Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (168990)	6/7/2006 6:43:21 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793759

Just to give some perspective. My grandmother never went out without her babushka. Unfortunately, I never asked why she wore it. When I was a teenager, I assumed it was to protect her hair-do. That's why I sometimes wore one. Of course, as a teenager, I was all about the hair-do. Why else would one do anything to one's head? <g> On reflection, I imagine she wore it from habit. What cultural reason there was for that habit developing in her culture, I have no clue. It might have had something to do with having to cover one's head in church.

To: Ilaine who wrote (168990)	6/7/2006 8:13:46 PM
From: frankw1900	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793759

The point I was trying to make, and having a lot of difficulty doing it, is that islamofascist terrorists have appropriated something which is either religious or cultural in nature and turned its use into a requirement of conformity with their ideology. In areas where they can get away with it, these extremists will even disfigure the faces of unveiled women. They have given wearing a chador or burkha a whole new meaning. Instead of their use being something in conformity with local standards of modesty, their use may be seen either as a symbol of submission to the perverted requirements of wahabbist or khomeniist extremists, or even as an explicit, triumphalist challenge. In this respect, it is becoming no different from wearing a swastika armband in 1930. My contention is that the burkha and chador in many places have become the symbol of a new, degenerate culture promoted actively by islamists. This is certainly the case, for example, in London, New York, Toronto and Tehran. In light of this I think Muslims who don't subscribe to the extremist islamist views might well reconsider whether or not they might veil themselves. Earlier in the discussion with Kumar, I posted the article by Marmaduke Pickthall and I chose it because it was written in 1927 and thus outside the developments of the last 50 years (although it was in part almost certainly written in response to Deobandist developments). I disagree with Pickthall on many things because I disagree with his basic premise that Islam is superior to everything else but I do think it's a very good article. muslimwomenstudies.com