Somali girl rebels against Hijab, throws it in the snow

[thefuturenow]

Saff,

 

I understand your point. Some of us are talking about "what should be" while you're addressing "what is." I also agree that "what is" is not acceptable. The moral and religious worth of an individual should not be reduced to a piece of cloth or the length of one's beard. The correct test is Taqwa and Allah (sw) knows best what is in the hearts.

 

However, I do not really follow what you're saying. So let me put it in the form of a question for sake of clarification.

 

Do you believe that the xijaab is an Islamically ordained modest dress for all individuals? If so, do you believe that it has been used to oppress and abuse women? If so, do you believe that an Islamically sanctioned societal practice should be abandoned in order to prevent this abuse?

 

OR

 

Do you believe that the xijaab is an optional form of "modest" dress?

[Guje]

magicbird;989041 wrote:

Haven't seen the video, but I can tell this child needs dhaqan celis. As for what she said about being Norwegian,

Somalis need to understand that there'll always be just a scummy Somali

. It doesn't matter how much you whitewash yourself, call yourself Ozzy or Mo, 'integrate' as much as you like, take off the hijab, adopt their liberal ways, they'll never 'see' or even notice you. As it states in the quran 'And the Jews and Christians will never be pleased with you, until you follow their religion.' Even then you'll never be their equal, and you'll always be remembered as the person with no principles.

And the other thing is nowadays hijab is basically just like an cimaamad. Hijab is meant to be for the whole body, so you could say some other girls ruined it for this one.

BS, you need your teeth knocked out for this grave insult. shame on you.

[Hawdian]

AfricaOwn;989047 wrote:

^^Sometimes I wonder if these obnoxious characters are like that in person or do they only feel empowered behind their cpu screen - is pathetic really.

+1

[burahadeer]

Iran and Saudi Arabia r oppressive regimes.There be much less niqab when people free and on their own will,just look at any muslim country that's not dictatorial.I been to few towns in Somaliland couple times last 10 yrs and to my surprise found out that niqab is disappearing.Also every women with niqab is not what you thought.Lot thm put on when they going to chat session or have date.It should be personal.

Kulu nafsi bimaa kasabat rahiintu.

Niqab surfaced last plus 20yrs among Somalis and already back to square one .Were we muslims before the niqab, i.e 1980!?

[burahadeer]

Iran and Saudi Arabia r oppressive regimes.There be much less niqab when people free and on their own will,just look at any muslim country that's not dictatorial.I been to few towns in Somaliland couple times last 10 yrs and to my surprise found out that niqab is disappearing.Also every women with niqab is not what you thought.Lot thm put on when they going to chat session or have date.It should be personal.

Kulu nafsi bimaa kasabat rahiintu.

Niqab surfaced last plus 20yrs among Somalis and already back to square one .Were we muslims before the niqab, i.e 1980!?

[Haatu]

guleed_ali;989016 wrote:

Then let's not force kids to eat their veggies or do their homework. Better yet let's get rid of curfew or chores. The deen is not something where you can pick and choose. If there are people who despise the Hijab and don't want to wear it they're the exception not the rule. Making the Hijab mandatory in a Muslim country is the same as indecency laws in North America (we just have a higher level of modesty, just as some States have a higher level of modesty than other States). Our opinions as outsiders are moot what matters is the will of the people in that particular country and their lawmakers, and one's got to admit it is way more than the typical 50+1 that is required in "democracy" (using the KSA as a test country). By the way you find just as many Women (if not more) fighting to enforce the Hijab as you do Men.

Exactly. The truth is one and Islam is one. You cannot pick and chose as you like. Either you submit and accept and get the reward, or you reject and get the punishment if Allah wills.

Whoever does righteousness - it is for his [own] soul; and whoever does evil [does so] against it. And your Lord is not ever unjust to [His] servants.

 

Islam is our religion and the hijab is a part of our faith. We will not bend and twist our deen to satisfy the whims of the liberalists and the secularists.

[Jacpher]

burahadeer;989100 wrote:

Iran and Saudi Arabia r oppressive regimes.There be much less niqab when people free and on their own will,just look at any muslim country that's not dictatorial.I been to few towns in Somaliland couple times last 10 yrs and to my surprise found out that niqab is disappearing.Also every women with niqab is not what you thought.Lot thm put on when they going to chat session or have date.It should be personal.

Kulu nafsi bimaa kasabat rahiintu.

Niqab surfaced last plus 20yrs among Somalis and already back to square one .Were

we muslims before the niqab,

i.e 1980!?

Does that imply you're not a Muslim now?

 

Back to the topic: Not that I understand what the little girl is talking about in the vid but she should be free to display her beauty to the world if she desires so. No compulsion in Islam.

[burahadeer]

Does that imply you're not a Muslim now?

 

Is that what we talking about! what am saying is there was no niqab among Somalis in 1975 or 80.Were we not muslims back then.?

 

anyhow am closer to truth on how things are.

[Marksman]

Interesting how some people say there's no compulsion in religion, but others feel the need to tell others they're 'openly sinning'. Which comes back to the social control.

 

These days proving one's faith done with a superficial act (hijab) is very important. And all have to do it. Strange how 'lower your gaze' is totally ignored if you can't control your urges.

 

These days are officially over.

 

[Safferz]

thefuturenow;989073 wrote:

Saff,

 

I understand your point. Some of us are talking about "what should be" while you're addressing "what is." I also agree that "what is" is not acceptable. The moral and religious worth of an individual should not be reduced to a piece of cloth or the length of one's beard. The correct test is Taqwa and Allah (sw) knows best what is in the hearts.

