Comments (3)

By Katie Kish, October 20, 2009 10:20 am

“In our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity,”

My hero, Tarek Fatah, appeared on Coren fighting for his cause on behalf of the Muslim Canadian Congress:

Tarek is definitely one man who can hold his own in front of anyone in the world. …The bearded guy he’s with is rude, and ignorant.

Anyway, as much as I respect Tarek I’m really torn on this issue. The biggest argument I have against it is that it is a restriction on religious freedom, which I wouldn’t necessarily condone under any circumstance. But on that note….

Defenders of the burka contend that the wearing of a face-mask by Muslim women is protected by our Charter’s right to religious freedom. But such arguments are premised on the myth that a face-mask for women is a necessary part of religiously prescribed Islamic attire.

There is no requirement in Islam for Muslim women to cover their face. Rather, the practice reflects a mode of male control over women.

…So is it oppressive to have them wear, or not to give them the option to wear it? Is it a matter of public safety? Is Canada disguising an unnecessary tradition as a triumph of liberalism and individualism? Why is this one religious tradition that people want to protect in Canada? We don’t protect all other religious traditions like the sword that shiks are supposed to wear, or polygamy or no shopping on Sundays… Could this just be a slippery slope? There are plenty of other religions in Canada that require the wearing of certain garbs, none of them do a full face cover… but the amish women are supposed to dress modestly and in those ugly dresses, and jews have to wear that little hat.

I don’t know. What do you think?

UPDATES:

*comments that I find interesting from my twitter and facebook*

Joel Klinepeter:

An identity forced on them by the misogynistic tenets of Islam… These practices damage both the women and men by placing responsibility for the men upon the women… It’s a twisted system whereby if a woman is raped it must be her fault for provoking the men… It makes women culpable for a mans lack of self control…

The very fact that anyone can consider it a ‘cultural identity’ and not a tool of oppression (not trying to attack you Caleb, just venting) is a clear example of cultural relativity gone wrong… All cultures are not created equal and many should be actively discouraged. It’s the same cultural identity that forces genital mutilation upon women that keeps them cloaked behind the burka. It should also be noted that the intent of the burka is not to protect the women, but at it’s root is a way for men to control women and it all generally comes down to a double standard with regards to sex… A woman who doesn’t bleed on her wedding night (and there are more causes for that than just having already had sex) could face anything from being ostracized to losing her life, whereas there are no negative consequences in these cultures for a man who doesn’t stay a virgin until he is married…

No tool of oppression, whether it can be considered part of a ‘cultural identity’ or not, has any place in a modern society…

Andrew Kish

How is forcing someone not to wear something any different than forcing someone to wear something?

Regardless of why, forcing anyone to do anything constitutes a breach of freedom IMO.

Joe Kirkintilloch

If an ‘adult woman’ wants to have her hymen replaced, her breasts enlarged, her tongue pierced, her skin tattooed, or any other sort of surgery, assuming that she isn’t shown to be incompetent, then just like an adult man, she should be allowed to do so.

Its her body. Not mine.

Genital mutilation is most often done to children, who can’t consent, and to both male and female, although often what is done to females is more destructive.

If an adult man, wants to have the tip of his penis sliced off… that’s his business.
Children are a completely different issue. And I object to the mutilation of both.

Talk about false parallels.
Wearing a burka is not irreversible, it doesn’t involve knives or physical pain. It causes no physical damage, and as long as the person…. male or female… consents to wearing the silly thing, that is their business.

Your interpretation of what a piece of clothing means, is simply your opinion.

