15 ms·

Step back and think of how much time and attention here in the West is invested in this article of clothing. Nations make laws about it; journalists write artic

Step back and think of how much time and attention here in the West is invested in this article of clothing. Nations make laws about it; journalists write articles daily, it seems. Either many people in the West have a fetish with it or it's become much more than clothing; it's a symbol. In large part it's a symbol for fear of a religion, Islam. The clothing is alien to most people who read the Washington Post, a symbol to them of a religion that's alien to them. It's an excellent representation of fear of the unknown (which is exactly what the terrorists, lacking the resources to achieve their goals any other way, want to create: Terror, fear, to drive their targets to create large-scale conflicts that the terrorists cannot create themselves and otherwise nobody in any religion would want.) Social norms and rules exist everywhere for clothing, especially for women. Women in the west must cover their breasts, an absurdity in some other cultures (I vaguely recall an interview with women in one non-western culture, who laughed and asked, 'are men there babies? they are so obsessed with breasts?'). In the workplace, at houses of worship, and other serious places women must cover more of their bodies - bikinis generally are frowned upon! Other countries are more strict: In India, the strong custom, if not rule, is for women to cover themselves from the neck to the wrists to ankles (except in movies and ads, which are like the West). Other religions have rules too: Many orthodox Jewish sects required women to be fully covered, including something on their heads. And in the West, every woman's clothing is apparently fair game for everyone else's opinions. (And there are rules for men to, but far less attention to them.) Note how everyone likes to tell women what they can wear. EDIT: Some minor edits