 

However, I do not really follow what you're saying. So let me put it in the form of a question for sake of clarification.

 

Do you believe that the xijaab is an Islamically ordained modest dress for all individuals?

If so, do you believe that it has been used to oppress and abuse women? If so, do you believe that an Islamically sanctioned societal practice should be abandoned in order to prevent this abuse

?

 

OR

 

Do you believe that the xijaab is an optional form of "modest" dress?

I don't think my own beliefs on the hijab are relevant, I'm more interested in discussing it as a practice in various social contexts, without judging anyone for their decision to wear or not to wear one. But what I will answer is what I put in bold in your quote -- I don't believe there's anything inherently oppressive about the hijab, and as I mentioned earlier, it can be liberating for some women while oppressive to others. It comes down to the context and conditions that enable (or disable) a woman from making the decision for herself. It's between her and Allah, not her father or husband, not her family, not her culture, not her government. I think my argument is pretty straightforward.

[thefuturenow]

Safferz;989147 wrote:

I don't think my own beliefs on the hijab are relevant, I'm more interested in discussing it as a practice in various social contexts, without judging anyone for their decision to wear or not to wear one. But what I will answer is what I put in bold in your quote -- I don't believe there's anything inherently oppressive about the hijab, and as I mentioned earlier, it can be liberating for some women while oppressive to others. It comes down to the context and conditions that enable (or disable) a woman from making the decision for herself. It's between her and Allah, not her father or husband, not her family, not her culture, not her government. I think my argument is pretty straightforward.

 

I agree with you. Modesty is between the individual and Allah---in the private space. Once out of the house, one becomes subject to cultural standards and current law. That is true in all societies.

 

What you're advocating is indeed straightforward but fundamentally at odds with a Muslim worldview. Muslims do not ascribe to the "don't judge me" sentiment as propagated by followers of the YOLO faith. We do not believe in a live and let live world both in individual relationships and in the construction of the public space. The odds are too high. This is faith whose adherents believe that there is a Perfect Word passed on to a perfect man who showed us the perfect way to live. This is the ideal. To divert from that ideal is to move towards hellfire. No Muslim desires for a fellow Muslim to do that which will bring them closer to such severe punishment. Thus, the duty to command right and forbid wrong is borne both out of love for fellow humans and the societal need to prevent fisq, corruption. In this context, the practice and propagation of each religiously sanctioned action is a move towards the ideal--towards good individuals who assemble into good families and eventually into good societies.

 

There are men who demand the women in their lives veil because they are insecure, jealousy prone, or oppressive. Your reaction is to condemn the act of veiling because such a man has demanded it. I see it otherwise--that such man has encouraged a good act but with bad intentions.

 

A society where the veil is optional (and legally enforced as so) does not solve the underlying problem--that particular man's ignorance. It only angers and frustrates him. It does not solve the woman's real problem--that particular man's ignorance. It only placates her in one respect of her frustration. The end result is two very frustrated people in the bedroom.

 

 

Saff, please, redirect that oriental gaze.

[Safferz]

thefuturenow -- not to be rude but it's now page 3 and I've lost interest in this debate, we are not entirely in disagreement but we're speaking from two completely different vantage points. I'm not making a religious argument and I'm not interested in making one, and repeating "there is no compulsion in religion" to argue hijab should be a choice free of coercion is not fundamentally at odds with a "Muslim worldview." I'm also no orientalist nor do my positions resemble anything close to orientalism lol, so I'm not sure where that's coming from but it's a cute way to sign off your post, I guess.

[thefuturenow]

Safferz;989160 wrote:

we're speaking from two completely different vantage points. I'm not making a religious argument and I'm not interested in making one,

Precisely, Ms. Saff. This is the essence of orientalist arrogance. To look at the native, quantify her, and pity her. And then to engage in a discourse entirely alien to the native in order to fashion and dictate a new mode of living until she becomes just as the oriental imagined she should be.

 

We address matters of religion and problems of the religious society in the realm of religion, in its rightful context. Replete with historical and cultural understanding.

 

Join our discourse. We can address the problem in our own terms.

[Safferz]

^^ nice misreading of Edward Said, have to say that's the first time I've seen orientalism deployed to shut down critique of practices in the Muslim world framed in the way I have in this thread, which are actually in the Saidian spirit. Consider re-reading it as it should be read, as an analysis of power, domination and hegemony, not the ahistorical, apologist manifesto in defense of the actions and practices of Muslims in the Muslim world you seem to think it is.

 

Cheers.

[Khayr]

Futurenow,

 

You described the arrogance of the champions of liberal modern thinking. Meaning that they feel

an "intellectual" right is given to

them to frame the question, define the problem when they are part and parcel of the problem

and dictate to the rest what the "only" valid options are that are available for developing a solution.

 

Saff wants to define the problem

(muslims being forced to follow any part of Islam) and the options

for resolution (re-education and re-examination of classical islamic thought because classical islamic thought is too regressive and sexist) and to give us a solution

(make your own personal choices so long as she and her dominant imperialistic worlview can accept those choices).

 

You can't define racism or xenophobia for us when you are part of and in suppport of the privileged group and all the perks that come with it e.g. 5 star vacations in Ecuador when the majority there don't make more than your hourly min. per hour wage in a day.