three women around the world has been beaten, coerced into sex or otherwise abused in her lifetime, according to the hotline survey. This is a global problem that transcends religion, wealth, class, race and culture.
But it is also true that in the West, men still believe that they are superior to women, despite protests to the contrary. They still receive better pay for equal work -- whether in the mailroom or the boardroom -- and women are still treated as sexualized commodities whose power and influence flow directly from their appearance.
And for those who are still trying to claim that Islam oppresses women, recall this 1992 statement from the Rev. Pat Robertson, offering his views on empowered women: Feminism is a "socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians."
No doubt a Liberal Islamic apologist trying to compare the true freedom Christianity/West brings to women in comparison to Islam and their much documented oppression. As if most Western females get boob jobs and compete in bikini contests. What they do have is true fredom to live their own lives w/o dictate and w/o DEATH! Honor killings anyone????
Tell how free Isalm is to all the female circumcised victims.
Tell how free Islam is to all who convert to another religion (Abdul Rahman et al.)
Tell how free Islam is to all the females who are 'honor' killed.
Tell how free and holy Islam and Saudi Arabia is with all their 9 year rape victims who walk the street and who have been shunned by their families for disgrace/dishonor since at 9 they are of the age of consent.
Tell how free Islm is to al the women whose husband say "I divorce thee' thrice and cannot support themselves or their children. No welfare for them in Islamic countries.
Tell who free Islam is to all the Coptic Christians and their female children who are abducted and forced to convert.
Tell how free Islam is to Nick Berg, et al. (beheaded kidnap victims) in Iraq to make things better for the citizens of Iraq.
Tell how free Islam is to the Dutch cartoonists in hiding.
Tell how free Islam is to the young S. E Asian boys who were used as jockies.
Tell how free Islam is to young boys violated.
Tell how free Islam is to the maids serving as indentured servants/slaves in Isamic households - even in America.
Please!
ps. Most women would rather wear a veil temporarily ratrher than get raped by the Taliban.
The author, a British leftist, having experienced the spiritual vacuity, moral relativism, and self-loathing of her own culture has found freedom in Islam by projecting all those things she finds lacking in her own culture onto that religious expression.
Her claim that Islam sees women and men as equals is rubbish. No religion created in pre-modern times saw men and women as equals. If women were the equals of men, she should ask herself why under Islamic law women inherit half of what men do. Why is a woman’s testimony in a legal proceeding worth half a man’s testimony? For example, in Nigeria, a woman was sentenced to death by stoning because she committed fornication. The man received a much lighter sentence; he wasn’t sentenced to death. She claimed she was raped, but couldn’t find two men to vouch for her, as required by Islamic law. Why was this necessary if men and women are equal in Islam?
On the subjects of honor killings and female circumcision she is correct that they are cultural adaptations and not sanctioned by Islam. Many Muslims outside of South Asia and the Middle East do not engage in these behaviors, while many non-Muslims in the Middle East and elsewhere do.
Christopher Hitchens wrote something to the effect that with the collapse of the Soviet Union and any notion of an international left dedicated to socialism, many leftists who are not satisfied with the other directions the left has gone in will hitch their wagon to Islam as the next best thing. Ridley is obviously one of those people.
What annoys me about people like her is they claim that we non-Muslims think that all Muslims are violent fanatics, but real Islam is very peaceful. If we only understood the real Islam and not the western misrepresentation of their adopted faith, we’d like it too. They then sing the praises of people who are the most violent and fanatical in the religion like Abu Hamza.
Perhaps...... Previously she was married to a Palestinian man who was connected in some way to the PLO. He may have been a Christian or a secular person of Muslim background. In any case, she was familiar with Islam to some degree before her conversion/reversion (as Muslims would say).
The second season of "24" had a storyline in which a White American woman became a radical Islamic terrorist after being kidnapped. I've heard it said that women can lose themselves in the identities of their mates but my goodness!
But extreme examples aside, why does it seem as though converts to a religion or people who adopt a new culture are more "hardcore" than native-born people? Is it a way to prove oneself to the new group?
The second season of "24" had a storyline in which a White American woman became a radical Islamic terrorist after being kidnapped. I've heard it said that women can lose themselves in the identities of their mates but my goodness!
But extreme examples aside, why does it seem as though converts to a religion or people who adopt a new culture are more "hardcore" than native-born people? Is it a way to prove oneself to the new group?
New converts tend to have more of a commitment in their choice due to their reasoning that brought them to make that choice rather than someone who is merely born within a particular culture who may be more likely to see their involvement as "the usual" or mundane.
On a side note, there are MANY District of Columbia residents who have NEVER been to the Washington Monument even though they only live minutes away from it while visitors to the region tend to head straight to it!
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 168 } Location: Mid-Atlantic States; USA
Posted: Fri 03 Nov 2006 21:18 Post subject:
Yes, but down underneath those veils, Muslim women can and do
wear anything they like. And when among their many women only
gatherings or in the privacy of their own homes they can and often
do belly dance to their hearts content. They boggie on down.
But all jokes aside, didn't White women wear bonnets a couple centuries
ago? And weren't women of societies who didn't cover up called sinners
and evil savages? Now that we no longer cover up, those who do are
the sinners and evil savages. I think if you just do what we Westerners
are doing at any given point in history, you'll be okay with God.
Why didn't Jesus tell the Virgin Mary and all of his other female followers
to uncover their heads and be free? And why did Paul write in the
New Testament that females should cover their heads and not speak
in the church? Why do Jews put something on their heads when they
pray? What about Catholic Nuns, why do they cover? What about the
Pope, why does he put something on his head? Why is Jesus often
portrayed with his head covered?
