An Additional Reason?

Submitted by Ron Thompson (United States), Sep 2, 2009 at 12:11

While this is an excellent update on an ongoing challenge, it may leave out an essential argument.

Perhaps because it seems too tindery or sensitive, Daniel Pipes omits to mention what is possibly even more of an issue than the relationship of burqas and niqabs to terrorist tactics - that is, that these garments are such a potent symbol of deep sexual pathology in Islamic culture.

Although always referred to as being in the service of "modesty", they really are a badge of radical inferiority in women's status, and radical immaturity in male gender relations with women. These garments do not deserve Western acceptance of the blatant rationalization for their imposition on women,apart from the brutally practical considerations Pipes raises in fighting terrorism and crime..

It is sad, tragic, and alarming that so many tens of millions of Islamic women appear to accept them as part of their culture and religion, but then we do not know the real feelings of a large percentage of them because of the threat of violence - acid in the face, public caning, death - that women face for opposing their imposition in the States that have succumbed or taken themselves backward to the medieval rule of mullahs and ayatollahs.

The nations of the West and elsewhere should consider legally banning these garments on the grounds of the pathologies they advertise about the Islamic attitude toward sex and women's rights as full human beings.

Personally, while I would not legally ban the voluntary wearing of headscarves (although I admire France for so doing in schools) I would express my personal disapproval of any woman doing so as long as they are imposed by law or violent custom anywhere in the world.

Ron Thompson

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".