The reasons why Islamic women wear the Veil

[Estro Felino]

Think about it that way, if twin sisters are walking together, one wearing Hijab the Islamic way and one showing what she is got, at which one would stir and his imagination would start drifting? Please don't tell me it is the same !

Muslims are not stupid people who lack self control.Many men are stupid people who lack self control. Why you are giving that to muslim men only?

I am not with the concept of forcing it too.

so you Muslims cannot go to the beach on Summer? Where you can find lots of women with bikinis. And I am talking about women with a perfect body: tiny waist, female hips and big breasts. Some of them take the top off, too.

I only see men who don't give a damn about them.

 

[Thana]

Islam doesn't oppress anyone.

Except it does.

It is just that you guys have biased sources saying Islam = Bad. It has controlled your minds that you can't see any thing good about Islam no matter how obvious it were.

No, We just look at Islamic countries. Like Saudi Arabia, Where women can't drive, Can't leave the country without a mans permission, Can't vote or Yemen where they have an overwhelming amount of child brides or even Egypt where the Female genital mutilation rate is 91%!

Not to mention the Quran that allows men to think they are better than women, Encourages them to discipline their women by striking them and of course, The topic of this thread, telling women to cover themselves.

Muslims don't necessarily equal bad, But Islam.. IMHO is a totally different story.

 

[ametist]

Except it does.



No, We just look at Islamic countries. Like Saudi Arabia, Where women can't drive, Can't leave the country without a mans permission, Can't vote or Yemen where they have an overwhelming amount of child brides or even Egypt where the Female genital mutilation rate is 91%!

Not to mention the Quran that allows men to think they are better than women, Encourages them to discipline their women by striking them and of course, The topic of this thread, telling women to cover themselves.

Muslims don't necessarily equal bad, But Islam.. IMHO is a totally different story.

on matter of treatment of one's wife: in quran 4:34 when somebody's wife was insisting on ill conduct, what the husband can do after warning her is indicated with a word that can either mean "hit"or "leave"(her). (like strike vs strike out) you ought to read all of quran to understand what god could mean in that verse. it is rather easy to have your faith totally go astray. it should be balanced enough so that it doesnt and god gives you always enough opportunity to test it for yourself reading quran or in real life.
never come to the details before understanding basics.
how women treated is rather unfair almost from all point of views because it was men who had the authority. they most of the time interpretted many things in the way that suits their pleasure or their way of unfair choice and god is aware of that fact, too.

 

[Sabour]

Except it does.



No, We just look at Islamic countries. Like Saudi Arabia, Where women can't drive, Can't leave the country without a mans permission, Can't vote or Yemen where they have an overwhelming amount of child brides or even Egypt where the Female genital mutilation rate is 91%!

Not to mention the Quran that allows men to think they are better than women, Encourages them to discipline their women by striking them and of course, The topic of this thread, telling women to cover themselves.

Muslims don't necessarily equal bad, But Islam.. IMHO is a totally different story.

What you stated is what muslims are doing and not what Islam says.


Tell me where in Islam it says or hints that women can't drive. That would be interesting.

 

[Sabour]

so you Muslims cannot go to the beach on Summer? Where you can find lots of women with bikinis. And I am talking about women with a perfect body: tiny waist, female hips and big breasts. Some of them take the top off, too.

I only see men who don't give a damn about them.

I don't go to the beach if that answers your question. I am not sure if I am not supposed to in Islam. But it is not my thing to do anyways

 

[Sabour]

on matter of treatment of one's wife: in quran 4:34 when somebody's wife was insisting on ill conduct, what the husband can do after warning her is indicated with a word that can either mean "hit"or "leave"(her). you ought read all of quran to understand what god could mean in that verse. it is rather easy to have your faith totally go astray. it should be balanced enough so that it doesnt and god gives you always enough opportunity to test it for yourself reading quran or in real life.
never come to the details before understanding basics.
how women treated is rather unfair almost from all point of views because it was men who had the authority. they most of the time interpretted many things in the way that suits their pleasure or their way of unfair choice and god is aware of that fact, too.

Besides that, the beating in that verse is equivalent to a slight hit with a toothbrush that doesn't inflict pain or leave behind it any mark.

 

[gnostic]

Whenever A muslim does something good, it is because he is human. Whenever a muslim does something bad, it is because of Islam.

No. If a Muslim do bad, it is his fault.

But if the Qur'an give poor advice, which a Muslim do bad thing because of this advice, then yes, Islam is to blame.

