Identity Death in a Burqa AKA STFU Miss Roy
"Surely you don't support the burka" , I said to my friend who had shared this image. "The hijab is one thing, but to eliminate identity? And say what we will, how is the face not a part of our identity? If someone undergoes cosmetic surgery and takes on someone else's face, it is termed identity theft.
Identity cards have our faces on them. "
If being naked is banned and condemned, surely we are within our rights to ban completely covering up in a shroud like garment that covers faces.
My friend looked at her post , and apologized for misreading 'Burka' as 'Hijab' , and reposting, and spreading this filth.
|The above picture clearly illustrates the different kinds of Islamic dressing prescribed for women by some foolish clerics of the religion. And, you can obviously see why the burka and niquab scare me.|
Friend (Zoha): Taliban's regime surely morphed "the veil" , thus leaving us with different, some extreme and absurd, interpretations of observing hijab. Hijab have different cultural connotations along with the religious order( not all of these interpretations are right of course). People aren't but should be open to different interpretation of how one chooses to dress modestly. The picture below exhibits how a girl chooses to dress modestly.
This girl is beautiful. Her dress is beautiful. I don't know if the veil is even mentioned in the Koran.
I don't know if i agree about the term modesty... "behaviour, manner, or appearance intended to avoid impropriety or indecency.", the dictionary states.
Now, who's to say what's decent and what's indecent so I'd rather not comment on that. But it's definitely a gorgeous outfit. ❤️
The French ban on those stifling, face covering dresses is well and good and, Roy should be a little careful about what she says. Not that she has followers who blindly believe her, but she still stands on a certain platform that carries weight with people who aren't as intimately connected with this culture as we are.
Cause I know what western students will make of this, they'll make France the villain if they think the Abaya or the hijab their Muslim friends wear is being banned. Because, all those words, niqab/ burka/ hijab/ chador don't mean different things to them.
And if indeed the liberal hijab that most Muslim women wear is being banned, I don't see how they can implement that without making the catholic nuns take off their head dresses. The hijab and the nun's habits are so exactly the same.
A fight can and should be fought for the hijab, but not for the burka, niqab described in the pictures above. And that distinction is so important. The wall between freedom and oppression.
And if Roy is referring to the burka I'm referring to instead to the hijab that my friend mistook then that's a pretty careless statement to make.
It helps the oppressors force the woman to do away with their identity and remain a mere flesh commodity because the government is allowing it. So now, not only is it 'religious' , but also 'legal'.
Now, there might be brainwashed women who wish to remain under the purdah. But there were brainwashed people in North Korea who were genuinely distraught over the then dear leader's ill-health.
So, I don't take these women's 'choice' as informed choice like my friend's was :) I can see Zoha's beautiful face, and I know who Zoha is. The covered masses, on the other hand, aren't even human in most minds.
There's nothing to see... No human features... Facial or bodily.
That being said, the ban in France, I'd like to repeat, isn't against the hijab that my friend Zoha wears, or the abaya that covers the body. It's against concealment of the face, and I've already explained what a face means to one's identity.
I'll refer you to the pictures inserted above. I really hope she wasn't referring to that burka but rather the definition that Zoha gave wherein it doesn't cover the face.
And if you'll read the law, it doesn't target Islam, there are some Jewish face veils and some another religion I can barely spell.
You can go on to read about the Islamic priest talk about how facial veils do not have a place in the written word, so he doesn't really care about it.
And before Roy and clan act like assholes with no knowledge of how many, many women are forced to be mere commodities, property by the veil - the purdah - they need to be shut the hell up about things they haven't experienced or studied. I spent 2 years in Bihar, where if the woman doesn't cover her face with her pallu/dupatta, she returned the next day with burn marks on her palms and arms. These were Hindu women.
The veil argument isn't about religion, it's about a culture that places the woman behind a cover rendering her in-existent.The Hindu women have to hold the veil in place by placing the middle bit in her mouth, thus fixing it. And I'll leave it to your ripe imagination as to how she's expected to speak.
These are not issues one can loosely comment on. I don't know or care if she said it intentionally or unintentionally. But whoever decided to blow up the sentence, highlight it in red and throw it around for people like you to read and assume crap needs to rethink their interpretation.
And if you are going to say women can choose to cover up... Body and face... And disappear. Well, answer me this, will I get arrested if I as a woman choose to undress and walk around completely naked?
So unless you are willing to fight on behalf of the nudists, don't fight on behalf of oppressors with your charismatic language skills.