Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

It's not about the way it looks ,it's about freedom of choice!

When you have that freedom of choice, the next you'll see is that the majority who choose not to cover will eventually apply oppression and discrimination against those who want to follow religious procedures, so much so that they will not only disriminate against the headscraf but also against the quality/presense of your full outer garments as well...

Why is it that modesty in dress for Muslim men means shorts and t-shirts and swimming trunks with a naked chest? I saw tons of that in Dubai and elsewhere. Dad was in the pool with kids and Mom sat by the edge in her black tent. Then the couple in Montreal on a hot summer day where Dad and child an Mom were playing on the grass and he was in his shorts and t-shirt and she was completely covered in black cloth, though her face was showing. At our condo we have a Pakistani family and when they first moved in the Mom was mostly wearing long pants, short sleeved blouse and a loose head scarf (like what Benazir B. used to wear) For the last few months we see her only in long black robes and tight black head scarf now. We have no idea why she suddenly changed how she dresses. She never swims though - but the Dad and kids do and he wears a naked chest and swimming trunks and I've seen him in short sleeves and shorts. I guess those women are more pious and modest than those who don't cover their hair, or have the nerve to wear short sleeved shirts, or heaven forbid wear a sports swimsuit and gym attire for working out!

kanelli wrote:Why is it that modesty in dress for Muslim men means shorts and t-shirts and swimming trunks with a naked chest?

Try a simple experiment, take 10 women , making sure that they are also not particular about religion, Then ask them whether they would prefer to walk around topless, the sentiments you receive will answer your question.

Also the common fallacy among westerners that they are forced to wear such clothes and couldn't fathom the fact that most women actually choose to wear it. I'm not saying there arn't any who end up dipsticks who do and also some very conservative cultures that don't find it acceptable for a women to not cover up, one come to mind are the tribal regions of pakistan and afghanistan, but thats another issue altoghter. Maybe if you went and asked them they could tell you, but ofcourse the your instinct will tell you that she is lying out of fear or something.

I know a few women who did not wear the hijab but after migrating to the west they started to, no one forced them to and just found it more comfy.

I know now mel will come in with her example of the Iranian and Saudi religious police here but once again that has nothing to do with Islam. I know of women you could not force them not cover up in public not matter what.

Another example I can give of guys who got newly married and asked their wives if they could dress a bit "modern" but after a couple tries they just found it uncomfortable and reverted back.

So really its a choice even though no matter how many would wish and say that it wasn't.

Come on DDS. They are wearing it because they have been taught by males in their society that they are immodest if they don't.

I had a coworker who cracked down on his wife's clothing and stopped her from swimming after they were married. He was simply being possessive of his woman.

-- Thu Jan 06, 2011 9:16 pm --

zubber wrote:

kanelli wrote:Why is it that modesty in dress for Muslim men means shorts and t-shirts and swimming trunks with a naked chest?

Try a simple experiment, take 10 women , making sure that they are also not particular about religion, Then ask them whether they would prefer to walk around topless, the sentiments you receive will answer your question.

Nice try. Male chests are just as se.xy as female ones. Modest men who have have wives who cover should never bare their chests in public or expose the skin on their arms and legs. If it is good enough for their wife it should be good enough for them.

There is no freedom of choice for clothes in Islam! enough said!

K, These are just excuses! the bottom line is, they don't respect women, they don't think you have the ability to decide what is appropriate for you to wear! they want to interfere in all little aspects in your life!

Cover for women is mandatory in Islam, there is no other choice!

kanelli wrote:Nice try. Male chests are just as se.xy as female ones. Modest men who have have wives who cover should never bare their chests in public or expose the skin on their arms and legs. If it is good enough for their wife it should be good enough for them.

So you are telling me you have no qualms about walking around bare chested ? and that other women should also do the same ?

Hate to be repetetive K but

kanelli wrote:Come on DDS. They are wearing it because they have been taught by males in their society that they are immodest if they don't.

desertdudeshj wrote: but ofcourse the your instinct will tell you that she is lying out of fear or something.

Thats basically sums it up, also look back as little as 50 to 60 ish years and beyond how did women dress. Where they were all busting out in hot pants and tank tops ? Just because the norms of western society have changed rapidly you can't expect everyone else to also conform to the norms of it and also would be an unfair comparison IMHO.

And also a little drifting away from topic, that is also the crux of a lot of problems today. Comparing everything to the west and western society as if it was some kind of moral becon or guidline to set the bar.

Things would be a lot more easier if people from both sides got it across that people and cultures are different from different parts of the world and every culture will take its own time to evolve and not trying to impose ones values on others.

-- Thu Jan 06, 2011 10:02 pm --

melika969 wrote:Cover for women is mandatory in Islam, there is no other choice!

Mel not trying to be confortational at all but you make a lot of claims about Islam but hardly if ever back them up.

desertdudeshj wrote:

melika969 wrote:Cover for women is mandatory in Islam, there is no other choice!