Nursie 10y ago
Ah yes, moral relativism exists therefore fining, imprisoning, beating and even raping women who don't comply with clothing requirements is just fine, as that's their culture and we generally insist women don't go topless.
- hackuser 10y ago
  > imprisoning, beating and even raping women who don't comply with clothing requirements is just fine Something you said, not me. It's a pretty inflammatory statement, so could you be specific about who does that and how often? Certainly women are assaulted - mostly by men - in many countries for violating social norms about their bodies. A big part of the women's rights revolution in the U.S. was taking control of that: Women decide what they can wear (bikinis), when to have sex (birth control and sexual assault laws), when to get pregnant (birth control), when not to (abortion), when they can be touched and commented on (sexual harassment). Before, it was a bunch of men telling women what they could or couldn't do with their own bodies. IMO, the faster that principle of basic self-determination (applied in whatever ways the local women want) spreads around the world the better, including Iran but many other countries and cultures too, and the U.S. and Europe have a ways to go themselves. As one example, some online communities in those countries (not HN but known here) encourage the abuse of women.
  - ethanbond 10y ago
    So... what's your point? We all know the job isn't finished. It probably never will be. This is one woman who is attempting to spread those rights faster, and your commentary is limited to "well shucks maybe imprisoning women for driving is just their twist on not allowing people to go to church in bikinis!" Besides the fact that, in the US, there certainly are churches or places of worship in which you're allowed to wear whatever the hell you want.
    - hackuser 10y ago
      > your commentary is limited to "well shucks maybe imprisoning women for driving is just their twist on not allowing people to go to church in bikinis!" Again, I didn't say that, you did. Perhaps quote something I did say. Regarding your statement, I'll repeat what I said above: It's a pretty inflammatory statement, so could you be specific about who does that and how often?
      - ethanbond 10y ago
        Do you live under a rock? How about Iran (the country in question) arresting women for showing hair (the problem in question) on Instagram. The problem with trying to quote you directly is that you actually aren't saying anything of substance. You're simply being an apologist who apparently can't muster up the courage to even take a stance on way or the other. You're just offering some good old PR hedging for an oppressive regime and trying to neuter the discussion with vague allusions to moral relativism. I'll ask again, what exactly are you trying to say? As it stands now, you're bogging down an important conversation that needs to happen with half-baked apologism. https://www.google.com/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iranian-women-arrested-for-posting-vulgar-photos-on-instagram-without-wearing-headscarves-a7033236.html%3famp?client=safari https://www.google.com/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...
        DanBC 10y ago
        The claim was not "women are arrested for not wearing the hijab" (and everyone agrees that it's wrong to arrest people for clothing). The claim was "women are arrested, beaten, raped, murdered for not wearing the hijab". Is that true?
- DanBC 10y ago
  Obviously laws about clothing are wrong. Do you have any evidence that women are raped for not wearing the hijab? And is that happening any more than in the "enlightened Christian" countries, such as the US where people are also raped and murdered for the who they are? http://www.rrsonline.org/?page_id=944 http://www.rrsonline.org/?page_id=944 eg >> Most studies reveal that approximately 50% of transgender people experience sexual violence at some point in their lifetime.48 >> The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs reports that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer people were three times more likely to report sexual violence and/or harassment compared to heterosexual people who reported to NCAVP in 2010.49 Surveys regularly show that people think the victims of violent sexual crime are partly to blame if they didn't fight back, or if they were in "the wrong place", or if they were intoxicated.
  - frozenport 10y ago
    There are numerous authorities on Islam who so say it's "okay" to rape women that don't meet their cultural norms (even if they don't live in their culture). Perhaps OP is referring to this incident http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/180393/muslim-imam-claims-women-who-dont-wear-hijabs-are-daniel-greenfield http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/180393/muslim-imam-claims-...
    - hackuser 10y ago
      There are people everywhere that say it and in poorer countries, I believe, that and other sanctioned violence generally is more common. I'd have to see some data to believe it's more than another ugly rumor, the kind that go with widespread prejudice, that such things are more common in Muslim communities. Certainly, these days, almost anything bad that can be associated with Islam is covered and is spun that way. I would request a different cite than FrontPage Mag, which appears to put a large banner at the top of every page saying 'Inside every liberal is a totalitarian screaming to get out'.
      - Chris2048 10y ago
        There is a big difference between a comment like that from some you-tube troll, and from a religious leader or imam/cleric.
LoSboccacc 10y ago
western culture is the only one that tend to respect foreign customs, while the reverse situation to happen is very rare. and there is a reason for that.
- hackuser 10y ago
