Tasnim, first of all I see no shame or embarrassment to mention your name.

OK, did I miss something? Because I honestly don’t understand what you’re on about there.

Second, I thought I was unambiguous in standing for free personal choice without fear or coercion.

You criticized Muslims who label or refer to non-hijabi women in a derogatory manner. I absolutely agree with you there. But then you go on to talk about women who wear hijab using words like silly and irresponsible. I find that contradictory.

No wise person enters into a debate without considering his views as convincing.

Of course. What I meant was, I’m not trying to force my opinion on anyone. I wrote the original post in response to something I read. Personally, as a Libyan woman, I was irritated by the presuppositions the article made, but I don’t expect everyone to agree with me. I just think ideas can be usefully exchanged without convincing the other side.

Women wearing black can be seen in almost every British city

Exactly. Which is why I find it kind of funny that someone should be prevented from wearing a colour because of its supposed religious significance.

I wasn’t talking about niqab, if that’s what you mean by black dresses. I was talking about just wearing a certain colour. If you’ve seen the BBC documentary on the French hijab ban, The Headmaster and the Headscarves, you’ll have seen that part where the Headmaster airs his opinion on the Islamicness of black. My point is “you can wear anything you want” is often a simplification.

Italian colonisation of Libya achieved one objective: They sent the country back at least 300 years.

You’re right. But that is no contradiction to the fact that colonization was a factor in increasing secularism.

Nissim, I agree with you all the way, I just hope that what you said made sense to those who read your comments

Tasnim, first of all I see no shame or embarrassment to mention your name, because I am attempting to communicate with a person I respect and who happens to have a name called Tasnim! Second, I thought I was unambiguous in standing for free personal choice without fear or coercion. You are free to wear hijab if that is your choice and no one should take that right away from you. But, by the same token, those who do not want to wear hijab should have the same freedom. I mentioned the 70s to make the point that the dominance of hijab today was never an essential characteristic of Libyan women or that of Islam. Otherwise, all the women who did not wear hijab in the past 1400 years will go to hell because they did not comply with the “commandment”!

Those who say that Islam makes it an obligation on women to obey men seem to forget that all religions were created by men and consequently tailored to serve their gender on the expense of other. Women’s contributions to religion were rare and far in between. Until today, most Muslim men keep repeating that women lack in faith and brain power ((ناقصات عقل ودين. It is engraved in the subconscious of most Arabs and Muslims in particular and some other societies as well, even if some deny this in public.

I don’t think convincing anyone is necessary to useful debate.

No wise person enters into a debate without considering his views as convincing. It is up to others to highlight any pitfalls they might see in his/her arguments. All debates are initiated for the sole purpose of exchanging ideas, and whoever comes up with a more convincing argument wins! But here winning is not for personal gain, as in the Olympics or in Football, rather it is for the betterment of the “human condition”!!

You can’t wear whatever you like when a student is not allowed to wear black because black is “an Islamic colour.”

Women wearing black can be seen in almost every British city and no one is allowed by law to physically attack them or humiliate them. The only exception is where this style of dressing contradicts with job functions or particular institutions. For example, people in airport security are obliged to undress any person if they see fit. Do not forget that some terrorists were able to escape by veiling themselves in black dresses. As a student in a western higher education institution, what a woman covering herself in black is doing there??!! She is wearing that dress because she is in denial of everything these institutions represent! She is absolutely free to join any Islamic institution and continue her studies over there. I have never seen an orthodox Jew with his unique appearance or a catholic nun mingling with other normal people in any college or university I have visited in the UK. These people have their own institutions which is where they normally go.

What, if any, effect did colonization have?

Italian colonisation of Libya achieved one objective: They sent the country back at least 300 years. If you want the western academic reference for this let me know and I will dig it up for you.

…. which kind of does away with the misconception that the hijab converts women to agoraphobic secluded housewives.

I did not say that. The problem has to do with what the men want (Patriarchal society). Hijab protects the women from the men; effectively this means the law of the jungle is in place. Women do not have to fear men no matter what they wear or think. A bad woman is a bad woman, and what she dresses or wears will not change this fact. However, the notion of “bad woman” is debatable, because every society has its own definition of what is a bad woman, or a bad man for that matter.

Alia: Questions I have: How can we change this view of women who wear veils?

You can change this view by taking the initiative to refuse to be subservient to men wherever you are. Forget that men exist in your surrounding and behave as responsible person who values herself irrespective of what other men or even women think of you. Do what you think is right, and steer clear of what you personally think is wrong.

Best wishes to all.

The way forward can be either good or evil. The evil way forward is usually the easier one. We could, for example, get rid of our Islamic notion of brotherhood and become an individualistic society like the US. No doubt it worked for them and it is after all harder to care for society as a whole than it is to serve your interests but this world is not the only aim for us Muslims. We have to follow our religion for the hereafter as well. It is because of this aim that we cannot absorb all that Western society promotes no matter how much success it will bring us in this life. That is not to say you cannot be successful in this life if you are a Muslim. To the contrary we have been successful in the past when we followed Islam. Islam promotes exemplary characteristics in people such as discipline, caring for society, piety, humility, caring for family amongst others. These are all desirable qualities regardless of what part of the world you live in. If Muslims implemented these qualities as mandated by their religion they would be successful in this life and the hereafter.

