It was in America, of all places, in the bosom of the Great Satan, that I first saw burqa-wearers "in the flesh" so to speak. Standing in a shopping mall in Baltimore six years ago, I noticed these two things - presumably human beings - walking past clad head-to-toe in grim black.

As a wee boy from Belfast - where religious attire is a Rangers top and a balaclava - I was taken aback at this exotic sight. In fact I almost physically recoiled at the horror of it, at the sheer life-hating mentality which would consider the revelation of a single inch of female flesh to be an affront to God.

Since then I have seen many people in varying forms of Islamic dress, some of it like the hijab I actually find quite elegant, but the bin bag still startles me when I come upon it in the street. And I hope it always will, for it is truly monstrous.

Perhaps Leader of the House of Commons Jack Straw feels as strongly as me about the burqa (and it’s lily-livered sister the niqab, for brazen hussies who want to flaunt their eyes to all and sundry). But of course, he would never be stupid enough to say so in public. He has though caused a storm by revealing that he asks veiled visitors to his constituency surgery to remove their masks so they can talk face-to-face.

The Islamic Human Rights Commission (no, that’s not a typo) criticised the former Home Secretary’s remarks. Its chairman Massoud Shadjareh said: "It is astonishing that someone as experienced and senior as Jack Straw does not realise that the job of an elected representative is to represent the interests of the constituency, not to selectively discriminate on the basis of religion."

But is Mr Straw really discriminating? The Blackburn MP was at pains to point out that he asks, rather than demands, that the veil is removed. And, given that he always has another woman in the room for such meetings, isn’t he already being more than accommodating to those of his constituents who have been brought up to despise their own gender?

Not according to the Stop The War Coalition which organised a protest in Blackburn today against Mr Straw which was attended by 50 people and 20 bin bags, presumably containing human beings. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at this, that a supposedly left-wing movement should rally to the cause of religious fundamentalism and misogyny.

As with the Danish cartoon controversy, it is sickening to see supposed secualrists supporting the enslavement of countless millions around the world. For have no doubt, that is what the burqa is. To walk around in these grim prisons, a woman will have had to internalise two things from an early age - that her body is something to be ashamed of and that men are so prone to sexual violence that only the full tent treatment will stop them. It hardly needs to be stated that this mentality is both anti-women and anti-men, based on a thoroughly pessimistic view of human nature.

Yet some on the left support the continuation of this misogyny on the spurious grounds that wearing a bin bag must be respected because it is part of someone’s "culture". To which the only reply must be, so what? Getting drunk on the 11 of July and burning an effigy of the Pope is part of my culture, but I don’t respect it, let alone demand that others must. Slave-owning was once part of western culture. Should that have been respected? Germany has a rich history of anti-Semitism. Is this also to be respected or is it to be challenged?

Good things are good and bad things are bad, whether or not they are part of a people’s history. Those who hide behind the veil of respecting that which they know is wrong just because it is traditional are moral cowards. All cultures have good parts and bad parts. Surely the point is to keep the good and slowly weed out the bad, not to freeze culture with a mentality which is centuries out of date.

But such positive change is made more difficult if we, in the post-Christian west, acquiesce in a system of slavery which we would not tolerate being imposed on ourselves. This is not to say that people should be forced to remove their tents. In a free society, I must respect someone else’s right to wear a bin bag. But I do not have to agree with it.

Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Oct 07, 2006
Those who hide behind the veil of respecting that which they know is wrong just because it is traditional are moral cowards.


They do not see it as such, they see progress or westernisation as the demise of their culture, great sins, temptations etc blah blah blah....

They are ignorant closed minded people who have no respect for women or themselves.
on Oct 07, 2006
Because I live in the Middle East I don't want to comment on this veil controversy too much. Perhaps it is suffice to say that, as young Egyptian and Lebanese women
discard the veil in larger numbers each year (Egypt and Lebanon are the most liberal of the Middle East countries), the more we see Muslim women in other lands such as those in Europe, sticking to the tradition. The young, trendy Egyptian and Lebanese twenty-something is wearing jeans, bright tops (often sleeveless), and showing off her sleek black hair to the young men of Cairo and Beirut. Companies in both countries often advertise for non-veiled workers. I would suggest that the Muslim women and men of Great Britain are trying to preserve some sort of tradition that isactually dying out in the most moderate Middle East countries.
on Oct 07, 2006
I find the practice loathsome and demeaning. That said, I believe that anyone in a free society should be allowed to wear what they like. If I can walk around with a Carmine Miranda bowl of fruit hat on my head, women who so choose should be allowed to wear burquas.

on Oct 07, 2006
When I lived in Indonesia everyone used to call the girls who wore the full burqa ninjas. I must admit it was always vaguely unsettling to see one walking down the street.