  Westerners like to think that, but it's not true in my experience. Even in the multicultural U.S., think of the reception of every immigrant group: All were hated. Germans, Italians, Africans (EDIT: not that I'm suggesting they were ordinary, willing immigrants), Catholics, now Latinos ... Think of the attitude toward hajibs and Muslims in the U.S. and Europe - hardly accepting! Anyway, we're making very broad, baseless statements about the opinions of hundreds of millions of people. People in my own family don't even agree on these issues.
  - vacri 10y ago
    And yet Europe has the Schengen area, where people are allowed to travel without requiring documentation, from Portugal to the far north of Sweden, despite some pretty different cultures. Where else in the world is there anything like Schengen? There's this massive myth that Europe is all one culture, and it's not (you may even have heard about a sizable war in the past century that was predicated on cultural differences).
    - hackuser 10y ago
      All countries have a variety of cultures. The U.S. has Alabama, New York City, Utah, Hawaii, the Bay Area, etc. You can always find a way to split people and set them against each other. There's the West; Europe and other Western nations; the UK and other countries; England, Scotland and Wales; London and the rest of England; different parts of London; different religions and ethnicities, the punks and the mods, etc, ad infinitum. But I don't see any purpose to that. You also can unite people and get great things done together, as 13 very different colonies did in 1789. Why choose fighting with that alternative? > you may even have heard about a sizable war in the past century that was predicated on cultural differences I disagree. The cause of the war was one country trying to conquer the other ones. And each side was composed of countries of different cultures and languages. Germany, Japan and Italy; and the U.S., Russia, France, China, etc. on the other side. And in fact, the EU was created to prevent another war; togetherness has succeeded: The idea of war inside the EU is now absurd.
legulere 10y ago
Also interesting to note, is that headscarf practices in Iran predate Islam by around a thousand years and that had an influence into Islam. Wikipedia has a great overview over the headscarf in Iran: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab_by_country#Iran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab_by_country#Iran
- hackuser 10y ago
  With respect, do you happen to know how accurate Wikipedia's article is? Especially on hot-button issues, I don't trust them without outside corroboration.
- jules 10y ago
  There is a very direct link between the mandatory headscarf law and Islam. It was not mandatory in Iran before Khomeini came to power.
solutionyogi 10y ago
Your point about different social norms and rules is well taken. However, social norms are one thing and state enforced law is a different ball game. A month ago, I went to Europe and my date had to wrap a scarf around her waist to visit a church (she was wearing shorts). That is totally cool. It's private property and they can set the rules as they please. But in public, women are free to wear what they want. On a side note: I am from India and I don't know where you got this idea that women has to cover themselves from neck to wrists to ankles (not even the villages, see: https://www.google.com/search?q=indian+village+women&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiC2rLupcbPAhXKQD4KHZw1AAAQ_AUICCgB&biw=1080&bih=1795 https://www.google.com/search?q=indian+village+women&source=...). Yes, certain Muslim population do wear hijab/niqab.
- hackuser 10y ago
  > I went to Europe ... in public, women are free to wear what they want. In many places it is now state-enforced law that women cannot cover their heads, faces, and/or wear hajibs/etc. But despite that serious problem, I agree there is far more freedom in Europe. My point is that people see the clothing as threatening; they are obsessed with what it symbolizes. I agree that the serious question is not clothing but women's freedom to wear generally what they want (among many other freedoms). > I am from India and I don't know where you got this idea that women has to cover themselves from neck to wrists to ankles That's very interesting to me. I certainly don't have your experience and knowledge, but I've been to India. Before going we were told that was the social norm, and when we were there, mostly cities in northern India including Delhi, that's what we observed. When we'd see a western woman in a tank top and shorts, she would stand out dramatically. Honest question: How did I misunderstand what I saw?
  - solutionyogi 10y ago
    I am very surprised that you had that experience in metropolitan city like Delhi. What were the women wearing? I don't even know what kind of dress women will have to wear which covers theirs wrists and ankles. Here's what you will find Indian women wearing in day to day life: 1. Educated, middle class: Salwaar Kameez, Jeans/Top, Skirt/Top. 2. Older or more conservative women: Sari. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sari https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sari Even Sari exposes a women's midriff and her hands. Do you have any photo of the outfit that you are talking about?
EliRivers 10y ago
Note how everyone likes to tell women what they can wear. Isn't the problem that some people like to tell women what they can't wear?
- byuu 10y ago
  The problem is both, and it's really tiring seeing each side deride the other without getting the hypocrisy. You have Iran saying they have to wear the Hijab, and France saying they can't wear the Burqa/Niqab. How about both governments and religions let women make their own damned choices?
  - LanceH 10y ago
    They can go to a soccer game in France, though.