Allah (SWT) says: “O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) over their bodies (when outdoors). That is most convenient that they should be known and not molested.” (Sura #33 ayah #59)

And here is what Khairi forgot to mention. Dr. Zaki Badawi’s full words were:

“I have issued a fatwa that Muslim women in Britain have an Islamic right to take off their hijab at this point of time if attacked or fearing to be attacked,” Dr. Zaki Badawi, the Dean of the Muslim College in London, told IslamOnline.net over the phone from the British capital.

Here is the link to that article. http://www.mostmerciful.com/fatwa-on-hijab-and-my-rejoinder.htm

To protect oneself and others we Muslims are allowed to take our Hijabs off according to Dr. Zaki Badawi but you forgot to mention that clause and generalized it to all situations. As for the rest of your article be sure that I will address it.

Those who believe in shoyukh and ulama note in particular the eloquent views of the late Dr Zaki Badawi. If you want justification that Hijab is cultural and not religious see if you can work out what this sheikh is saying. I quote “….. Dr. Zaki Badawi who you will recall declared that the headscarf is not obligatory in Islam. A statement that in the mid 1990′s caused fanatic Muslims to brand Dr. Badawi ‘a criminal’, and ‘a forger’ after he had gone on television in Holland to tell Muslim women that it is not necessary to wear the hijab as it is not required in Islam. The Issue of the Veil in Islam has been subject to much interpretation by the classical scholars of long ago and also by modern day scholars. Some scholars in their enthusiasm to try and prove that the Veil is compulsory in Islam have used a weak hadith – one that is not of proven authenticity. ”

I also quote a female from one of the articles listed here “Muslim women need to stop fooling themselves. This hejab and burqa is not for religion, only for men to have power over them. Open your eyes I want to say to them.” You see, it is not only me who think that men are the source of the Hijab problem

Most of the comments appeared in Q-news magazine which was founded by Kenyan journalist Fuad Nahdi, whom I knew in the eighties in London when we were at the same university, although my studies were far from journalistic. Q-news was staffed by either Muslim converts or young ladies from the sub continent (Pakistan and India). Note that most (if not all) of the comments were made by this group of people and they reflect their cultural experience and point of view. It was a progressive Islamist magazine which founded on the pillars of western journalistic standards and ethics. It started in the late 80′s in a four page black & white newsletter form which I still have in my possession the first few issues. Remember that in this period Cat Stevens (Yusuf Islam) considered music “Haram” (I am glad he is back on track with his guitar and wonderful voice) and Sheikh Omar Abdulrrahman (the convicted terrorist) was preaching freely in London and in the houses of some Libyan Millionaires who lived here at the time!

I will keep repeating that what we have in Libya is one version of Islam and not the only or best Islam. Every one knows that there are many sects and groupings belonging to this religion and the version we have existed purely for historical reasons, just like the others, not because it is the one and only!

In the past, when people gather within one place of land and form a society it was possible to be immune from outside influences which allows them to protect themselves and their culture within their boundaries, at least for a while. This situation normally changes when they are conquered and occupied by another group of people who take their land and enforce their way of life, religion and culture leading to a different society being formed. Muslims were a superpower when they occupied most of the known world at that time. They remained in some areas where they enforced their religion and culture; in others they were thrown out and lost the influence they once had. Had Isabella and Ferdinand not gathered a more powerful army to kick us out, Spain probably would be a Muslim country today and Sunni Maliki as well! Also, had the Fatimid state الفاطميين not got defeated around a thousand years ago in North Africa, we would probably be all Shia today!! But that is history, we cannot change it, we can only learn from it.

Today things are different. The whole world comes to you even if you did not want to take the trouble and go to it. You are forced to takes notice of certain things which otherwise you would not have bothered to notice. Civilisations grow and prosper when they encapsulate all human experiences in a new form that proves superior and more beneficial in meeting the needs of human beings. This is what the Western civilisation had done over the past few hundred years which led to its domination, as we know it today. For Islam and Muslims, their civilisation and superpower status passed away long time ago, and all what we have left of it is a reminder that it once existed and it was great, which no body can deny. It was great because we presented to the world better value systems and practical solutions which helped mankind in the process of human evolution to land us where we are today. But that was in the past and today we have hardly anything to present to the world which they do not have. In fact we import almost everything from outside our borders to keep us alive and kicking! Many Muslims still live in the dream that we are still great and deserve to be treated as great, even though they can see that our civilisation is dead and exists only in the museums and in library books. I am not asking for anyone to convert themselves and become westerners, but I would like to raise the question how can you survive if you cannot comprehend that the world had changed? Don’t you know that unless you change you are doomed!!

Sometimes I feel it is futile to argue with certain kinds of people, who think that what they believe in is set in stone and hence they leave you no room for constructive discussion. They think it is only them who matter as if they are the only important living creature that counts. But I learnt, sometimes in a hard way, that controversial and contentious issues need to take their natural course of time and a lot of effort to become acceptable or at least tolerable. In other times it is the shock factor which does the trick.

Questions I have: How can we change this view of women who wear veils? Would changing news/newspaper articles/internet’s focus on veiling be a step towards a different perspective on women in the Middle East?