Mel not trying to be confortational at all but you make a lot of claims about Islam but hardly if ever back them up.

Which claim I dodn't back on? You saying cover is not mandatory in Islam?
Even Berrin already mention the verse about it!

you want some evidence about differenced for men and women in Quran?
start with heritage, amount of heritage for girls is half of boys: 4:11, 4:176

Then we can go to the right of divorce, 2:231, 2:237, Quran always addresses men for the right of divorce.

what other claims I have to support?

The one I quoted

My wife just fell about laughing when I told her she has to obey me when it comes to what she wears.

Mel, have you heard the parable about the blind men and the elephant?



Cheers,
Shafique

desertdudeshj wrote:The one I quoted

Is about the hijab (cover):

desertdudeshj wrote:

melika969 wrote:Cover for women is mandatory in Islam, there is no other choice!

Mel not trying to be confortational at all but you make a lot of claims about Islam but hardly if ever back them up.

Berrin already answered that:
24:31:
"And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, their brothers' sons, their sisters' sons, their women, that which their right hands possess, or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed."

shafique wrote:My wife just fell about laughing when I told her she has to obey me when it comes to what she wears.

Mel, have you heard the parable about the blind men and the elephant?



Cheers,
Shafique

4:34:
"Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand."

Since the passages you mentioned are too long to paste I'll just link them and one can scroll down to the relevant passages themselves if they wish. In fact the opposite i'll let the original text do the talking

http://quran.com/2

Women are allowed to divorce which is know as khulah but in this case she has to return the "dowry" for lack of a better word here, just as same as a husband has to pay her that "dowry" if he hasn't paid it already if he wishes to divorce here and it is the womans right. In both cases both man and wife can dismiss the dowry if the want to. For example a wife can give up or forgive her "dowry" if the husband wants a divorce or if she wants to annul the marriage, but she has the complete right to demand it if she wishes. And that dowry can be any amount she wishes it to be as there is no minimum or maximum limit and is mentioned in the marriage contract.

However having said that Islam does discorage divorce and tries everything for a reconciliation first but if in the end the "out" option is given to both sexes

EDIT : Oops I seen a few beat me to it ...again ! lol

-- Thu Jan 06, 2011 10:53 pm --

melika969 wrote:24:31:
"And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, their brothers' sons, their sisters' sons, their women, that which their right hands possess, or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed."

Yes and where does it says you have to walk around looking like a tent ? No one is arguing that Islam does precribe dessing modestly for both men and women.

DDS, Ok the one you quoted was about cover, so now are you talking about cover or divorce?

I didnt give a link to a passage, I mentioned two verses of Quran, addressing men when talking about divorce! why don't you back up your statements with verses from quran?

melika969 wrote:DDS, Ok the one you quoted was about cover, so now are you talking about cover or divorce?

I didnt give a link to a passage, I mentioned two verses of Quran, addressing men when talking about divorce! why don't you back up your statements with verses from quran?

Fine addressing men, but talking about both men and women.( Actually its addressing niether to be precise but anyways for the sake of argument ) So what you really find offensive is that its addressing men and not women, although it talks about both their rights equally. Is that really it ? Seriously ?

What if the passage was addressing women, should I speak out and say its being anti male ??

Many places the Quran address both men and women for example, beileving men and women. Should the feminist still get offended that why wasn't it believing women and men instead ?

It is addressing men in divorce section, because in Quran the divorce is a right for men, not women. As you believe in Quran you should know that there is a fine purpose of using different pronouns.

So are we done with the one you quoted? Did you accept that cover is mandatory?

desertdudeshj wrote:

melika969 wrote:24:31:
"And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands' fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers, their brothers' sons, their sisters' sons, their women, that which their right hands possess, or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed."

Yes and where does it says you have to walk around looking like a tent ? No one is arguing that Islam does precribe dessing modestly for both men and women.

Who talked about the tent?! I said there are restrictions, and they are pretty tight! the only part that can be shown is face and hands from wrist.

No freedom of choice!

melika969 wrote: Quran the divorce is a right for men, not women.

No thats misinformation. Talaq is divorce for men while its called Khula for women

2: 229 (( Divorce may be (pronounced) twice, then keep (them) in good fellowship or let (them) go with kindness; and it is not lawful for you to take any part of what you have given them, unless both fear that they cannot keep within the limits of Allah; then if you fear that they cannot keep within the limits of Allah, there is no blame on them for what she gives up to become free thereby. These are the limits of Allah, so do not exceed them and whoever exceeds the limits of Allah these it is that are the unjust ))

i.e a woman is just as much as right to divorce as man

melika969 wrote:So are we done with the one you quoted? Did you accept that cover is mandatory?