pfortuny 10y ago
It happens that a woman is willing to forfeit her championship rights because she does not want to be forced to dress in a way just because she is a woman. I gather that is big news.
- mcguire 10y ago
  One wonders if she would also boycott a tournament in France because she could not wear a scarf there?
  - pfortuny 10y ago
    I do not know. But what she is doing now is just newsworthy, is it not?
  - Chris2048 10y ago
    Can men wear scarfes?
Chris2048 10y ago
> symbol for fear of a religion > clothing is alien > a religion that's alien to them > representation of fear of the unknown Maybe. Maybe people dislike it due to fear, fear of terrorism, and the alien, unknown religion. But it's also a sign of oppression. I don't fear the religion that oppresses women (I'm not oppressed myself), but that doesn't i don't care. It it "alien"? yes, sort of, but also no - women were oppressed in the west too. Does this matter? Unless by "alien" you mean either, I reject Islam only because I am not familiar with it, or if I was familiar with it I may tolerate it more I'd have to disagree; Are victims of abuse more tolerant of abuse? > Women in the west must cover their breasts Not true, there are places in the west this isn't the case, and if it's changing it can be in either direction. Also the reasoning is usually different, which is why mixed nude beaches still exit even in places you cannot be nude in public, i.e. you can do it with other consenting adults, just not in public where we cannot assume to have the consent of everyone - Does Islam allow this? No. > ...other serious places women must cover more of their bodies... And in a nightclub, you might have to dress smart and wear clothes, and why would you wear a bikini in a church?; These aren't public spaces. And since when were religions the voices of reason? You can opt out of any religion in the west, big differences. > In India that once (as still) has a strong caste system, acid attacks and terrible sexual violence against women (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Delhi_gang_rape https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Delhi_gang_rape among others) > And in the West, every woman's clothing is apparently fair game for everyone else's opinions Uh, yes, freedom of speech/expression; You are also free to ignore those opinions, and have you own. Where is the problem? > Note how everyone likes to tell women what they can wear. By everyone, you mean the handful of examples above, most of which are contextual, not restricted to clothing, and not restricted to women. Wearing a mankini to church may also be "frowned upon".
- hackuser 10y ago
  > But it's also a sign of oppression. It's a sign to you of oppression, but some women prefer to wear it. I see women in the U.S. wearing it. If women are forced to wear it, that's a problem; that is oppression. It's not the clothing, it's the freedom that matters. When you bring up exceptions and complexities in social norms in the West, realize that other cultures are just as complex in their rules. We're just not there to see it.
mr_pink 10y ago
> In large part it's a symbol for fear of a religion, Islam. Weird reaction to an article about a non-Muslim woman who does not want to subject herself to medieval oppressive practices (let's not kid ourselves what Hijabs and Burqas really are) in order to participate in an international sports competition.
vacri 10y ago
If you're going to be that disingenuous, men are told what to wear as well. No boardroom meetings wearing only jogging shorts, no funerals wearing flip-flops. I grew up with a lesbian single mother during the tail end of first-wave feminism and the start of the second, so I've seen a lot of the struggles up close. It really bothers me that in the attempt to be inclusive people of muslim backgrounds, the modern progressive tends to ignore the rampant sexism in Islam. Yes, there is still a mismatch in the west between the genders, but it's much less extreme - for example, nowhere in the western world is there anything like official morality police. Women in the western world have considerably more freedom to wear whatever they like, and while bikinis are frowned on in the workplace (so are speedos, by the way), women can still wear bikinis elsewhere, out in public. The government doesn't penalise them for wearing a bikini down Main Street, and droves of women do just that, weather permitting. In some places in the west, it's legal to go topless in public as well - like NYC. Whereas before first-wave feminism, it was considered shameful to be seen in public if you were pregnant. The west is getting better and better at getting rid of these taboos. The islamic world is not - check out photos of Iran before the revolution, and there's plenty of muslim women without head coverings. To suggest that the issue boils down to simply where you draw the line on clothing is really disingenuous.
hospes 10y ago
>> Social norms and rules exist everywhere for clothing, especially for women. In this case it is not a social norm it is a law. For breaking law you can be prosecuted and/or imprisoned, for breaking social norms you cannot. Social norms and laws are two different things, your comparison is extremely misleading. To make it completely clear why your comparison is misleading look at following example: In some Muslim countries you can be executed for leaving Islam and it is not a social norm, it is a law and part of criminal code they have. Now imagine someone from conservative Christian family (let's say in US) changing their religion. They most probably will be judged by their families and some peers, but no one can prosecute them for that. Enforcing by law certain group or minorities wear certain clothing is a definition of oppression. If there is no choice left, that is an oppression, there is nothing to discuss here really.

