Our new blogger Kaveh Mousavi mentioned in a conversation the infuriating “arguments” he gets from fellow Iranians about the hijab. What are they? He listed them.
The first one: I say, I believe a woman should be able to have a choice in the matter of her own dress. They say, but, what if your own mother and your own sister chose to go on the street without the proper dressing code? This argument is repeated in all manners of sexual liberty, including porn. They are then genuinely amazed that I’m not convinced by this. They genuinely think that I would NEVER even consider letting my own relatives go out in the streets not covered up.
The second one is this: looking at a woman’s hair or body is a sin. Being turned on or being attracted to such things, also sin. Men have a “right” to walk in public without the danger of committing a sin. Women who go out in public with improper dressing code, they’re violating this right.
The third is that we’re all Muslims and Islam says this and therefore the social rules should be Islam’s rules.
Fascinating. Women who go out in public without being bagged up like rolls or newspapers or freshly ground coffee are violating men’s rights.
But what about women’s rights?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
……………………………………………………………………..what?
And those people have even more power than the elected president.
Men have a “right” to walk in public without the danger of committing a sin.
What’s to stop them from thinking naughty thoughts? Shouldn’t they be pithed or something?
Women who go out in public with improper dressing code, they’re violating this right.
Not to mention the earthquakes!
So teh Iranian men are unable to control themselves in the presence of women? If they can’t control themselves shouldn’t they be the ones restrained?
Funny thing, I was just looking at my RSS feed for the New Statesmen prior to reading this post and saw an article there titled “Animal Farm: the benefits of Castration”.
What’s to stop them from thinking naughty thoughts? Shouldn’t they be pithed or something?
I try to tell myself we should all always be nonviolent, but …, well …, (snigger), snort!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
If Allah is all-knowing wouldn’t he know that they were the kind of person to have impure thoughts anyway?
The argument from freedom of choice on the matter of her dress would be a whole lot more persuasive if it weren’t followed by an appeal to the horrible consequences of not dressing in a particular way.
Sorry to be a pain, but I wanted to click through to Kaveh Mousavi’s blog to read the OP referred to here and I couldn’t find which post it was in – does anyone have the direct link handy? Many thanks!
Oh, maybe I misunderstood – this was from an actual oral/aural conversation, not a post. Oops. There would be a good reason I can’t find it on the blog, then …
I’ve always wished that those men who want to be free “to walk in public without the danger of committing a sin” would just wear welder’s goggles or blinkers or both whenever they leave the house. Of course I realise it’s so much more convenient for them to massively restrict women’s lives than voluntarily – if considerably – inconvenience themselves.
Yes, sorry, that’s why I said “in a conversation” – so that people wouldn’t think I’d forgotten to link to a post (that doesn’t exist)!
The thing about the blinders v hijab/burqa of course is that men are people and women are not.
@opposablethumbs If you want, you can still click though my blog, maybe found the conversation somewhere (and increased my hits) *evil laughter*
This story reminds me of the christians here in the USA claiming that their “rights” are being denied by not being allowed to discriminate against homosexuals. Such a weird mindset.
Shouldn’t men also be bagged up to prevent sinful thoughts of women? Or the sinful thoughts of other men?
@ Kaveh Mousavi #11 – already was/am reading, and glad to have the opportunity to read you!
Don’t suppose you’d consider making the conversation referenced here into [part of] the subject of a post?