The hot gossip was though that most of the ninjas were insatiable sexual deviants. I was always too intimidated to find out for myself but the rumours were everywhere.

For me the intimidation came from their total refusal of body language, and in this I agree with Straw - it's very hard to hold a conversation with someone when you can't read any physical cues. It's worse than talking on the phone because you yourself are at a serious disadvantage. They can read you but you can't read them.

They may have a right to wear a burqa wherever they want, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.
on Oct 07, 2006
The key word is: choose.
I think of the girl in Afghanastan that lifted her burqa to see and was whipped with a stick by that taliban - woman hating - old bastard of a male. It didn't look like she had a choice to wear it.

I think that a society that holds half of the population in distain can not be a health society.
Until women are treated as human beings, Islamic society will be doomed.
Men and women are a team - a society must have all of it's people to survive.
on Oct 08, 2006
attended by 50 people and 20 bin bags, presumably containing human beings.


So, you say that a human being wearing a burqa is worth less than one not wearing it? Are you beggining to evaluate the value of people based on what they wear - and why - ?

That kind of thinking always lead to rascism (or religionism, or whatever you call it). You always start on a true fact, but it degenerates into a generalisation and wide-ressentment + discrimination. If you bash against the burqa, there will only be more of it, because immigrant muslim will feel treathened in their culture.
on Oct 08, 2006
Thanks all for the comments.

jennifer 1,

Just to clarify, in the part you quoted I was talking, not about Muslim women, but about non-Muslims who hide behind the metaphorical veil of respecting the burqa. Hope that clears that up.

adnauseum,

"Because I live in the Middle East I don't want to comment on this veil controversy too much."

Says it all really, doesn't it?

Cikomyr,

One pearl of wisdom in an otherwise turgid contribution:

"If you bash against the burqa, there will only be more of it, because immigrant muslim will feel treathened in their culture."

Very true unfortunately. No Muslim woman is going to take off her burqa coz some stroppy Irish atheist doesn't like it.

"So, you say that a human being wearing a burqa is worth less than one not wearing it? Are you beggining to evaluate the value of people based on what they wear - and why - ?"

Sorry, if this was not clear, but the two references to "presumed" human beings were made with tongue in cheek. Of course these bin bags contain human beings. But is the mentality that imprisons these women a mentality which values their humanity?

"That kind of thinking always lead to rascism (or religionism, or whatever you call it). You always start on a true fact, but it degenerates into a generalisation and wide-ressentment + discrimination."

Same old, same old. It's "culture" so I'm not allowed to comment on it. As I said in my blog, I don't get touchy about other people criticising my "culture" such as it is. And my "culture" is a small and vulnerable one. Only deeply insecure people throw up these walls around their traditions, because ultimately they know that what they are doing will not stand up to rational debate.

You're not going to shut me up by accusing me of encouraging racism (since when were Muslims a race anyway?) so don't even bother trying.
on Oct 08, 2006
That whole culture is skewed. Before a muslim man marries, he can have NO contact with any woman who is not a relative. So you might find an othrewise hetrosexual guy who is say 30, who never had sex with a woman. How to get around this? Why, sex with other men or boys.
There is nothing forbidding this in the culture. When I was in Afghanistan, we saw many instances of boy-man rape, and consensual sex, many times a boy being given away by his father to settle a debt,etc.
This is no B.S. It's well documented.

Tell me...what kind of culture dresses their women like ghosts, forbids them from learning to read, work, socialize, etc?

A culture based on fear, intimidation, insecurity (male), ignorance, intolerance.

In Afghanistan this happens time and time again. A woman is raped, she stands trial for adultery(!), and her sentence? To be gang raped for the transgression. After all, she was asking for the inital rape wasn't she?...showing so much cheekbone and all...
on Oct 09, 2006
Women are God's gift to man. Here is a resource for young women (PATNOX.COM) which is an article on Abortion which is a very complex issue. Dr Rama of Kentucky gives an insight at PATNOX.COM
on Oct 17, 2006
It must be said OG, that you are seemigly ashamed of your own culutre, taking, as you do, every chance to belittle and deride Ulster Protestants and to crassly generalise about Ulster Protestanism.