Nursie 10y ago

Ah yes, moral relativism exists therefore fining, imprisoning, beating and even raping women who don't comply with clothing requirements is just fine, as that's their culture and we generally insist women don't go topless.

hackuser 10y ago
> imprisoning, beating and even raping women who don't comply with clothing requirements is just fine Something you said, not me. It's a pretty inflammatory statement, so could you be specific about who does that and how often? Certainly women are assaulted - mostly by men - in many countries for violating social norms about their bodies. A big part of the women's rights revolution in the U.S. was taking control of that: Women decide what they can wear (bikinis), when to have sex (birth control and sexual assault laws), when to get pregnant (birth control), when not to (abortion), when they can be touched and commented on (sexual harassment). Before, it was a bunch of men telling women what they could or couldn't do with their own bodies. IMO, the faster that principle of basic self-determination (applied in whatever ways the local women want) spreads around the world the better, including Iran but many other countries and cultures too, and the U.S. and Europe have a ways to go themselves. As one example, some online communities in those countries (not HN but known here) encourage the abuse of women.
- ethanbond 10y ago
  So... what's your point? We all know the job isn't finished. It probably never will be. This is one woman who is attempting to spread those rights faster, and your commentary is limited to "well shucks maybe imprisoning women for driving is just their twist on not allowing people to go to church in bikinis!" Besides the fact that, in the US, there certainly are churches or places of worship in which you're allowed to wear whatever the hell you want.
  - hackuser 10y ago
    > your commentary is limited to "well shucks maybe imprisoning women for driving is just their twist on not allowing people to go to church in bikinis!" Again, I didn't say that, you did. Perhaps quote something I did say. Regarding your statement, I'll repeat what I said above: It's a pretty inflammatory statement, so could you be specific about who does that and how often?
    - ethanbond 10y ago
      Do you live under a rock? How about Iran (the country in question) arresting women for showing hair (the problem in question) on Instagram. The problem with trying to quote you directly is that you actually aren't saying anything of substance. You're simply being an apologist who apparently can't muster up the courage to even take a stance on way or the other. You're just offering some good old PR hedging for an oppressive regime and trying to neuter the discussion with vague allusions to moral relativism. I'll ask again, what exactly are you trying to say? As it stands now, you're bogging down an important conversation that needs to happen with half-baked apologism. https://www.google.com/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iranian-women-arrested-for-posting-vulgar-photos-on-instagram-without-wearing-headscarves-a7033236.html%3famp?client=safari https://www.google.com/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...
      - DanBC 10y ago
        The claim was not "women are arrested for not wearing the hijab" (and everyone agrees that it's wrong to arrest people for clothing). The claim was "women are arrested, beaten, raped, murdered for not wearing the hijab". Is that true?
DanBC 10y ago
Obviously laws about clothing are wrong. Do you have any evidence that women are raped for not wearing the hijab? And is that happening any more than in the "enlightened Christian" countries, such as the US where people are also raped and murdered for the who they are? http://www.rrsonline.org/?page_id=944 http://www.rrsonline.org/?page_id=944 eg >> Most studies reveal that approximately 50% of transgender people experience sexual violence at some point in their lifetime.48 >> The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs reports that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer people were three times more likely to report sexual violence and/or harassment compared to heterosexual people who reported to NCAVP in 2010.49 Surveys regularly show that people think the victims of violent sexual crime are partly to blame if they didn't fight back, or if they were in "the wrong place", or if they were intoxicated.
- frozenport 10y ago
  There are numerous authorities on Islam who so say it's "okay" to rape women that don't meet their cultural norms (even if they don't live in their culture). Perhaps OP is referring to this incident http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/180393/muslim-imam-claims-women-who-dont-wear-hijabs-are-daniel-greenfield http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/180393/muslim-imam-claims-...
  - hackuser 10y ago
    There are people everywhere that say it and in poorer countries, I believe, that and other sanctioned violence generally is more common. I'd have to see some data to believe it's more than another ugly rumor, the kind that go with widespread prejudice, that such things are more common in Muslim communities. Certainly, these days, almost anything bad that can be associated with Islam is covered and is spun that way. I would request a different cite than FrontPage Mag, which appears to put a large banner at the top of every page saying 'Inside every liberal is a totalitarian screaming to get out'.
    - Chris2048 10y ago
      There is a big difference between a comment like that from some you-tube troll, and from a religious leader or imam/cleric.

LoSboccacc 10y ago

western culture is the only one that tend to respect foreign customs, while the reverse situation to happen is very rare. and there is a reason for that.

hackuser 10y ago
Westerners like to think that, but it's not true in my experience. Even in the multicultural U.S., think of the reception of every immigrant group: All were hated. Germans, Italians, Africans (EDIT: not that I'm suggesting they were ordinary, willing immigrants), Catholics, now Latinos ... Think of the attitude toward hajibs and Muslims in the U.S. and Europe - hardly accepting! Anyway, we're making very broad, baseless statements about the opinions of hundreds of millions of people. People in my own family don't even agree on these issues.
- vacri 10y ago
  And yet Europe has the Schengen area, where people are allowed to travel without requiring documentation, from Portugal to the far north of Sweden, despite some pretty different cultures. Where else in the world is there anything like Schengen? There's this massive myth that Europe is all one culture, and it's not (you may even have heard about a sizable war in the past century that was predicated on cultural differences).
  - hackuser 10y ago
    All countries have a variety of cultures. The U.S. has Alabama, New York City, Utah, Hawaii, the Bay Area, etc. You can always find a way to split people and set them against each other. There's the West; Europe and other Western nations; the UK and other countries; England, Scotland and Wales; London and the rest of England; different parts of London; different religions and ethnicities, the punks and the mods, etc, ad infinitum. But I don't see any purpose to that. You also can unite people and get great things done together, as 13 very different colonies did in 1789. Why choose fighting with that alternative? > you may even have heard about a sizable war in the past century that was predicated on cultural differences I disagree. The cause of the war was one country trying to conquer the other ones. And each side was composed of countries of different cultures and languages. Germany, Japan and Italy; and the U.S., Russia, France, China, etc. on the other side. And in fact, the EU was created to prevent another war; togetherness has succeeded: The idea of war inside the EU is now absurd.