But all foolishness aside, we're all just having fun, and Muslims are
today's easy scape goats. Tomorrow they'll be the West's best friends,
just like our other past ememies; the British, the Native American
Indians, the Germans, the Italians, the Japanese, the Russians, and
others. Our only lasting enemies are Americans of African descent.
Come back in fifty years and see if I'm not right. Why do you think white
folks call Middle Easteners white? Because they secretly admire them and
their spunk and their history. The same reason they readily marry and
live next to Native American Indians, Japanese, and most of their other
past enemies. They don't see them as cowardly slaves. And no,
Americans of African descent are not cowardly slaves, not in the least.
Yet, no matter how unfairly, that is the way we Americans of African
descent are often thought of by White America and much of the world.
Even today, all across America with all the fear and hatred of Islam
and of Arab and other Muslims, how many White folks can any of us
find who would rather be married to or live next door to a so-called
"Black" or even "Partly-Black" American fellow Christian believer,
than to an even Non-American so-called "White Arab" Muslim?
They don't care if the so-called "Black" or "Partly Black" American is
a fellow American and a fellow Christian who loves Jesus and hates
Muslims and Islam even more than they do. That does not endear us
to them. They just don't care. Who needs us pawns when there's no
more dirty work to be done, or after the two sides have made up?
Ask anyone who's ever interfered in a lover's spat.
White folks are basically warriors and conquerors, that is their history and
heritage, and they admire that spirit in others. Check back in fifty years,
and see who's buddy buddy. And see who's the butt of the joke and still
on the outside, looking in.
Let's continue to honor our First Amendment to our Constitution, and
continue to respect our cherished American belief and dedication to
freedom of religion and expression. It's the American thing to do.
At least in my humble opinion it is. Let's continue to be the fine
decent caring human beings we have each always been.
EDITED: to do as requested and erase the borderline risque bikini cartoon
I had posted here. No offense was intended. And I sincerely apologize.
Leo Y. "Ireland" Abdulmalik
Last edited by leosprycat on Mon 06 Nov 2006 22:25; edited 1 time in total
Tomorrow they'll be the West's best friends,
just like our other past ememies;
I know you were being tongue-in-cheek but there is something to this. It's not clear to me that the West sees Arabs/Muslims as enemies, especially in the U.S. We were fine with encouraging and funding sectarian violence (*cough* Iran/Iraq war) and using Muslim nut-jobs to bring down the Soviets (er, muhajadeens and the CIA, anyone?). Bush and the Saudi princes can't seem to keep their hands off of one another. There's certainly no talk of cruel dictatorial regimes when it comes to them. Not one 9-11 terrorist came from Iraq. Makes you wonder.
We seemed to allow, if not encourage, the instability in the Middle East, and possibly Europe, as long as it wasn't directed at us. IMO we have been trying to establish some kind of buffer zone in the region for decades and it has sorely backfired.
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 168 } Location: Mid-Atlantic States; USA
Posted: Mon 06 Nov 2006 22:48 Post subject:
sagascend wrote:
leosprycat wrote:
Tomorrow they'll be the West's best friends,
just like our other past ememies;
I know you were being tongue-in-cheek but there is something to this. It's not clear to me that the West sees Arabs/Muslims as enemies, especially in the U.S. We were fine with encouraging and funding sectarian violence (*cough* Iran/Iraq war) and using Muslim nut-jobs to bring down the Soviets (er, muhajadeens and the CIA, anyone?). Bush and the Saudi princes can't seem to keep their hands off of one another. There's certainly no talk of cruel dictatorial regimes when it comes to them. Not one 9-11 terrorist came from Iraq. Makes you wonder.
We seemed to allow, if not encourage, the instability in the Middle East, and possibly Europe, as long as it wasn't directed at us. IMO we have been trying to establish some kind of buffer zone in the region for decades and it has sorely backfired.
Yes Ma'am, Sagascend, those are some excellent points you've made.
Ms. Sagascend, they're a bit frightening, too. At least to me they are.
Joined: 09 Jan 2007 {Posts: 6 } Location: www.clementcooper.com
Posted: Tue 09 Jan 2007 14:54 Post subject: SISTERS A Celebration of British Female Muslim Identity
A few weeks after Sept 11th, I was working in a hotel in Manchester, UK and because I look "Muslim" the other members of staff including the general public began abusing me. With the mouth that is!
It was through this negative experience (many infact) that I was able to gain a different perspective on Muslim and non-Muslim relationships.
The role and status of Muslimah in Islam inparticular.
Anyway, soon after I decided to walk away from the place I ended right back making photographs again.
With a great deal of hard work, trial and effort I was able to produce the UK's first monograph to concentrate on Muslimah who identify through Hijab.
Should you be interested, I have just posted the new SISTERS movie on my web site.
Last edited by Clement on Fri 02 Feb 2007 12:02; edited 2 times in total
Joined: 09 Jan 2007 {Posts: 6 } Location: www.clementcooper.com
Posted: Thu 11 Jan 2007 02:19 Post subject: A very confused member!
The photograph of the young woman posted above was from my DEEP publication of 1997 and has nothing what so ever to do with the thread of this topic. The Veil.
I think the member is very confused to say the least and will most likely remove the offending image right after reading this response to save face.
The young woman with her coat hood up (pictured) is not the same as a young Muslimah wearing Hijab. Why is that so hard to understand?
I'm pretty sure that there are many more ignorant and deluded people walking around out there sharing this very same ill informed view of Islam, Muslimah and Hijab.
I believe the distinction needs to be made very clear now so as to not confuse the thread of this interesting topic on the veil.
So, a basic coat hood placed over the head for fashion purposes is just not the same thing as Hijab. Get it? Period.
Thank you for trying, perhaps next time you'll try harder eh!
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
What they do have is true fredom to live their own lives w/o dictate and w/o DEATH! Honor killings anyone???? 
