What is it his business to intrude on someone's personal choice of attire?
Niqab is not equal to terrorism.
Niqab is not equal to wife-beating.
Niqab is not equal to male domination.
Niqab is not equal to "servitude".
Niqab is not equal to "undermining of dignity".
"Prisoners behind netting, cut off from all social life, deprived of identity."
Wow. Are they really?
Want to read my future posts? Don't forget to subscribe
6 comments:
Uh yeah a little.
Meg, I note your "a little".
In what ways are they deprived of identity? Who is cutting them off from all social life? And why are they prisoners? Who is their jailer? To whom are they in servitude?
men
So if I was to wear niqab, would it have to do with women?
This response by France has always annoyed and concerned me. Although I understand Meg's point, I simply don't think it is any of the government's business and certainly must seem like a huge intrusion into the lives of Muslim women.
I say concentrate on the issues that really matter - no abuse, no clitorectomies, no multiple wives, etc.
Good points by Lynn, but Ahmed the point is that men DON'T wear niqab. I won't defend Sarkozy without knowing his true intent with his statements, but was he questioning how voluntary it is exactly for women to wear niqab? No, while I don't think he was referring to terrorism I think he was pointing to whether or not there is personal choice or freedom.
So in your above statements you listed what niqab was not equal to. But what does it mean? Perhaps not only Sarkozi, but I need to be enlightened as well...
Post a Comment