Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  1 2 (2 total)
04:21 PM on 05/19/2012
As far as I know there is nothing in the Koran saying women should be fully covered. Just as in the Bible, women are to dress modestly. The now suspended Catholic mandate which required women to cover their heads had no relevance in original Bible theology. It appears all religions have been tainted and corrupted for man's own personal agenda and bear little resemblance to the original teachings, and of course we have no proof of the veracity of those either.
Kittie King
09:47 AM on 05/21/2012
You are right - I interpret the wearing of this scarf in many western born and raised women as a "look how pious" I am show. Kind of a little display to others - I liken it to the exaggerated huge christian crosses that show up on the oversized purses, loud boots, cell phone covers - you name it - see what a good christian I am - look how big and shiny my cross is... same same.
Stacy Ann Tucker
Liberal with a capital "L"
03:43 PM on 05/19/2012
Hollister calls their sales clerks "models" and only hires kids that fit their idealized image of potential customers. The employee at Hollister would have known that. Would she have expected to be able to wear the hijab if she was hired by Hooters?
I think therefore I woman:)
01:12 PM on 05/21/2012
Yeah that whole story really has nothing to do with this. She was in the wrong. She was not going to be fired for wearing her hijab in the back room, but she did not want to conform for dress code standards in the store front.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:20 PM on 05/19/2012
A Canuck, eh!
02:07 PM on 05/19/2012
I hate to say this, but I believe an employer has the right to introduce a dress code. Where I worked you were only allowed to wear jeans on a Friday and they couldn't be the ones with holes in them. Nowadays, you have no idea who a nun is, as they dress just like any ordinary person. Sikhs wear turbans but in some industries they are forbidden as it is a safety issue, as they have to wear hardhats. These people don't have a problem with it. I you work in a factory around machinery, you are not allowed the head scarves as they can get caught in the machinery.
Dem belly full but we hungry
04:34 PM on 05/21/2012
I agree about employer dress codes. However, I'd give the qualifier that there must be some concrete safety or other reason for doing so. If there's no such reason, it's discrimination. However, I'm not fine with government banning burqas.
IvyRedhead Hoffart
enjoying life in a messed-up world
01:23 PM on 05/19/2012
Dancing around words daily...
11:25 AM on 05/19/2012
I agree with the article's idea of the invisible burqa. I disagree with its idea that the visible one is acceptable. Its is symbolic of man's misogyny; his transfer of blame for a perceived lack of control, his lack of responsibility for actions of disrespect and disregard for women.
Carpe Cerevisi
08:40 AM on 05/19/2012
employers have a right to tell you what you can and can't wear while you are working for them. If you don't like it, go work for a religious organization who doesn't care what your wear. Once you carry your belief of imaginary friends into the real world, someone is going to call BS. Why do you need to cover your face while you're selling a cheeseburger? Why do you need to wear a 4 inch solid gold cross bouncing on your chest to prove you can stack papers in an office? If people quit their petty bitching over every petty incident every once in awhile we could really come together as a whole. Religion, in general, and their outdated customs and beliefs are at the base of damn near EVERY problem there is. After I bust my a-s all week working, I can't go buy myself a beer on sunday because some 'christian' says I can't..,. I don't believe in your childish, imaginary friend, I want a beer on sunday. I'm rambling now, but who cares, everyone is
07:50 AM on 05/19/2012
Women aren't important when it comes to our politics.

When the British ruled in India they outlawed the practice of burning the surviving wife of a dead man and said they would put to death anybody who tried to enforce it.

Yet we go into Iraq and create a constitution that enshrines a religion and allows practices that set women there back decades.
Contrarian advocate for truth and justice
07:46 AM on 05/19/2012
A good commentary. Well done.

It is ironic that the CIA decided to run a propaganda campaign about the treatment of women in the nations targeted for western wars for power and oil as a tool to mobilize European women in support of those wars.

Many inspired by these campaigns do not seem to consider that they are being manipulated and that killing women and the people around them does not liberate women..

The campaign is just another form of exploitation.

Notice how our leaders respond to Code Pink. That reflects their true attitude.

The most effective campaigns for women's rights have been led by socialists and peace activists. That may be a model for going forward.
12:53 AM on 05/19/2012
Another example of the ideological alliance between right-wing fundamentalist Islam and center-left liberalism. Both seem to oppose rigth-wing secularism; right wing Christianity; right-wing Judaism and Hinduism, but enthusiastically applaud right wing Islamic doctrines.
Go figure... I can't.
likes all cats more than most people
10:21 AM on 05/19/2012
" the ideological alliance between right-wing fundamentalist Islam and center-left liberalism"

That statement is not only totally false, it's inane.
10:30 AM on 05/19/2012
"hat statement is not only totally false, it's inane. "

Your record, as a Western liberal who spend majority of his time defending various fundamentalist Islamic ( but never Christian, Jewish or Hindu) causes proves my point conclusively.
Dancing around words daily...
10:55 AM on 05/19/2012
Obviously this enso has difficulty with comprehension. Trying to correct his fallacious assumption will get you no where but ridiculed. Try as you might, there will be no dent in his don quixote armor. Windmills are everywhere.
11:30 PM on 05/18/2012
To be clear...before the campaign to ban the niqabs, the Muslim women living in France had the right to choose if they want to wear the niqabs ? Their husbands fully and completely supported them choosing to wear or not to wear them?

There are many companies in the US that do not allow ANY religious symbols to be worn by employees when interacting with the public.
03:48 AM on 05/19/2012
The niqab is less a religious symbol and more of a cultural implement of modesty, according to a friend of mine who grew up in Iraq. US companies wouldn't require a Mormon to wear mini skirts.
And to be clear, if these women have oppressive husbands, the solution is not to REPLACE the husbands in who makes the oppressive decisions about women . The solution to empower women as best they can to make their own choices. You can't force social change, you can only ease it along.
10:50 AM on 05/19/2012
I have a hard time believing that a Mormon woman would apply for a job that requires a mini skirt. If you can prove otherwise, I'd like to know.
Dancing around words daily...
10:58 AM on 05/19/2012
There are many places where short skirts or shorts or other less modest attire are required as a uniform. They can require that the uniform be worn. So, yes, in that regard, if you have a religious objection to it then you won't be wearing the uniform but it is not because your employer is forcing you to; its because you won't be working there.
Sarah Trickey
love, luck and lollipops. Narf!
10:30 PM on 05/18/2012
Thank you!
Kara Kramer
08:06 PM on 05/18/2012
Amen, sister!