With regarding to your reply about when a husband have to beat his wife, Qur'an 4:34:

Besides that, the beating in that verse is equivalent to a slight hit with a toothbrush that doesn't inflict pain or leave behind it any mark.

This give the notion to Muslim husbands they have the rights to beat their wives.

The verse provide no detail on how hard to hit a woman, so your "slight hit" like with a "toothbrush", is just your opinion.

Hitting your wife is wrong, no matter what justification Muslim apologists, like yourself. It encourage domestic violence.

But before you try to switch blame to others, start by saying that domestic violence occurred in the west, and I would agree.

Domestic violence can occur anywhere, and have occurred every countries, in which husband can physically hurt his wife, or a parent hurt his or her child (or children), regardless of religious or social background. There are bad and abusive husbands all around the world.

However, this is different. This verse - 4:34 - is the only one that I know that actually give husband the rights to hit his wife. And I have no doubt in my mind that some Muslim men have follow this verse, in which they have abused their wives.

That to me, that verse gives poor, backward advice, which can be subject to abuse.

Now, the verse state that a husband could only hit her if she is continually disobey her husband, and only used as a last resort. This is not husband and wife relationship, but one of master-and-slave. It is not a healthy relationship, if a man can punish his wife for disobedience. The Qur'an is treating women, like wives, as properties, just like slaves or like cattle or pets.

And there could be a good reason why a woman would disobey her husband. What happened if they were arguing, and the woman is right? Does she obey anyway, regardless if her husband is wrong? And what if the husband like beating woman?

Let face it, not all men are the brightest. What if the woman is smarter and wiser than her husband, must she obey him if he is stupid or a fool?

According to the Qur'an, husband is the breadwinner and head of the house, regardless if he might be intellectually stupid or that he might be a tyrant. The Qur'an doesn't consider these possibilities. And not knowing these possibilities, only make me certain, that your god didn't write this scripture but patriarchal Arabs wrote them, unless your god don't know everything.

And given that in today's societies, a woman could earn more money than her husband, which would mean that is the breadwinner. Did your Allah ever thought that happening? If not, then he isn't all-knowing and couldn't predict the future.

And if she is the breadwinner, shouldn't be the head of house? Yes? No?

To me, there are still some wisdoms in the Qur'an, but others clearly are outdated or archaic.

 

[Sabour]

No. If a Muslim do bad, it is his fault.

But if the Qur'an give poor advice, which a Muslim do bad thing because of this advice, then yes, Islam is to blame.

With regarding to your reply about when a husband have to beat his wife, Qur'an 4:24:



This give the notion to Muslim husbands they have the rights to beat their wives.

The verse provide no detail on how hard to hit a woman, so your "slight hit" like with a "toothbrush", is just your opinion.

Hitting your wife is wrong, no matter what justification Muslim apologists, like yourself. It encourage domestic violence.

But before you try to switch blame to others, start by saying that domestic violence occurred in the west, and I would agree.

Domestic violence can occur anywhere, and have occurred every countries, in which husband can physically hurt his wife, or a parent hurt his or her child (or children), regardless of religious or social background. There are bad and abusive husbands all around the world.

However, this is different. This verse - 4:24 - is the only one that I know that actually give husband the rights to hit his wife. And I have no doubt in my mind that some Muslim men have follow this verse, in which they have abused their wives.

That to me, that verse gives poor, backward advice, which can be subject to abuse.

Now, the verse state that a husband could only hit her if she is continually disobey her husband, and only used as a last resort. This is not husband and wife relationship, but one of master-and-slave. It is not a healthy relationship, if a man can punish his wife for disobedience. The Qur'an is treating women, like wives, as properties, just like slaves or like cattle or pets.

And there could be a good reason why a woman would disobey her husband. What happened if they were arguing, and the woman is right? Does she obey anyway, regardless if her husband is wrong? And what if the husband like beating woman?

Let face it, not all men are the brightest. What if the woman is smarter and wiser than her husband, must she obey him if he is stupid or a fool?

According to the Qur'an, husband is the breadwinner and head of the house, regardless if he might be intellectually stupid or that he might be a tyrant. The Qur'an doesn't consider these possibilities. And not knowing these possibilities, only make me certain, that your god didn't write this scripture but patriarchal Arabs wrote them, unless your god don't know everything.

And given that in today's societies, a woman could earn more money than her husband, which would mean that is the breadwinner. Did your Allah ever thought that happening? If not, then he isn't all-knowing and couldn't predict the future.