Kiran Mehdee

I was on the fence about this issue for quite a while. Until I researched, talked to people on both sides of the issue and understood that:
1: The Burqa is a symbol of rape-protection for the women who wear it. It’s the product of culture that believe if a woman is sexually harassed or raped, it’s her fault for existing. It’s a symbol of patriarchy and a woman’s internalized sense of patriarchy.
2: Islam the religion itself does not actually mandate face covering, it mandates “modesty” and the covering of breasts. That is if you believe in that religion.
3: Face covering burqas are increasingly being used by criminals to rob banks and stores. (news stories have come out of England and Canada and the US about this).
4: Face covering is a public safety issue. Like we don’t allow people wearing ninja masks or ski masks and stockings to cover their faces when they are in public places like govt buildings, airports, banks, parks, shools, etc., the face covering of the burqa falls under the same category as a way for the covered person to conceal his or her identity from everyone else around. In cases of criminal prosecuation, this can mean witness and perpetrators of crimes couldn’t be identified if their faces were covered.
5: Women mostly wear these garments because they were raised from birth to think their bodies belong to their husbands only. This sense of ownership over a woman’s body by the man in her life (father, husband, brother, son) is the essence of patriarchy and the motivation behind “honor killings”. So, while patriarchy and the honour culture is not going to go away if burqas go away, as a society we need to decide if we’re willing to incorporate those things in or root those anti-human-rights ideas out, one step at a time.
6: Some of the loudest voices against burqa usage are coming from muslims themselves including Muslim women like Mona Eltahawy (US), Jobeda Ali (UK), Fadela Amara (France), and Muslim men like Tarek Fatah (Canada) and even Egypt’s highest cleric Sheikh Mohamed Tantawi.
7: Defenders of the burqa often claim it is the “right” of a woman to wear whatever she wants, as though by wearing a burqa, a woman is showing off how liberated she is. In truth, the Burqa is a garment worn by women who are enslaved either socially or internally to an ideology that treats them as nothing but the property of their masters (husbands/fathers). How this garment seems to the mind of a cultural relativist as a symbol of women’s liberation is confounding for those of us who are from Muslim cultures and would like to enjoy the same freedoms and opportunities as those liberals who purport to want to “protect” our cultural practices regardless of how misogynist and discriminatory.

Comments (9)

By Katie Kish, July 14, 2008 4:15 am

Ian wrote a post recently claiming that those of us who want to talk with religious folks might just be hypocrites. I can most definitely see his point – but I think his point is wrong and that comparing religious people to child molestors is a pretty disgusting and unfair way to make a point.

I agree that the loud and proud atheists have done a great job at getting atheism on the front lines. Dawkins at al have been very effective in making atheism more “main stream” and well known. However, this is where mine and Ian’s opinions differ – greatly.

In my eyes, if anyone is a hypocrite it are those who are like Dawkins et al. So many flaming atheists claim that religion is closed minded and detrimental to the well being of individuals. However – a lot of these atheists are just as closed minded as the christians/jews/muslims/whatever that they’re attempting to stand up against. It’s hypocritcal to stand so firmly against something because you think it’s haulting people’s lives and ability to live their lives in the way you think they should be living it.

Ian says this

If you call yourself an atheist and believe that many religious beliefs are down right wacky

I do think religion is pretty wacky. I think it’s pretty silly to believe in most religious things. However – I also see that not everyone thinks like that. I see that my mom finds comfort and love in her religion, and I’m curious about it. What makes her believe? What does she cling onto? What would make her stop believing? Is she upset that I don’t believe?

How else am I supposed to fill my curiosity about something like religion without talking to those who are religious. The difference between this and a child molestor is that a child molester is breaking the law and doing something that I know is fundamentally unethical and disgusting. Being religious isn’t fundamentally unethical and disgusting. If a particular religion did advocate child molesting, or killing people, or something cultish – then yeah, I absolutely 100% wouldn’t give them my time of day – that’s why you’ll pretty much never see anything about scientology on my blog.

I think Ian is looking at it from a very narrow view. Not all atheists think that religious people are a waste of space or “wacky”. Some of us are genuinely curious about the sociology behind religion. I want to know everything about what they’re thinking. I don’t think it’s fair to mock their religious ideologies or to tell them that they’re “wrong” or “stupid” for believing what they do.

So yes, I do love what Hemant is doing over Dawkins et al. I would rather listent to Hemant speak about looking for more – than Dawkins talkabout already knowing everything.

Comments (5)

By Katie Kish, February 2, 2008 1:33 am

Trust me, it’s better than the original one I had picked out….
Who am I to say what liberates a woman? I personally don’t have the right to tell a woman that what she is doing isn’t liberation. However… the following is just a sort of “liberation” that I find counterproductive.

Women in Islam can’t show skin. We’ve all seen the burqua debates that have spread like wildfire online – is it oppressive? or do they like it? is it that bad? blah blah blah? The fact is -women wear them, and some women don’t. Some men think it is sinful, wrong, shameful and disgusting when women don’t wear them.

