Do you think the Niqab is a form of oppression?

[Colonel]

Ridiculous, how can it be oppression when most choose to wear it. Having said that I'm not a fan of girls wearing niqaab in the west, they're putting themselves at risk of attack. What I don't understand is old women wearing niqaab unless they first put it on at a young age who will find them attractive?

PO would you say the wives of the Prophet (SAW) were also oppressed?

[SultanOrder]

GG, that was my favorite part too. lol

Colonel, you must understand that it was a direct commandment from God to the wives of the prophet scw, to wear to wear the veil.

[hipsterrunoff]

Yes, because last time I checked the Quran it said nothing about covering your whole body and only revealing your eyes. It's not only oppression but a safety hazard as well. Just think about a niqabi driving beside you on the road.

[ElfRuler]

The legacy I speak of is the sufferage of women from the late 19th century onwards.

The western women has achieved the highest levels of education in the world, the highest levels of income, the highest levels of equlity with men, the highest positions in government, etc. Western women for the first time in the history of man are surpassing him in education, and encroaching on his dominance in the work place. They don't get paid equal to women, then the struggle is not yet over, but do attempt to trivialize their achievements.
Le liberity de la femme, is not synonymous with the objectification of women. This is a straw man argument. How western societies advancement should be measured is from whence they came and in what direction they are going. It has nothing to do with tribal women in Africa, since they share nothing but the fact that they are of the same sex, but they also share that with animals too, so should we compare women with dogs?

Western women are not the only ones to have achieved such progress. When it comes to scientific degree graduates UNESCO has already noted that Muslim women often exceed western women in such progressive fields. In most countries that provide education to both MEN and WOMEN (Irrespective of them being Muslim or Western), women are starting to exceed men in Universities (Iran being one). Once again, it's not a progress exclusively limited to Western women. The "liberation" of women in the West came with an extreme form of feminism influenced by capitalism and male interests which even target women in higher positions of government institutions to be objectified and commodified. Watch the documentary "Misrepresentation". Western women like all women around the world are faced with a strong patriarch institutions that are deeply embedded within their society. They do not define what liberty means for the rest of the women of the world, nor do we use their ever-changing position and standard to measure the liberty and success of other women.

You've the preconceived notion that any woman who wears it is supposedly lacks education, the ability to critically make crucial decisions, and succeed and contribute to society. You have judged women who wear niqaab and deemed them representing a cloak of oppression, yet reluctant to judge the social worth-fullness of Western women based on how they down dress? You have insulted the Ummahat ul-Muminin in your blind process of glorifying Western women. The greatest scholar in Islam was a Woman, Asiaha (RA), who wore the Niqaab, and who far exceeds any "from of freedom Western women will ever achieve". The notion that they are supposedly more "liberated" because they do not wear the "niqaab", which in your view is oppression is ludicrous.

Every society has the potential to progress and regress. The oldest University known to mankind to give out degrees was built by two Muslim women in North Africa, yet today we are fighting ignorant and corrupt men in the corners of Afghanistan and Pakistan to give girls the right to education. Western nations progress is not static, like any other society the potential to regress is constantly there.

So give me a better measurement of "liberty".

[ElfRuler]

Yes, because last time I checked the Quran it said nothing about covering your whole body and only revealing your eyes. It's not only oppression but a safety hazard. Just think of a niqabi driving beside you on the road.

Do you even think before making such statements?


The Mothers of the Believers wore them. It's one thing to not like them, and no one is forcing you to wear it. But for the LOVE OF GOD think before commenting about the niqaab. To even suggest that the Mothers of the Believers wore an oppressive clothing is downright wrong.


Show some respect women of Snet.......Show some ounce of respect for the House of the Prophet (PBUH).

[TeAmo]

Niqab is not oppressive, it's a form of freedom, Insh'Allah I'm going to wear it when I get married. Hipster their face is covered not their eyes, so of course niqabies can see.

Some people are talking badly about the niqab not realising the wifes of the prophet wear them, and also the female companions and the wifes of the companions wore them too.

[SultanOrder]

Elfruler, very good response, I enjoyed reading it. You are right there is no monolithic measure of the progress of women. And we should not be so quick to use the western view as a role model, especially knowing it's pitfalls and short-comings.