And if she is the breadwinner, shouldn't be the head of house? Yes? No?

To me, there are still some wisdoms in the Qur'an, but others clearly are outdated or archaic.

Hold on there.

With a toothbrush is not my opinion. It is in the hadith.

You are not free to explain Quraan the way you want. You have to refer to hadith to know the meaning when hadith is available and you must also refer to explanations of the Quraan.

 

[gnostic]

With a toothbrush is not my opinion. It is in the hadith.

You are not free to explain Quraan the way you want. You have to refer to hadith to know the meaning when hadith is available and you must also refer to explanations of the Quraan.

I am not a Muslim, one-answer. And I haven't read any Hadith.

I don't see why I have to look up even massive Hadith. And I do t see why I must resort to the Hadith.

I have read the Tanakh too, or what the Christians called the Old Testament bible. No Jews have told me that if I read the Torah, that I must know (or expect me know) the Oral Torah or read the Talmud, because they know I am not Jewish.

Of course it would be great, if I had the time to read the Talmud or the Hadiths. But time, I don't have.

But feel free to quote the specific verse of the Hadith, about the toothbrush.

But in any case, the toothbrush is the least important points. Why are you focused on that, when I have more points than that?

 

[Sabour]

I am not a Muslim, one-answer. And I haven't read any Hadith.

I don't see why I have to look up even massive Hadith. And I do t see why I must resort to the Hadith.

I have read the Tanakh too, or what the Christians called the Old Testament bible. No Jews have told me that if I read the Torah, that I must know (or expect me know) the Oral Torah or read the Talmud, because they know I am not Jewish.

Of course it would be great, if I had the time to read the Talmud or the Hadiths. But time, I don't have.

But feel free to quote the specific verse of the Hadith, about the toothbrush.

But in any case, the toothbrush is the least important points. Why are you focused on that, when I have more points than that?

I know you are not a muslim but when you want to read the Quraan and judge it you should also know what it means.

The hadith is:


"When the above Quran verse authorizing the beating of a refractory wife was revealed, the Prophet is reported to have said: "I wanted one thing, but God has willed another thing – and what God has willed must be best (see Manar V, 74). With all this, he stipulated in his sermon on the occasion of the Farewell Pilgrimage, shortly before his death, that the beating should be resorted to only if the wife "has become guilty, in an obvious manner, of immoral conduct", and that it should be done "in such a way as not to cause pain (ghayr mubarrih)"; authentic Traditions to this effect are found in Muslim, Tirmidhi, Abu Daud, Nasai and Ibn Majah. On the basis of these Traditions, all the authorities stress that this beating, if resorted to at all, should be more or less symbolic – "with a toothbrush, or some such thing" (Tabari, quoting the views of scholars of the earliest times), or even "with a folded handkerchief" (Razi); and some of the greatest Muslim scholars (e.g. Ash-Shafii) are of the opinion that it is just barely permissible, and should preferable be avoided: and they justify this opinion by the prophet’s personal feelings with regard to this problem."[41]

And I focused on that because your whole reply was based on the idea that Quraan allows men to beat women.


As you can see the beating is symbolic. Anyways I will discuss this in detail more in my next comment.

 

[Sabour]

The main problem about hitting the wife come from the verse 4:34

4:34 Dr. Ghali

Men are the ever upright (managers) (of the affairs) of women for what Allah has graced some of them over (some) others and for what they have expended of their riches. So righteous women are devout, preservers of the Unseen for. And the ones whom you fear their non-compliance, then admonish them and forsake them in their beds, (Literally: a madajic= reeclining) and strike them, (i.e. hit them lightly) yet in case they obey you, then do not seek inequitably any way against them; surely Allah has been Ever-Exalted, Ever-Great.






The word looks not nice. But how the "beat" is taken ? The problem here is in the word lightly. Other translations has this part as "strike them", so in my comments I will refer to the "beating" by the word "strike them" as it is written in the Sahih International translation.

