Bikini or headscarf -- which offers more freedom?

[somya]

The majority of the people follow simplicity and conformity. A girl can be liberal in political views and modest in clothing at the same time.

One can support freedom of speech, democracy, equality and have no need to bare skin.

One can be a nudist and oppose any and all liberal ideals.

The problem is when you view the world with western eyes and not make a mind of your own. You said it the majority does it, so it must be okay. It just makes you another sheep in the herd, doesn't make you right.

I have seen liberal , conservative and third hypocrite too.

Liberal have nothing to do much with your physical outlook but more with your mental oulook.

Conservative want Physical and mental outlook to be synchronous.

Hypocrite has asynchronous physical and mental outlook.

See where you fit.

 

[somya]

How about totally Liberal?

Let go of the bikini

ha ha very nice

 

[Awesome]

I have seen liberal , conservative and third hypocrite too.

Liberal have nothing to do much with your physical outlook but more with your mental oulook.

Conservative want Physical and mental outlook to be synchronous.

Hypocrite has asynchronous physical and mental outlook.

See where you fit.

You're forgetting moderates who can balance out their lives and do not have an inherent need to fit in a predefined category.

 

[somya]

You're forgetting moderates who can balance out their lives and do not have an inherent need to fit in a predefined category.

Moderates just flactuate in the three classes according the situation.

So i did not classified it

 

[Condor]

ha ha very nice

Glad you liked the idea - we love it too.

We wish to see you totally liberated but you'd rather be just 'more liberated' - now whose preference should count?

 

[Raghu]

There is a sea of better clothings between these two extremes ...

 

[Raghu]

And this should be considered unacceptable , inhuman, appalling eyesore by any modern human regardless of religion .

For the uninformed, exactly this sort of ghostly cloak that covers entire body was banned in France,the not those headscarf generally worn by Muslim women and the kid in the article .

 

[fallstuff]

I never said that bikinis are better than burqas…don’t just assume something which I haven’t said. Neither am I saying that bollywood is real. What I am saying is that let the women determine what is better for her, however, let there be no force.

Please explain how has, according to Taliban, "the face of a woman is a source of corruption for men”. Cannot they see anything asexual in women? How come the face of a woman is a source of corruption for men? Please don’t forget Taliban is a not some fringe group. It has ruled Afghanistan for years; even now it has say in matters in some parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan affecting a large number of women.

I am not a Taliban nor do I have any inclination to become one

Therefore I can not answer your query. Take a look at the following YouTube videos:

The follower of certain Christian denomination "Jehovas Witness" calls college education is evil.
YouTube - Jehovah's Witnesses Demonizing Higher Education

The following in Italian with subttiles

YouTube - Jehovah's witnesses and higher education

 

[Awesome]

Yeah but on what shaky grounds was it done on? "Its not the French way", Sarkozy said.

He didn't say "Liberation of women" because he is taking away the freedom of women to wear what they want - that is the very opposite of liberation.

When France does something so underhanded to impose a anti-Muslim law, then you're sure the days are not far away when it will ban the headscarf. It's already trying to ban halaal food.

Fashion is closely followed even by Muslim women. Even Abayyas now come in trendy designs with bead works, flaps and various other gizmos all built into them. The idea is to promote modesty. Trust me when you're told Muslim women are not roaming around in bikinis because the men have forced them not to wear it, most of them don't want to themselves.

"In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock."
– Thomas Jefferson

 

[vsdoc]

No one is stripping anyone Asim. Neither is anyone forcing girls into bikinis.

I will be honest enough to admit that I would be embarrased to see my daughters in bikinis in the pool or on the beach. (My wife calls me a shotgun dad .... and I'm unapologetic about the fact)

Does that mean I would ding-dong to the other end of the spectrum and prefer to see them in blue/black robe with slits for eys? Or even the more "liberal" headscarf?

NO!

The only time our women wear headscarves is in the fire temple during prayer. The little girls before puberty wear topis. But then so do our men and boys cover their heads with topis as well.

Both our boys and girls grow up being taught the basic tenets of our ancient religion - Humata, Hukata, Hvrashta - Good Thoughts, Good Words, Good Deeds. We believe that modesty comes from within a person, and not from a piece of cloth.

At the end of the day its a cultural thing. And as said repeatedly over the length of this debate, one can be modest without the need for a veil. And that does not mean that one strips to their underwear if one moves away from the veil.

The insinuation of moral corruption in the absence of one is what irritates non-muslims, just as you guys take offence to the rest of the world calling your burqa culture as regressive. If one wants others to respect their own culture and give one the space to practice it freely, then one must necessarily respect the culture of others as well. And this is where the clash on a global level is.

If there is Islamophobia, then my friends, equally so is there Western/Christian phobia and Jew-phobia amongst the Islamic world as well.

I agree with Asim that it should be a matter of free choice. However, what exactly is "free choice" when it comes to a little girl as in the topic that started this debate, is the actual debate ..... here and in the western world. As well as for millions of other muslim women growing up in highly male and mulla dominated Islamic regimes and areas around the world.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Avatar]

Yeah but on what shaky grounds was it done on? "Its not the French way", Sarkozy said.

He didn't say "Liberation of women" because he is taking away the freedom of women to wear what they want - that is the very opposite of liberation.

When France does something so underhanded to impose a anti-Muslim law, then you're sure the days are not far away when it will ban the headscarf. It's already trying to ban halaal food.