I was just messing around with the whole oppression of women by the niqab, in that it erases a womans identity. If women are to be liberal and they have the right to dress down, it confounds liberty to put conditions preventing them to also dress up.

I fear that we too often get bogged down in pitting one side against the other. Either we focus too much on the consequences of too much liberty, or the oppressions of too little liberty. When we can be introspective on both sides. Muslims societies do for the most part denegrate the position of women, and confine them to rigid standards and customs. Non-muslim societies have pushed their societies so fast that they have left a lot of women alienated and confused.

My last point is that, muslims not having much to draw from their present, have reached to the past in a way to not let the west monopolize the progress of women. So just like you have, you will reach to antiquity, to illustrate how Islam was first at this. Well, the reality is, Islam is behind, and what their forefathers have done, is not being done today. So, we need to come to grips with our own reality.

[ElfRuler]

Elfruler, very good response, I enjoyed reading it. You are right there is no monolithic measure of the progress of women. And we should not be so quick to use the western view as a role model, especially knowing it's pitfalls and short-comings.

I was just messing around with the whole oppression of women by the niqab, in that it erases a womans identity. If women are to be liberal and they have the right to dress down, it confounds liberty to put conditions preventing them to also dress up.

I fear that we too often get bogged down in pitting one side against the other. Either we focus too much on the consequences of too much liberty, or the oppressions of too little liberty. When we can be introspective on both sides. Muslims societies do for the most part denegrate the position of women, and confine them to rigid standards and customs. Non-muslim societies have pushed their societies so fast that they have left a lot of women alienated and confused.

My last point is that, muslims not having much to draw from their present, have reached to the past in a way to not let the west monopolize the progress of women. So just like you have, you will reach to antiquity, to illustrate how Islam was first at this. Well, the reality is, Islam is behind, and what their forefathers have done, is not being done today. So, we need to come to grips with our own reality.

I have meet plenty of Muslims who share some of your views PO.

A human being's identity is not limited to their facial structure. The argument that the niqaab "erases a woman's identity" is a extremist feminist and anti-Islam/Muslim argument used by those who make it their business to distort and misconstrue the actual principles and Islamic stance on the niqaab. I have yet to see your face or your body, yet your identity as a human is still intact and unquestionable.

Being liberal also includes the right to dress-up, but Western interpretation of liberalism is biased against dressing up. They have passed laws banning women from wearing the Hijab in some European countries as well as the niqaab. We have to also remember that terms such as freedom, liberty, and justice are continuously employed to expand Western intrusion into Muslim lands. Some basic principles of human rights which are also labelled liberty are universal in nature. But in each society the boundaries of liberty is shaped by the collective cultural knowledge of its people.

I agree that we do tend to be one-sided, but it's not the Muslims who are running a multi-million dollar propaganda machine meant to dehumanize, devalue, and re-educate Muslims about Islam and their own identity using an anti-Islamic approach. A woman should never be judged solely on how she dresses, it's superficial and counterproductive. And in Islam the Qur'an (as well as the hadith) did not prescribe a punishment for a woman who does not wear the hijab nor did the Prophet (PBUH) or the Rightly Guide Caliphs punish a woman for not wearing the Hijab, let alone the Niqaab. It's a matter concerning only her and Her Lord. Women being forced to wear niqaab or hijab is not Islamic, but a result of the current existing authoritarianism in many Muslim countries creeping into the private matters of its citizens.

The Qur'an of yesterday is the Qu'ran of today, but the Muslims of the past and the once in the present are completely different and much of that difference stems from Muslims today being clueless about their faith and failing to differentiate between the socio-political manifestation of government oppression and society in general from Islam. You can't confuse the nature of Muslims with the nature of Islam.

Islam is neither behind nor forward, it's forever centered as the Qur'an is. Muslims, however being humans that experience endless cycles of social change will progress or regress depending on their current and historical economic, political, and military connections with themselves and other societies. You can not judge the progression of Islam using Muslims and the current status quo of their governments as an example, especially, when Muslims continue to fail to implement the basic principles of Islam in their lives. WE need to focus on our individual understanding of Islam and ourselves, before venturing out into the World of Islamic reality.

[grandpakhalif]

Superb argunents and excellent posts Elf, I reallt appreciate it!