So, a group of Islamic women had a fashion show where they skimped down to bikinis and mini skirts to show their liberation from Islam. They claimed it was a fantastic way to show that they can still be Islamic while strutting their stuff and showing off their ankles. They also appeared in some traditional Islamic clothing, just more “fashionable” then plain black clothes and less than lovely burquas.

One side of me definitely screams “good for them”. If women don’t want to dress like they live centuries ago – all the power to them. I think it is fantastic to modernize life and religion to fit the world. However – did they have to do it with a fashion show? Judges and all?

Can a beauty pageant that perpetuates sexism and stereotypes really be an effective way to display feminism and liberation to those who are told to be covered up?

I say no. Fashion shows, beauty pageants and the like objectify women. When people see the women strutting up and down the run way they don’t think “wow, she’s so liberated” or “wow, what a brain she must have”. It is putting beauty over brains.

Obviously these women have enough brains to realize that they’re being oppressed and that things aren’t equal in their religion. They know this enough to do something about it. But I personally don’t think it was an overly good way to display their feelings. It is normalizing hypers sexuality in a not overly sexual religion.

I fell weird writing about this as a westernized, obviously liberated and free woman. I can’t feel right oppressing their way of breaking from the cultural barriers that they’ve felt confined in. Just… it doesn’t seem “right”… I guess.

This all spawned from my “I Support Tarek Fatah” group that got me the boot from facebook. Some woman sent me a message telling me not to support Tarek because he didn’t support this beauty pageant (which I had never previously heard of, and still can’t find a relevant link to) and thus he must be a horrible person. The girl flipped out when I told her I didn’t support beauty pageants either… I tried to explain why to her, but she told me that I was exercising my white privilege, so I stopped messaging her.

Anyway, I just felt like writing about it, maybe someone has an opinion that will make me see what is so great about having a sexist show to fight sexism. … I just don’t get it.

Comments (3)

By Katie Kish, April 18, 2007 4:39 am

Gordo has posted a long post about Iraq agencies being in some desperate need. He links to articles about just how bad the situation is.

Malnutrition rates in children under five have almost doubled since the US-led invasion – to nearly 8% by the end of last year, it says.

Some 17,000 children die every day from hunger-related diseases, the report claims, calling the situation a scandal in a world that is richer than ever before.

“The silent daily massacre by hunger is a form of murder,” Mr Ziegler said. “It must be battled and eliminated.”

As you probably know, situations can’t get better without help. …And help usually means money. Check out the following links that Gordo has provided to see where you can help.

Mark of Gorilla’s Guides provides links to other personal accounts and to facts and figures that describe the unfolding humanitarian crisis in Iraq. He also provides information on how you can help the relief organizations that are now saving so many lives, information that I’ve reproduced here. Remember, every bit helps, and by spreading the word to your family and friends, you can make a real difference:

International Committee of the Red Cross/Crescent/Crystal

To ensure that your donation goes to Iraq, choose the “Iraq” program rather than one of the more generalized programs.

International Catholic Migration Commission

This page gives instructions for sending a check. To ensure that your donation goes to Iraq, write “Iraq-icmc” on your check.

Muslim Aid

War Child

World Vision

It’s such a strange feeling to know that I’m in such a privileged position – but that I can’t really do anything. Do what you can to help. A little bit of money can go an extremely long way.

Also, on a completely unrelated note, but also a call for help (and also from Gordo) Kevin from Slant Truth is sending out a plea for information on his brother’s where-a-bouts. His name is Michael Patrick Vaughn. And Kevin thinks he may be on the west coast – California area… I know I have readers from that area – and one of you is a cop… so if any of you hear anything, know anything… anything anything let Kevin know. Its a scary world.

Comments (4)

By Katie Kish, February 4, 2007 3:20 pm

Why is it that Muslim woman have become a symbol to the western world of all
that the word oppression means? Whether this is a tool of propaganda used by those
who want Islam to remain “the other�, as the epitome of terrorism and
aggression is not up for much debate. Muslim women were polled and it was found
that they did not find themselves to be conditioned to oppression as it is made
out in Western countries, and that it is not their religion keeping them from
holding government positions and from voting but economic and political
instability from pressures of war and international bullshit.