legulere 10y ago

Also interesting to note, is that headscarf practices in Iran predate Islam by around a thousand years and that had an influence into Islam. Wikipedia has a great overview over the headscarf in Iran: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab_by_country#Iran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab_by_country#Iran

hackuser 10y ago
With respect, do you happen to know how accurate Wikipedia's article is? Especially on hot-button issues, I don't trust them without outside corroboration.
jules 10y ago
There is a very direct link between the mandatory headscarf law and Islam. It was not mandatory in Iran before Khomeini came to power.

solutionyogi 10y ago

Your point about different social norms and rules is well taken. However, social norms are one thing and state enforced law is a different ball game. A month ago, I went to Europe and my date had to wrap a scarf around her waist to visit a church (she was wearing shorts). That is totally cool. It's private property and they can set the rules as they please. But in public, women are free to wear what they want. On a side note: I am from India and I don't know where you got this idea that women has to cover themselves from neck to wrists to ankles (not even the villages, see: https://www.google.com/search?q=indian+village+women&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiC2rLupcbPAhXKQD4KHZw1AAAQ_AUICCgB&biw=1080&bih=1795 https://www.google.com/search?q=indian+village+women&source=...). Yes, certain Muslim population do wear hijab/niqab.

hackuser 10y ago
> I went to Europe ... in public, women are free to wear what they want. In many places it is now state-enforced law that women cannot cover their heads, faces, and/or wear hajibs/etc. But despite that serious problem, I agree there is far more freedom in Europe. My point is that people see the clothing as threatening; they are obsessed with what it symbolizes. I agree that the serious question is not clothing but women's freedom to wear generally what they want (among many other freedoms). > I am from India and I don't know where you got this idea that women has to cover themselves from neck to wrists to ankles That's very interesting to me. I certainly don't have your experience and knowledge, but I've been to India. Before going we were told that was the social norm, and when we were there, mostly cities in northern India including Delhi, that's what we observed. When we'd see a western woman in a tank top and shorts, she would stand out dramatically. Honest question: How did I misunderstand what I saw?
- solutionyogi 10y ago
  I am very surprised that you had that experience in metropolitan city like Delhi. What were the women wearing? I don't even know what kind of dress women will have to wear which covers theirs wrists and ankles. Here's what you will find Indian women wearing in day to day life: 1. Educated, middle class: Salwaar Kameez, Jeans/Top, Skirt/Top. 2. Older or more conservative women: Sari. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sari https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sari Even Sari exposes a women's midriff and her hands. Do you have any photo of the outfit that you are talking about?

EliRivers 10y ago

Note how everyone likes to tell women what they can wear. Isn't the problem that some people like to tell women what they can't wear?

byuu 10y ago
The problem is both, and it's really tiring seeing each side deride the other without getting the hypocrisy. You have Iran saying they have to wear the Hijab, and France saying they can't wear the Burqa/Niqab. How about both governments and religions let women make their own damned choices?
- LanceH 10y ago
  They can go to a soccer game in France, though.

pfortuny 10y ago

It happens that a woman is willing to forfeit her championship rights because she does not want to be forced to dress in a way just because she is a woman. I gather that is big news.

mcguire 10y ago
One wonders if she would also boycott a tournament in France because she could not wear a scarf there?
- pfortuny 10y ago
  I do not know. But what she is doing now is just newsworthy, is it not?
- Chris2048 10y ago
  Can men wear scarfes?