[abdisamad3]

Do you consider bikini wearing womens being used in commercials opressive?

[Saraxnow]

I recall the words of a flamboyant bimbo: '' The niqab must be banned because the face is central to communication'', mentioning how it adds to her insecurity in her Muslim identity.

@the ironic mentality of forcing people to accept their notions of freedom. Of Bush and men.

[Negritude]

So many contradictions in one thread.

[Mondey]

Im going on this issue like imaam Al Albaani (aun) said,, Niqaab is not compulsory it's optional and his daughters used to wear it bcoz they chose to.

if you put it on you get ajar, if u leave it u don't sin.

the fitna of women is not actually on their face it's their other body parts that should be covered.

[SANDIEGUY]

Elfruler, very good response, I enjoyed reading it. You are right there is no monolithic measure of the progress of women. And we should not be so quick to use the western view as a role model, especially knowing it's pitfalls and short-comings.

I was just messing around with the whole oppression of women by the niqab, in that it erases a womans identity. If women are to be liberal and they have the right to dress down, it confounds liberty to put conditions preventing them to also dress up.

I fear that we too often get bogged down in pitting one side against the other. Either we focus too much on the consequences of too much liberty, or the oppressions of too little liberty. When we can be introspective on both sides. Muslims societies do for the most part denegrate the position of women, and confine them to rigid standards and customs. Non-muslim societies have pushed their societies so fast that they have left a lot of women alienated and confused.

My last point is that, muslims not having much to draw from their present, have reached to the past in a way to not let the west monopolize the progress of women. So just like you have, you will reach to antiquity, to illustrate how Islam was first at this. Well, the reality is, Islam is behind, and what their forefathers have done, is not being done today. So, we need to come to grips with our own reality.

I have meet plenty of Muslims who share some of your views PO.

A human being's identity is not limited to their facial structure. The argument that the niqaab "erases a woman's identity" is a extremist feminist and anti-Islam/Muslim argument used by those who make it their business to distort and misconstrue the actual principles and Islamic stance on the niqaab. I have yet to see your face or your body, yet your identity as a human is still intact and unquestionable.

Being liberal also includes the right to dress-up, but Western interpretation of liberalism is biased against dressing up. They have passed laws banning women from wearing the Hijab in some European countries as well as the niqaab. We have to also remember that terms such as freedom, liberty, and justice are continuously employed to expand Western intrusion into Muslim lands. Some basic principles of human rights which are also labelled liberty are universal in nature. But in each society the boundaries of liberty is shaped by the collective cultural knowledge of its people.

I agree that we do tend to be one-sided, but it's not the Muslims who are running a multi-million dollar propaganda machine meant to dehumanize, devalue, and re-educate Muslims about Islam and their own identity using an anti-Islamic approach. A woman should never be judged solely on how she dresses, it's superficial and counterproductive. And in Islam the Qur'an (as well as the hadith) did not prescribe a punishment for a woman who does not wear the hijab nor did the Prophet (PBUH) or the Rightly Guide Caliphs punish a woman for not wearing the Hijab, let alone the Niqaab. It's a matter concerning only her and Her Lord. Women being forced to wear niqaab or hijab is not Islamic, but a result of the current existing authoritarianism in many Muslim countries creeping into the private matters of its citizens.

The Qur'an of yesterday is the Qu'ran of today, but the Muslims of the past and the once in the present are completely different and much of that difference stems from Muslims today being clueless about their faith and failing to differentiate between the socio-political manifestation of government oppression and society in general from Islam. You can't confuse the nature of Muslims with the nature of Islam.

Islam is neither behind nor forward, it's forever centered as the Qur'an is. Muslims, however being humans that experience endless cycles of social change will progress or regress depending on their current and historical economic, political, and military connections with themselves and other societies. You can not judge the progression of Islam using Muslims and the current status quo of their governments as an example, especially, when Muslims continue to fail to implement the basic principles of Islam in their lives. WE need to focus on our individual understanding of Islam and ourselves, before venturing out into the World of Islamic reality.

Bravo. You have really put some misguided ppl in their place! What a good read thank u

[NoAngst.]

If it is foisted on women agains their will, then yes it is oppression and must be fought and resisted. But if women wear them out of their own volition, then no it is freedom of expression (religious).