"When the above Quran verse authorizing the beating of a refractory wife was revealed, the Prophet is reported to have said: "I wanted one thing, but God has willed another thing – and what God has willed must be best (see Manar V, 74). With all this, he stipulated in his sermon on the occasion of the Farewell Pilgrimage, shortly before his death, that the beating should be resorted to only if the wife "has become guilty, in an obvious manner, of immoral conduct", and that it should be done "in such a way as not to cause pain (ghayr mubarrih)"; authentic Traditions to this effect are found in Muslim, Tirmidhi, Abu Daud, Nasai and Ibn Majah. On the basis of these Traditions, all the authorities stress that this beating, if resorted to at all, should be more or less symbolic – "with a toothbrush, or some such thing" (Tabari, quoting the views of scholars of the earliest times), or even "with a folded handkerchief" (Razi); and some of the greatest Muslim scholars (e.g. Ash-Shafii) are of the opinion that it is just barely permissible, and should preferable be avoided: and they justify this opinion by the prophet’s personal feelings with regard to this problem."[41]


the purpose is not inflicting pain.

If someone came to me and said to me "we are in danger", I may have different reactions.

I may thing he is exaggerating it.
I may think we are in little danger.
I may think there is really a huge danger.

But if someone came, and shook my body and told me we are in danger, than I would understand that it is big. So establishing physical contact delivers the message more effectively. And we are talking about serious problem in the verse. It is marriage and divorce.

Striking came out to be the third stage. The two previous stages are [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed.

Let us reflect on these verses by thinking of the situation.

The first stage was advising them. How much time would advising them take? A day or two? Ofcourse not. This is a serious problem, a first stage requires more time than that.

Stage 2 is [then if they persist], forsake them in bed. Similarly I think forsaking requires more time than a 1 week by logic.

Step 3 Is the striking [with a toothbrush].

However just because the striking is there, doesn't mean you have to strike. Read the verse which is after that. It says

4:35 And if you fear dissension between the two, send an arbitrator from his people and an arbitrator from her people. If they both desire reconciliation, Allah will cause it between them. Indeed, Allah is ever Knowing and Acquainted [with all things].

Therefore, you can go for the verse 4:35 to solve the problem. Just because it says strike them doesn't mean striking is for the purpose of inflicting pain. Neither does it mean you have to do it because you have to read the full context.

 

[ametist]

Hold on there.

With a toothbrush is not my opinion. It is in the hadith.

You are not free to explain Quraan the way you want. You have to refer to hadith to know the meaning when hadith is available and you must also refer to explanations of the Quraan.

there is no obligation people should read hadith to understand quran or quran would have stated that, dont you think?

a book who is even saying that war prisoners shouldnt be treated badly,(you have to release them after getting a ransom or without a ransom) wont say such a thing or would say you are free to pay less respect to your mom than your dad, as well.right?
so back to the wholistic understanding and back to the root of word which very well can mean "strike out"(leave,omit) and not "strike".

 

[Maldini]

Hijab, the idea that women should dress like Batman in public.

 

[Estro Felino]

Hijab, the idea that women should dress like Batman in public.

well...it's a good idea for women who are as ugly as toads....
at least they don't scare anybody

 

[Sabour]

there is no obligation people should read hadith to understand quran or quran would have stated that, dont you think?

a book who is even saying that war prisoners shouldnt be treated badly,(you have to release them after getting a ransom or without a ransom) wont say such a thing or would say you are free to pay less respect to your mom than your dad, as well.right?
so back to the wholistic understanding and back to the root of word which very well can mean "strike out"(leave,omit) and not "strike".

The point is if one doesn't understand the Quraan he has to refer to it. And the Hadith explains some verses like the toothbrush example. Quraan also repeats several times, obey God and obey the messenger. The Hadith is from the messenger. How would we obey the messenger if we don't follow the hadith.

I agree about the translation. I think it is wrongly used here and it exaggerates things. Just like many other words.

I didn't understand your point regarding mom and dad? Can you explain please?

 

[Sabour]

Hijab, the idea that women should dress like Batman in public.

It would be an extremely good idea to google some pictures using the word hijab before giving such opinion.

 

[Sabour]

well...it's a good idea for women who are as ugly as toads....
at least they don't scare anybody

Do catholic nuns scare you too ?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

It would be an extremely good idea to google some pictures using the word hijab before giving such opinion.

This is what the Somali women around here wear:

(Usually all black.)

 

[Sabour]

This is what the Somali women around here wear:

(Usually all black.)

This is their choice. What majority of women wear here is not even close.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

This is their choice. What majority of women wear here is not even close.

Do you think if a Somali woman decided not to wear that, it would be just be accepted? From my experience, Somali men are very sexist. They also have multiple wives but try to hide it. They also practice female genital mutilation. Since the ones who come here act like they're still in Somalia, I have little doubts that they don't practice FGM while here.

Also, I have no idea what country you're in.