Chris2048 10y ago

> symbol for fear of a religion > clothing is alien > a religion that's alien to them > representation of fear of the unknown Maybe. Maybe people dislike it due to fear, fear of terrorism, and the alien, unknown religion. But it's also a sign of oppression. I don't fear the religion that oppresses women (I'm not oppressed myself), but that doesn't i don't care. It it "alien"? yes, sort of, but also no - women were oppressed in the west too. Does this matter? Unless by "alien" you mean either, I reject Islam only because I am not familiar with it, or if I was familiar with it I may tolerate it more I'd have to disagree; Are victims of abuse more tolerant of abuse? > Women in the west must cover their breasts Not true, there are places in the west this isn't the case, and if it's changing it can be in either direction. Also the reasoning is usually different, which is why mixed nude beaches still exit even in places you cannot be nude in public, i.e. you can do it with other consenting adults, just not in public where we cannot assume to have the consent of everyone - Does Islam allow this? No. > ...other serious places women must cover more of their bodies... And in a nightclub, you might have to dress smart and wear clothes, and why would you wear a bikini in a church?; These aren't public spaces. And since when were religions the voices of reason? You can opt out of any religion in the west, big differences. > In India that once (as still) has a strong caste system, acid attacks and terrible sexual violence against women (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Delhi_gang_rape https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Delhi_gang_rape among others) > And in the West, every woman's clothing is apparently fair game for everyone else's opinions Uh, yes, freedom of speech/expression; You are also free to ignore those opinions, and have you own. Where is the problem? > Note how everyone likes to tell women what they can wear. By everyone, you mean the handful of examples above, most of which are contextual, not restricted to clothing, and not restricted to women. Wearing a mankini to church may also be "frowned upon".

hackuser 10y ago
> But it's also a sign of oppression. It's a sign to you of oppression, but some women prefer to wear it. I see women in the U.S. wearing it. If women are forced to wear it, that's a problem; that is oppression. It's not the clothing, it's the freedom that matters. When you bring up exceptions and complexities in social norms in the West, realize that other cultures are just as complex in their rules. We're just not there to see it.

mr_pink 10y ago

> In large part it's a symbol for fear of a religion, Islam. Weird reaction to an article about a non-Muslim woman who does not want to subject herself to medieval oppressive practices (let's not kid ourselves what Hijabs and Burqas really are) in order to participate in an international sports competition.

vacri 10y ago

If you're going to be that disingenuous, men are told what to wear as well. No boardroom meetings wearing only jogging shorts, no funerals wearing flip-flops. I grew up with a lesbian single mother during the tail end of first-wave feminism and the start of the second, so I've seen a lot of the struggles up close. It really bothers me that in the attempt to be inclusive people of muslim backgrounds, the modern progressive tends to ignore the rampant sexism in Islam. Yes, there is still a mismatch in the west between the genders, but it's much less extreme - for example, nowhere in the western world is there anything like official morality police. Women in the western world have considerably more freedom to wear whatever they like, and while bikinis are frowned on in the workplace (so are speedos, by the way), women can still wear bikinis elsewhere, out in public. The government doesn't penalise them for wearing a bikini down Main Street, and droves of women do just that, weather permitting. In some places in the west, it's legal to go topless in public as well - like NYC. Whereas before first-wave feminism, it was considered shameful to be seen in public if you were pregnant. The west is getting better and better at getting rid of these taboos. The islamic world is not - check out photos of Iran before the revolution, and there's plenty of muslim women without head coverings. To suggest that the issue boils down to simply where you draw the line on clothing is really disingenuous.

hospes 10y ago

>> Social norms and rules exist everywhere for clothing, especially for women. In this case it is not a social norm it is a law. For breaking law you can be prosecuted and/or imprisoned, for breaking social norms you cannot. Social norms and laws are two different things, your comparison is extremely misleading. To make it completely clear why your comparison is misleading look at following example: In some Muslim countries you can be executed for leaving Islam and it is not a social norm, it is a law and part of criminal code they have. Now imagine someone from conservative Christian family (let's say in US) changing their religion. They most probably will be judged by their families and some peers, but no one can prosecute them for that. Enforcing by law certain group or minorities wear certain clothing is a definition of oppression. If there is no choice left, that is an oppression, there is nothing to discuss here really.