Fashion is closely followed even by Muslim women. Even Abayyas now come in trendy designs with bead works, flaps and various other gizmos all built into them. The idea is to promote modesty. Trust me when you're told Muslim women are not roaming around in bikinis because the men have forced them not to wear it, most of them don't want to themselves.

"In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock."
– Thomas Jefferson

I dont see the logic. Muslim states such as Saudi completely disallow anything that does not suit them, even ban religious freedom. Nobody talks about that.

I see no reason why a secular country cannot ban specific attire that can be taken advantage of by unscrupulous people. Besides, if you cannot show your face then dont live there. It's that simple.

Nobody is forcing anyone to strip of their modesty. Most Indian women do not wear the full body veil, but completely guard their modesty without having to cover their face. I see nothing immodest with salwaar kameez which can cover the entire body from neck to toe. The full veil was meant for medieval times when men preferred to have no control over their testosterone.

Nobody is forced to wear a bikini. It's just a lame excuse. Even the western women who wear the skimpy attire do so because it does not conflict with their attire. Different people have different principles and each one can wear a wide variety of attire to suit them.

 

[Fighter488]

I dont see the logic. Muslim states such as Saudi completely disallow anything that does not suit them, even ban religious freedom. Nobody talks about that.

I see no reason why a secular country cannot ban specific attire that can be taken advantage of by unscrupulous people. Besides, if you cannot show your face then dont live there. It's that simple.

Reffering to the two highlighted parts :

Saudi dis-allow them because of the very reasons namely Religious Fanatics

And to your so called a secular country is wrong because they are SECULAR AND DEMOCRATIC.

Saudis, e.g. follow what they preach; A QUITE LOGICAL PRACTICE keeping in view of the government policies they practice.

It is not the case with hypocrites in Europe with secular and democratic VALUES ( SO TO SAY)!

Nobody is forced to wear a bikini.

Agreed! But then somebody is FORCED TO STRIP-DOWN (by the definition and feelings of the vieled person). It CAN NOT be right by any standard.

A secular and democratic society CAN NOT impose the view of a section of society to another group of people, in the same country on how to live, eat and dress !

 

[vsdoc]

A secular and democratic society CAN NOT impose the view of a section of society to another group of people, in the same country on how to live, eat and dress !

It can. Its called Uniform Civil Code, and its there for all citizens of the country regardless of their religious beliefs.

The State guarantees the Citizenry certain privileges.

In return the Citizenry owe the State certain responsibilities.

Its always a two-way street. No one religious group can hold the rest of civil society hostage to its own beliefs and value systems if they clash with that of the State as a whole.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Avatar]

Reffering to the two highlighted parts :

Saudi dis-allow them because of the very reasons namely Religious Fanatics

And to your so called a secular country is wrong because they are SECULAR AND DEMOCRATIC.

Saudis, e.g. follow what they preach; A QUITE LOGICAL PRACTICE keeping in view of the government policies they practice.

It is not the case with hypocrites in Europe with secular and democratic VALUES ( SO TO SAY)!

Sir, I completely understand your argument about the French claiming themselves to be democratic and secular. The confusion here is the definition of democracy and secularism.

Even the two have their limits. If Catholics/Christians/Buddhists or Hindus desired to wear such attire I'm sure they would be declared unacceptable too.

Your problem lies with the belief that the concerned nations call themselves secular but do not reflect it in their policies. To that, I can only say that you're being a little greedy.

Women can dress down as much as they like (as tolerated by the public) but they cannot dress up to the extreme. The so called secular countries also have excellent law enforcement so as to deal with any unscrupulous people developing wrong intentions simply by looking at immodestly dressed females. When there are other women going around in bikinis, I dont feel the women undressed between their chin and eyebrows should face much trouble.

Agreed! But then somebody is FORCED TO STRIP-DOWN (by the definition and feelings of the vieled person). It CAN NOT be right by any standard.

I am impressed. Forced to strip down..your mask ?

A secular and democratic society CAN NOT impose the view of a section of society to another group of people, in the same country on how to live, eat and dress !

No nation of the world should allow any attire that can mask an individuals identity. It violates national security and the person is impossible to identify by any security footage or witness. Criminals can wear the same clothing to evade detection.

I dont even understand why this argument is still going on. The complete veil is unacceptable (in "secular" countries) and the hijab is fine, if the individual wants it.

 

[Fighter488]

It can. Its called Uniform Civil Code, and its there for all citizens of the country regardless of their religious beliefs.

Uniform Civil Code is India specific debate, so a little off-topic.

Indian constitution specifies or directive principles of state policy that some day differences in presonal laws would be quashed and uniform civil code would be adopted but this has to be done when we are sure that there are is no discrimination based on religion and we live in an equal society..until that day we can only work towards equality..that day is not upon us yet..all i'm saying is that let us as people be equal first then we can have equal laws..let each runner in a race be at the same starting point then we can say that the race should be fair

The State guarantees the Citizenry certain privileges.

Yes. These very privileges are being questioned here.

In return the Citizenry owe the State certain responsibilities.

Responsibility do not include shedding those very privileges as you mentioned, states gaurantees! And state GUARNTEES the basic religious rights to minorities!

Its always a two-way street. No one religious group can hold the rest of civil society hostage to its own beliefs and value systems if they clash with that of the State as a whole.

Exactly right. But the other way! One group / community CAN NOT IMPOSE THIER WILL on other.