Veiling had not been quoted as being a form of oppression to them. In the
past few years we have seen cases of veiling being banned or contested in the Netherland, France and England…etc
This topic pisses me off… why? Western feminists and people feel as though it
is their duty to liberalize these women from their veil, that this will release
them from their shackles of oppression and show them the real world where they
can be seen as equal.

There are certainly aspects to the veil that would make one
consider it a form of oppression and that lead to the suggestion that these
woman are living in a patriarchal cultural. A country where the veil is
required sort of says something about the men that are living there too; they
are too animalistic to control their sexual urges so the women must be covered.
This also alludes to the idea that men are more deserving of public positions,
so instead of removing those which can not control their urges the woman is
covered instead. Sort of like that gym class that took the girl out of it
instead of the guys that were abusing her. Anyway, yeah the veil is sort of
shitty from a western perspective – and I know I’m pretty late on this post
since all the veil shit happened last year, but the Quebec incident with the
town saying “no face coverings except on Halloween� reminded me of it all.

Western feminists criticize the veil as it is used to hide the
woman from the world, and that it is coving up a body for which we should all
be proud of because being a woman is a really fantastic thing. However, banning
the veil is just silly. Lets say the veil was banned here in good ‘ol

Victoria

… do you think
we’re going to start seeing the free and liberated faces of all the Islamic
women? Eff no. We’re going to see less Islamic women because they’re going to
stay cooped up in their own homes. A “liberation� law isn’t going to make the
ladies dump their religion.

For Westerners to think they have any more freedom over how
they dress as opposed to Islamic women is just flat out stupid. I can’t walk
around in what ever I want where ever I want when ever I want. I have to dress
the right way for class… and when I’m around my apartment, and when going to
funerals or weddings… It’s all culturally set. It’s stupid to think that just
because a woman is following a religious belief to wear a veil actually means
she is less capable of independent thought and intelligence. We’re all trapped
in some sort of social order of how to look, dress and act.

So how about this, when it becomes acceptable for a man to
wear a dress, when androgyny becomes so normal that we don’t even notice, when
a hooker can walk down the street in her work outfit, when it’s alright for a
woman to be fat, when it’s alright for a guy to be gay and when it’s perfectly
fine and normal for me to wear a tux and my boyfriend to wear a dress to prom
THEN we can start harping on the fact that these women are in a religion that
asks them to veil. Because really, all of those people that I mentioned before
are already prisoners in their own bodies because they can’t express who they
want to be.

When the veil is banned it is only going to become
problematic for the women who are not allowed to be wearing it as they end up
combating an internal struggle between modern life and their religious beliefs.
And in all reality it is another law that is being placed over women telling
them what they can not wear. It brings woman back to the status of a symbol
rather than the autonomous human being.

Before pointing figures and saying feminists are more
liberalized than muslim women there has to be a realization to the fact that
these feminists are stereotyping and often misrepresenting Islamic women. They
are falling into the least commendable whole of polarizing Islamic women with
the “them� vs “us� attitude. Islamic women are given the portrayal of a group of
people in the East, or Third world who are irrational, disordered,
overpopulated and unable to make decisions for themselves. It is a completely
simplistic view of them.

Those arguing for the liberation of Islamic women are
marginalizing the Islamic religion. Who are we to be saying that a woman should
or should not be following the laws and rules of Islam because they don’t
adhere to the Western ideal of a free woman? Westerners tend to portray the
idea that the only path to true female emancipation is through the common
secular feminist theories and ways of life. The reality of it is, the veil does
not consume a woman, and they are still professional and responsible people
even behind a veil.

Western media creates a bias telling the public that the women
are forced to wear the veil. It is easy to use this as a form of propaganda to
the public because there is little sensitivity to Muslims in general right now
because of the conflicts that we are facing every day. Also little is known
about the actual culture to every day citizens of the West, just what the media
shows us, and what the media is showing us is that the veil is a form of
oppression and evil.

There are plenty of cases of this – if you don’t believe
me, feel free to question it in the comment thread. It’s all just another way
to convince the public that there is a war on terror and human rights that
needs to be fought, instead of the veil symbolizing ones faith in their
religion and a practice of modesty. The veiling bans and uproar are a symbol of
the West’s intolerance for those that are not like them… “them� who are holding
captive their gay communities, their women and those that seek peace.

/rant.