free forum make a forum for free message boards free forum hosting free phpbb forum phpbb create free forum

zatkins-weltman · Joined: 26 Nov 2011 Posts: 5

It seemed to me that Brooks assumed that the Veil was a sign of oppression. She didn't really understand it and figured that she needed to talk to women to really comprehend what it meant to the culture. The overall reading felt very confusing, mainly because of the contradictions. Some women talked about not wanting to wear the veil because it was a constraint, but the majority of women took it as part of their heritage and Islamic law. for many women, they felt uncomfortable and even "naked" to go out in the streets without a veil. Some women even believed that it was to differ themselves from the western women who were seen as "products of capitalism to be bought and sold" (110). In different places the women interpreted the meaning of the veil differently and I think they all bring it back to Islamic law. Because men don't have to wear such things or follow such strict codes, the law does seem unfair, but the women seem to believe in the importance (In different ways) of wearing such a veil, so is it prejudice to make them wear it if they feel such a comfort and need to wear it? in other word what is more important, the islamic law that started the trend, or the interpretation from the people who were oppressed by the law?

Eric von Hippel · Joined: 19 Oct 2010 Posts: 23

Thats a hard question to answer, actually i thin its one of the main questions the writer herself was asking. in my personal opinion i think that it it can be both an oppressive element as well as a personal choice. in some countries in the middle east it is a requirement that women cover themselves and can be arrested for not doing so, i think that form of religious representation is oppressive because it is forced and enforced with force. on the other hand n places like the U.A.E it is not uncommon to see people who are not covering themselves and following strict tradition, this may just be my western bias toward a country that has accepted and embraced western economic ideas and the culture that comes from them but i think that if given the choice it is not necessarily repressive.

in my reading i noticed tat she seemed fixated on finding the true suffering that women felt in the middle east, but why did she ignore the fact that her co worker said she chose it freely and liked it?

asmith · Joined: 04 Dec 2011 Posts: 3

i also found the reading a little fustraiting because she kept saying, "Something was going on here, and i derermined to try to understand it." Like there was some big mystery of why some women liked the veil and hijab, even though early on in the reading, her friend gave her all these explainations as to why. So like Eric i am also wondering whyshe kept ignoring that her friend chose it freely and gave her explainations as to why she enjoyed wearing them. For some reason Brooks had a hard time understanding that and it became confusing in the reading. To answer zach's question, i personally think that it is fine to wear the veil and/or hijab if the woman freely chooses to do so. We cannot forget the women weakening background of where the veil came from but i appreciate how some women have turned it into an empowerment symbol. The coworker/friend said early in the reading that when dealing with men "'They have to deal with my mind, not my body,'"

lchristakis2013 · Joined: 27 Nov 2011 Posts: 5

Eric, I think you made an important point when you said that for many women, covering themselves in accordance to muslim law is a personal choice. Sahar could have easily continued dressing and acting in a western style for the rest of her life. However, she decided to become a more devout muslim and follow Islamic dress codes without any outside influence (that we know of; i think it's safe to assume from the way the narrator described Sahar's decision that Sahar made that choice herself).

This topic is especially interesting when you consider the fact that France recently made it illegal to wear a burqa in a public place (this includes public schools) under the argument that the burqa is a "symbol of oppression against women." Many muslim women living in france countered that if they were making the choice to wear a burqa, without being forced by their husbands or another male figure, than they were not being oppressed by anyone. Their rebuttals mostly fell on deaf ears.

Rachel, if you are reading this, France's banning of the burqa is a fascinating and controversial topic that I would like to talk about further. Perhaps we could incorporate it into a seminar discussion?

Liam :d · Joined: 17 Feb 2011 Posts: 5

I agree, I think it is a personal choice that has taken on some oppressive elements. After all, the customs are dictated by Islamic law, which is part of the religion that these women practice. Now you can argue that religion is forced, seeing how closely tied to the government and overall society in countries such as Saudi Arabia, but ultimately its one’s own choice to worship and pray. There are punishments for not obeying the dress code, and that’s the oppressive aspect, but since it is part of the culture and religion isn’t customary to dress a certain way? Just as if you were Christian and went to church every Sunday, because it’s a part of participating in your religion. Except if you didn’t go you would be whipped by the authorities, yet you would still go either way. Brook’s friend Sahar is a good example, where she voluntarily chose to adere to Islamic culture.
I think also there’s a greater contrast between an American reporter and Islamic customs than there would be for woman already living in Saudi Arabia.

mijiawang · Joined: 04 Dec 2011 Posts: 24

It was very interesting for me that Sahar thought dressing modern was "imitating Western" and she wanted to "try something of their own". I found in the reading that a lot of women covered themselves not just for the Muslim law, it was more of a personal choice as Lysander mentioned before. But I think the other point I've never thought of before was that the women did not feel oppressed by covering themselves, instead they felt protected and safe.
I was confused in how the culture was respecting women. It sounds weird to me that the women thought restrictions (dress code, conversations, etc) to them was a natural thing "because women are different" and they did not feel oppressed.

Sam Gorple · Joined: 28 Nov 2011 Posts: 4

asldkajns;dnasdng; yo

Free Forum