"it (the veil) lies at the root of all the most important
features that differentiate progress from stagnation. In Arabia before
the advent of Islam it was customary to bury female infants alive. Muhammad
improved on the barbaric method and discovered a way by which all females
could be buried alive and yet line on----namely the veil." Our Moslem
Sisters, A Cry of Need from Lands of Darkness, by A Van Sommer and
S. Zwemer.
"In general, the woman of Arabia in the early Muslim
era was in subjection either to her nearest male kinsman...or to her husband,
whose right over her was regarded in the same way as his right over any
other property." p. 94, Stated by Ruben Levy.
The colonialist government officials, utilized the influx of Christian Missionaries and Orientalists who came to "teach" the Muslim masses. Of course at first it was only the upper class families that these "scholars" had access to or interest in. Through their observations of these elite families, it was determined that Muslim women all over the world were suppressed.
It is ironic, actually, that Victorian Orientalists, in their tightly laced & disfiguring corsets
By removing women from their homes and displacing men, who by nature are more aggressive and confrontational with a more docile work force, colonialists of all time periods have found they can become wealthier with little overhead or worker demands.
Colonialists encouraged political leaders to adopt "civilized" behavior prescribed by the dominating Christian European social structure. Those greedy leaders desiring to emulate Europe, quickly adopted the trappings of Europeans, at the cost of their fellow countrymen & Muslims.
French colonialists, in the 1950's, in Algeria used the issue of the veil to win the support of Muslim women & thereby defeat the Algerian Nationalists. Their tactics however included turning younger people against their own culture by "liberating" them from the traditions & their cultural dignity.
The veil was abolished, by the government, in 1920 in Afghanistan. Then was reinstated in 1929 by the government. Yet, again in 1959, the issue of the veil turned again when the wife and sisters, of Afghanistan's Prime Minister appeared in public unveiled and set a new precedent & once again
In Iran, the veil was formally abolished in 1936 by Reza Shah. Yet though it was outlawed by the Shah, women still chose to wear it. In many of the rural areas,
In Turkey, the practice of veiling also was under attack. Ataturk abolished the veil in the 1920's. In 1997 a university woman was expelled from architectural school for wearing hijab to class. In today's educational system in Turkey, Muslim women are DENIED an education if they wear even a simple headscarf, which is ordered by Allah! Yet NO Feminist organization fights for the freedom of Muslim women to choose their own form of dress, nor their right to an education. What has happened to these champions of women's rights? Why have they gone so silent? Do the Capitalists have their tongue?
In Egypt too, the veil is being attacked. Women
wearing traditional face veils are threatened with arrest and even rape
by government officials who claim that wearing the garment is a symbol
of terrorist activity.
Now, Muslim girls and women are being forced to choose
between Islam and their educations, yet none of the Women's organizations,
who's voices have been previously claiming to be concerned with Muslim
women's rights seems to demand the rights of these religiously conscience
women. While Political conscienceness is applauded in the West, religious
conscienceness appears to be an alien concept!
Yet constantly we here Western media & political
leaders talking about morality and family values. Doesn't it seem like
they are being a little bit two faced?
Though there is no concise detailing of the similarities and differences between Muslim clothing styles around the world, this has not stopped feminists from making sweeping assumptions about the suppressive nature of Islmaic dress code.
Veiling has long been described by feminists as a means
for men to control women.
In Gender Roles, by L.L. Lindsey, it states:
"Islamic law is nurtured by a code of ethics which sees woman's role as providing legitimate male heirs. This role may be compromised if women are not restricted in their activities especially during childbearing years...Therefore, Islam assumes that woman is both potentially powerful and dangerous." (p 222)
Such broad strokes, this author makes!!! Shame on her for suggesting such ironious claims. Quran clearly states that daughters and sons are to be equally welcomed. So I must ask you, where is this "scholar" getting her infomration?
Islamic law comes from Quran and hadith, not the practices
of ignorant people.
To suggest that the actions viewed amongst the masses
IS the religious law, is no different from suggest that murder & warfar
is promoted in Chistian Laws. However, as a consciencious writer, one has
to acknowledge that the acts of some Christians is not necessarily the
religous Laws that their religion dictates.
This practice known as veiling has long been left unchallenged
in Western sociological or anthropological journals. Those in the Muslim
world who do attempt to challenge it are often brushed off by fellow academic
professionals as "ignorant" or "biased".
It should be acknowledged that much of what has been written has been heavily clouded by cultural, political and religious biases which are rarely addressed by the authors, book reviewers or publishers.
As with the previous citation, the typical interpretation of veiling has been that of a form of victimization of women or the political manipulation of them.
"The effect of these garments is the same, though, for the woman is rendered anonymous,a non-person, unapproachable, just a silent being sulking along, looking neither to the right or left. To those who do not know her personally, she is nameless and faceless." (Jeffery, 1979)
Frank Viviano stated in his article, "The scarf
that split a nation" in the Nov./Dec '94 issue of Weekend, "...a
head scarf worn by Muslim women to demonstrate allegiance to fundamentalist
Islam. "
Viviano goes on to say,
January 1999: French Teachers Strike Over Muslim Headscarves
If this is truly an issue of equality, as the opponents of hijab claim, then why is it that the Muslim girls have the right only to wear what the opponents feel is appropriate?
Schoolgirls in France have been expelled and harassed since Feb 1989 for donning the hijab. The French hijab issue reached a crisis point in September of 1989, when French Minister of Culture, Francois Bayrou issued a decree calling for the scarf to be forbidden as "an ostentatious religious symbol". The issue of hijab in France is nothing more than a remnant of the colonialist mentality that dictated the lives of Muslims, when France controlled its neighbors to the south.
Though many of the opponents of hijab are of Arab Muslim origin, their ideology is no different than their Christian colonialist counter-parts-----to subjugate Islam and Muslims to the secular ideology of the day. Today this is done through negative labeling of those who adhere to their religious values and who choose to openly practice their chosen faith.
Yet there are some voices beginning to be heard over the clammer of leftists and Euro-centric feminists. One such example is found in "Behind the Veil Debate" in which it states:
"For many Algerian women the hijab represents a rejection of Western influence, liberation from unwanted male advances, and the right to promote their own social status through education and self-appointed professions."
Email: dawaah@hotmail.com
HIRU
21079 1st
Ave., N
Bushnell,
SD 57276