Depends on what you mean by cover : Dressing in a tent or modestly

-- Thu Jan 06, 2011 11:39 pm --

melika969 wrote:Who talked about the tent?! I said there are restrictions, and they are pretty tight! the only part that can be shown is face and hands from wrist.

No freedom of choice!

That is the Irani and saudi version. The verse says to cover other than what is natrually visible. also does not prescribe the type of dress, colour, lenght etc etc.

desertdudeshj wrote:

melika969 wrote: Quran the divorce is a right for men, not women.

No thats misinformation. Talaq is divorce for men while its called Khula for women

2: 229 (( Divorce may be (pronounced) twice, then keep (them) in good fellowship or let (them) go with kindness; and it is not lawful for you to take any part of what you have given them, unless both fear that they cannot keep within the limits of Allah; then if you fear that they cannot keep within the limits of Allah, there is no blame on them for what she gives up to become free thereby. These are the limits of Allah, so do not exceed them and whoever exceeds the limits of Allah these it is that are the unjust ))

i.e a woman is just as much as right to divorce as man

you are getting it wrong. This verse is about two times divorce. In this chapter, the tree times divorce is being discussed and what is important here is after 3 times divorce the woman has to sleep with some other guy and then she can marry her first husband again.

What you indicated as bold, has nothing to add here, it doesnt say she has the right to divorce, it says she can give up properties, but still no right is included!
Where did you get the khula?! never heard of it! can u show it to me in Quran?
I m very surprised that you are a muslim and you dont know about right of divorce is for men.

Even in the verse 230 it starts with: if the husband divorced her for the third time, in the whole Quran it is talking about men divorcing women, not vice versa.

desertdudeshj wrote:

melika969 wrote:So are we done with the one you quoted? Did you accept that cover is mandatory?

Depends on what you mean by cover : Dressing in a tent or modestly

-- Thu Jan 06, 2011 11:39 pm --

melika969 wrote:Who talked about the tent?! I said there are restrictions, and they are pretty tight! the only part that can be shown is face and hands from wrist.

No freedom of choice!

That is the Irani and saudi version. The verse says to cover other than what is natrually visible. also does not prescribe the type of dress, colour, lenght etc etc.

I'm sorry but if covering whole body except for face and palms are modest to you, it's not the same to me and lots of other women. It is dull and direct interference in our personal choices.

Mel, the religious texts may say a woman is equally entitled, but the reality is that if she is completely financially depended on the husband as was the case in those days she is less likely to ask for divorce than the man - so there is a disproportionately high number of men asking than women. Then there is the social pressure not to divorce. Women bring shame to their family if they do it, but men can simply move along an find another bride. For women there so much more stigma about their modesty and honour than men - typical double standard.

-- Fri Jan 07, 2011 5:30 am --

zubber wrote:

kanelli wrote:Nice try. Male chests are just as se.xy as female ones. Modest men who have have wives who cover should never bare their chests in public or expose the skin on their arms and legs. If it is good enough for their wife it should be good enough for them.

So you are telling me you have no qualms about walking around bare chested ? and that other women should also do the same ?

No, I did not, but I think bare male chests and topless women should be reserved for tanning at the beach, not anywhere else in the general public. My point is that many Muslim men expect their women to cover almost 90% of their skin while they themselves walk around with arms and legs exposed and even their bare chests while their wife sits by the pool or seaside, unable to swim. Do you understand what I am saying?

kanelli wrote:Mel, the religious texts may say a woman is equally entitled, but the reality is that if she is completely financially depended on the husband as was the case in those days she is less likely to ask for divorce than the man - so there is a disproportionately high number of men asking than women. Then there is the social pressure not to divorce. Women bring shame to their family if they do it, but men can simply move along an find another bride. For women there so much more stigma about their modesty and honour than men - typical double standard.

Yes, describes western society from a little while ago perfectly.

Yes, it does. That doesn't negate the fact that is also applies to Muslim societies who have claimed that women have more rights in Islam than Christianity, but what is really done in practice?

kanelli wrote:Yes, it does. That doesn't negate the fact that is also applies to Muslim societies who have claimed that women have more rights in Islam than Christianity, but what is really done in practice?

And that is it right there. What Islam teaches and what the so called " Muslim Societies" practice are two different things. Without a doubt in Islam women have more rights than Christianity or even Judaism I think ( ? )

That's why I think religion is not valuable or relevant in my life.

Then each to his own and all power to you.

melika969 wrote:Maytbe those whites who converted to Islam are not that proud!

You make a good point Mel.
Anyone who 'converts' (well the truth of the matter is that they were not practicing religion to begin with, so didn't actually convert as such) is somewhat lost and insecure beforehand. The choice of religion is irrelevant. Islam is just the flavour of the month. In the 70's it was cults. In the 80's it was 6 day bike riders, In the 90's it was happy clappers. The naughties has been the decade of the moozie.

When I have my personal crisis I'll likely end up with a shaved head living in a cave, practicing Buddhist meditation

Same here Kanelli.