In this otherwise well-written article you have claimed that a 'Rangers top and a balaclava' constitutes religious attire in the Northern Irish context, in one move roping the entire Protestant community, of which I am a member, in with the minority of mindless hooligans who do deserve our disdain. This sort of dress may be a purposeful indicator of religion, but it is not respresentative of the religion. I would certainly hesitate to claim that an Armalite, a wad of plastic explosive and bad sideburns are the religious dress of Irish Catholics. It is ridiculous and highly bigoted to claim that anything other than a minority of Protestants wear balaclavas, and it is the sort of writing I would expect in the Daily Mail. It is EXACTLY the same as declaring that religious dress in the Muslim sense is wearing a turban with bomb in it - i.e. linking the terrorist exponents of a religion with the mainstream practice of that religion. It is all the more baffling considering the rest of your article is thoughtful and open-minded.

To then go on as you do and say that burning an effigy of the Pope on Bonfire Night is part of Protestant culture speaks volumes about your bigotedness in this respect. Have you ever been to a proper 11th night? I sincerely doubt it. I have been to many in my youth and never once did I see this sort of thing. I heard the songs (sung by a minority) certainly. I will grant that on the Shankill Road the odd papal effigy might be burned, and it is inexcusable, but again this is far from representative of mainstream Protestant culture, in the same way that the daubings of 'Queen Mother RIP' that appeared around the short strand after that Royal's death are far from representative of Catholic culture. Please stop identifying Ulster Protestants as criminals and hoodlums, regardless of how self-loathing you are in this respect. Stop pretending you know about how working-class Protestants live and behave.

If you insist on being bigoted, please comment on both sides of the community.

The Northern Ireland problem is compounded by 'liberal' Protestants who brand all working-class Protestants Paisleyites and fascists, yet scream bloody murder if you so much as suggest the Republican movement is anything other than righteous.
on Oct 17, 2006
Why, sex with other men or boys.
There is nothing forbidding this in the culture. When I was in Afghanistan, we saw many instances of boy-man rape, and consensual sex, many times a boy being given away


The boys are called Xenias. (Yes, just like the tv show.) My husband has spent almost two years in Afghanistan....and is going back in Jan. He has commented about this as well. He also said that it is not considered "homosexual" which is punishable by death, as long as the man is the mounter and not the mountee.

He also said the Xenias are often dressed in very colorful and silky looking burqas. hahahahaha

Gross.

OG--Great article. I know its serious but I laughed out loud at this....
and it’s lily-livered sister the niqab, for brazen hussies who want to flaunt their eyes to all and sundry


And cacto you are so funny!

When I lived in Indonesia everyone used to call the girls who wore the full burqa ninjas


That just cracks me up!
on Oct 17, 2006
You should read this....It was written in 2001..

http://www.nospank.net/glazov.htm

Here is part of it.

The Sexual Rage Behind Islamic Terror
By Jamie Glazov

ALL SERIAL KILLERS, almost without exception, are severely sexually abused as children. The kind of people who hijack a plane with innocent people and drive it into a building with thousands of other innocent people are related to this phenomenon.

Socially segregated from women, Arab men succumb to homosexual behavior. But, interestingly enough, there is no word for "homosexual" in their culture in the modern Western sense. That is because having sex with boys, or with effeminate men, is seen as a social norm. Males serve as available substitutes for unavailable women. The male who does the penetrating, meanwhile, is not emasculated any more than if he had sex with a wife. The male who is penetrated is emasculated. The boy, however, is not, since it is rationalized that he is not yet a man.

In this culture, males sexually penetrating males becomes a manifestation of male power, conferring a status of hyper-masculinity. It is considered to have nothing to do with homosexuality. An unmarried man who has sex with boys is simply doing what men do. As the scholar Bruce Dunne has demonstrated, sex in Islamic societies is not about mutuality between partners, but about the adult male's achievement of pleasure through violent domination.

on Oct 17, 2006
Derek,

Wow, obviously touched a nerve there.

As I think should be obvious, the remark about balaclavas and Rangers tops was made with tongue in cheek. I doubt the very small number of people who wear such attire could even spell "Protestant" let alone explain what it means.

