Comments on: It's a Nice Day for a White Wedding

By: Manas

Manas — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:41:24 +0000

Absolutely agreed, Rob.

By: Manas

Manas — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:41:24 +0000

Absolutely agreed, Rob.

By: Robert

Robert — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:37:53 +0000

“It?Äôs also widely held that jilbab-wearing young women are often wearing it just for the image, and are in fact ‘very naughty?Äô.”

It’s not much different to the stereotypical “Catholic schoolgirl” then.

The concern I have about the use of the hijab or more significant coverings to avoid the male sexual gaze is the same as the concern I have about the requirement that queer people be “discreet”. There is an assumption that a woman who does not wear that covering is fair game for sexual ogling, despite the fact that she is doing something completely non-sexual. It is a double-standard because men don’t share the burden of covering up to avoid being sexualised.

By: Robert

Robert — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:37:53 +0000

“It?Äôs also widely held that jilbab-wearing young women are often wearing it just for the image, and are in fact ‘very naughty?Äô.”

It’s not much different to the stereotypical “Catholic schoolgirl” then.

By: Anthony

Anthony — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:16:34 +0000

In Indonesia, in my experience men tend to fetishise and eroticise women wearing the jilbab. It is partly the image of purity/virginity, and partly the way it focuses men’s thoughts on imagining what’s underneath. It’s also widely held that jilbab-wearing young women are often wearing it just for the image, and are in fact ‘very naughty’. This is of course frowned upon, in one of those doublethinks that men are so good at. What can I say, we’re incorrigible.
It’s nice that women can feel empowered by wearing them, but from conversations I’ve had with men there, their reasons are at variance with reality. Still, if it makes them feel better, that is ample reason to do it.

By: Anthony

Anthony — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:16:34 +0000

By: Manas

Manas — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:00:05 +0000

Interestingly, though, a lot of Islamic women say that they feel empowered by wearing the hijab/headdress – it means that men are not able to look at their features, and thus less able to see them as sexual objects. Because men cannot observe anything except, often, the person’s eyes, or at any rate just their face, the focus is then on the conversation, the more substantial intellignence of the women with whom they are talking.

I do think, however, that there remains a large element of marginalisation and dehumanisation in the requirement that women wear the hijab. (Of course, again, it is not a requirement for all muslim women necessarily).

I also wonder whether that old idea that the more left to the imagination, the more imagining there is left to do, and the more imagining that will happen, plays any part in the equation.

I remain open to debate on this issue.

By: Manas

Manas — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:00:05 +0000

I also wonder whether that old idea that the more left to the imagination, the more imagining there is left to do, and the more imagining that will happen, plays any part in the equation.

I remain open to debate on this issue.

By: Darlene

Darlene — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 08:19:26 +0000

These pledges apparently have a failure rate of around 80% according to a study that was cited in The Australian last year.

People can choose to do as they wish, but there is something obsessive about the pledgers that gives them an obsessive “I’m not going to think about it, I’m not going to think about it” quality.

This desire for “purity” and certainity is not that different from the reasons some women in the United States gave in an article in Bust magazine as their reasons for converting to Islam.

Of course, even the Baptists don’t make women cover their heads so as not to attract sexual attention.

By: Vita

Vita — Mon, 21 Mar 2005 05:54:04 +0000

Interesting ‘test’.