69 million page views

Protection for women

Reader comment on item: Keeping Muslim Girls under Wraps in France
in response to reader comment: Unbelievable

Submitted by Oswald (Australia), Aug 18, 2007 at 10:17

I am often intrigued about the comment by apologists for, and advocates of women, societies and religions that promote the need to wear excessively concealing clothing on the grounds that it is to protect the women who are so treasured by their menfolk.

I ask my self "protected from whom?". Since this tradition has been brought to the West from predominantly Muslim lands the answer has to be protected from Muslim men. But how does that fit with the notion that Muslim men, if they have truly submitted to Divine Will, ought not be people from whom women need protection in the first place?

Each Muslim man must suspect that a good proportion of other so called Muslim men are not actually Muslim. It all becomes a bit nonsensical because the suspectees must also suspected others in their turn, maybe even the original suspectors.

I just don't get it.

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Submit a comment on this item

<< Previous Comment      Next Comment >>

Reader comments (23) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
Does it make sense? [84 words]HAAug 19, 2007 12:47106521
1Unbelievable [137 words]Ishan AlmaziAug 11, 2007 18:57105931
1Protection for women [149 words]OswaldAug 18, 2007 10:17105931
Human values ?? [52 words]tom nortonJan 9, 2006 14:2731350
Be courteous to your Creator [83 words]HishamApr 11, 2006 13:0431350
To prove the case, throw in the whole thing [69 words]Taimur BegJan 9, 2006 07:3731328
Stop Pointing others !! [122 words]FrazJan 9, 2006 15:4231328
Read carefully first, then comment [123 words]Taimur BegJan 9, 2006 16:1631328
Reply to Taimur Beg [111 words]Tom NortonJan 9, 2006 16:5031328
You are missing the point Taimur [123 words]John GiannascaJan 9, 2006 17:1331328
you didn't understand !! [455 words]FrazJan 9, 2006 19:5631328
Re: Taimur Beg's misconception [131 words]KafirJan 9, 2006 20:5531328
U got it all wrong Mr.Taimur [186 words]Aumprakash reddyJan 9, 2006 21:4231328
1An example of the problem before us [439 words]Taimur BegJan 9, 2006 22:2831328
bad logic as usual [130 words]TaimurJan 10, 2006 10:1531328
as usual blame others for your problems...typical [239 words]Aumprakash reddyJan 10, 2006 17:0331328
To: reddy [207 words]TaimurJan 11, 2006 11:2031328
to taimur---dont justify unjustifible [179 words]aumprakash reddyJan 11, 2006 17:5731328
Clarification [310 words]TaimurJan 12, 2006 02:0531328
Taimur Bug grow up now !! [231 words]tomJan 12, 2006 14:3231328
u dont get it do you [320 words]Aumprakash ReddyJan 12, 2006 18:1831328
A small minority doing something absurd you say,Mr. Beg? [492 words]Little HammerJan 6, 2008 14:1131328
why not sending him back to Arabia? [210 words]bruno, ITJan 9, 2006 03:1731316

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)