As for the bonfires, let's keep what's good and lose what's not. Getting pissed and having a sense of community is grand. Burning effigies of the Pope and singing those songs (which even you admit are sung) is not.

The whole point of using the example of the bonfires was to show that something isn't good just because it's part of someone's tradition.

So obviously I was going to pick something bad about my background rather than something good to make that point. It doesn't work if I write "How would everyone else feel if they had to respect my cultural need to turn up five minutes early for everything?"

"If you insist on being bigoted, please comment on both sides of the community. The Northern Ireland problem is compounded by 'liberal' Protestants who brand all working-class Protestants Paisleyites and fascists, yet scream bloody murder if you so much as suggest the Republican movement is anything other than righteous."

You must be new here. Go read some of my past blogs. There must be at least a dozen slagging the Provos.

I never mentioned Paisley or working-class people YOU did. Don't pretend I'm saying things I'm not.

"Please stop identifying Ulster Protestants as criminals and hoodlums, regardless of how self-loathing you are in this respect."

Just coz I disagree with you I'm "self-loathing". That's a fairly standard smear against anyone whose opinions don't accord with the unionist mainstream.

I want what's best for our people just as much as you do, I simply disagree with you as to how this is to be achieved. Don't lecture me about what it means to be a Protestant.
on Oct 17, 2006
The boys are called Xenias. (


I need to modify this because my husband has been to many Arab countries and told me this story but didn't specifically say they were named Xenias in Afghanistan. However, he DID say specifically about Afghanistan, men do practice sex with boys there as a normal part of life.

The colorful clothes may not be there though, now that I think about it, they may wear them in another, wealthier Muslim country.

Now that you are really confused!hahahahah.

on Oct 18, 2006
OG it's good to see that you now regret making your original bigoted comments, using the age-old excuse of 'tongue-in-cheek' to justify them, usually the reserve of backbench Conservatives, employed when they make questionable remarks about ethnic minorities.

"The whole point of using the example of the bonfires was to show that something isn't good just because it's part of someone's tradition. "

What's wrong with a bonfire? Why should bonfires be resisted? My comment was that burning an effigy of the Pope is not part of Ulster Protestant culture, which you claimed in you article. I agree with you that just because something is part of someone's tradition it doesn't mean its right, but I disagree that this particular act is part of Protestant tradition. Maybe it is part of UVF tradition, not Protestant. My point is that in your original article you link mainstream Protestantism with militant Loyalism, which is bigoted.

"You must be new here. Go read some of my past blogs. There must be at least a dozen slagging the Provos."

I apologise if I've missed your previous articles, I will look into it, but this statement doesn't affect my argument. I will happily 'slag' the Loyalist paramilitaries and the Provos, what I will not do is suggest - even tongue-in-cheek, as if this excuses it - that anything other than a minority of Protestants burn papal effigies and wear balaclavas. You would never, I suspect, claim that Catholics are all balaclava-wearing terrorists, and neither would I.

"I want what's best for our people just as much as you do, I simply disagree with you as to how this is to be achieved. Don't lecture me about what it means to be a Protestant."

You say you disagree with me about how the best for our people is to be achieved. I'm glad that you are able to ascertain my political outlook from a short article on a blog, but perhaps you can outline what this is, as I'm not even sure how I think the problem can be resolved. Have I indicated at any point how I believe this should be achieved, other than claiming I dislike bigots? And when did I lecture you about what it means to be a Protestant? I questioned your experience of working-class Protestant life, certainly, never did I state that any one sort of Protestantism is better than another. And I thought the point of a blog was to encourage discourse and debate (I will always tackle bigotedness when I see it, even in the guise of a liberal blog), not brand anyone who questions an article a 'lecturer.'

Sorry to go on, but last point:

"Just coz I disagree with you I'm "self-loathing". That's a fairly standard smear against anyone whose opinions don't accord with the unionist mainstream. "

I am not a unionist, I loathe Unionism, and for that reason take no part in NI Politics. I despise Pailsey and despair of the politics of the UUP. You seem to want to pigeon-hole me as a reactionary Unionist just because I took issue with your bigoted remarks. I am a Protestant in the community-sense only, and I am tired of the sweeping generalisations people make about the Protestant working-class. Yes Unionist politics leaves a lot to be desired, yes the Orange Order is a fairly abhorrent organisation, but the average Protestant citizen is no more inclined towards violence and/or bigotedness than the average Catholic or Muslim is.
2 Pages1 2