I'm just gonna throw this one out to everyone as more of a rant than a finely-crafted piece of commentary. It's a long and bumpy ride so strap on your seatbelt and hang on.
A few days ago I noticed this story about a female Muslim police officer in Britain that refused to shake hands with Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair during her graduation ceremony. She refused to do so on religious grounds. Specifically, her faith prevents her from touching another male other than her husband or close relative. More on this one later.
Next I get wind of this little beauty. A 24-year-old Muslim teacher named Aishah Azmi refused to remove her veil in class after pupils claimed it was difficult to understand her. She was promptly sacked and has filed suit claiming her religious beliefs were discriminated against. More on this one later.
Lastly, we go to Detroit where Ginnnah Muhammad, a 42-year-old Muslim woman, is pulling out the religion card. Muhammed refused to remove her veil in small-claims court at the request of District Judge Paul Paruk. Paruk claims that he needed to see her face to determine her truthfulness. Muhammed was contesting a $2,750 charge to repair her rental car. More on this later.
Now first I want to get something made clear. I personally don't give a crap what another person wears or believes in. If a woman wants to cover herself up like a beekeeper. Fine. If you want to run around naked. Great. If you choose to believe in Jesus, Muhammed, Buddha, FSM, or nothing at all. More power to you. But there is a catch. You have to accommodate others beliefs and make an effort to be part of society if you choose to reap it's benefits.
Now back to the first story with the whole I can't shake hands with another man thing. For this woman to not even shake the hand of her boss is just retarded. What the hell is her hang-up? As a matter of fact why is Islam so messed up when it comes to seeing and touching women? There seems to be some sort of wacky fetish thing going on. Are Muslim women not allowed to touch another man for fear that they might break down and start having sex? Do Muslim men need their women covered because they can't contain themselves? I'm being totally serious.
I've seen American women travel to the Middle East and wear a hijab. So why the hell can't this ignorant police officer shake the hand of her boss in England? Better yet, how can she be a cop in the first place? I'm pretty sure she'll have to touch other men during arrests and rescue missions. Luckily, Muslim law is flexible though in this case apparently. Sheikh Ibraham Mogra, of the Muslim Council of Britain, says:
People should not be alarmed by the officer's beliefs and that Muslim law was not set in concrete. If the officer is called to a male victim who has been shot, the laws go out of the window. If she has to resuscitate that dying person, Muslim law will then change and allow her all sorts of physical contact because a life is at risk and life is so precious. Muslim law will say, 'forget everything, save this life'"
Well if Muslim law is so flexible and wise, then why can't it let a female employee shake hands with her boss? Seriously, this is so damn stupid that my eyes hurt reading about it.
Now how about this teacher's refusal to remove her headpiece at school. Now don't get me wrong. I actually support Muslims wearing their hijab in the classroom, just as I support Jews wearing their little head covers. I honestly don't care and actually I like the diversity and exposure to different cultures. But as a teacher, one has to make sacrifices for the better of the class. There is no real reason why this woman can't simply remove her beekeeper mask at school. And I don't want to hear about how her religion dictates it. To me it sounds like she honestly doesn't know why, she just blames it on her religion. Did she ever question WHY it is so wrong in the first place?
And lastly we go to the Ginnah Muhammed, the Muslim lady who refused to let the judge see her face. This really pisses me off. It reminds of that Muslim woman who refused to take her hijab off for her driver’s license. If you want to be a part of another society, then you have to make some concessions damn it! I'm not saying toss out all your beliefs, but some flexibility would be nice. When I'm visiting a foreign country I do my best to adjust to their customs and rules. I don't expect their whole country to cater to my needs. It's just common courtesy and common sense. Neither of which I see in Islam.
My rant is over.
Related posts:
- Muslim Cabbies Ditch Common Sense In Favor Of Islam
- Hijab Or Bust
- Common Sense And Christianity
- Christian Hypocrites Declare War On Common Sense
- Hijabs Rooted In Kinky Ceremony?
January 24th, 2007 at 6:17 pm
I wonder if this police officer will be exempt from arresting men.
January 24th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
Yeah, I agree Police Officer thing is dopey, but from a purely pragmatic point of view I think it’s worth the tradeoff. This woman’s immersion in similarly dopey rules could open a lot of doors - think of the opportunities she would have to enforce that “Wife beating is NOT therapy”, just by virtue of easy access to the “target” population.
Besides, surely there would be alternative islama-friendly gestures that would suffice sufficiently for sucking up to the brass - surely a suitably servile exhibition of saluting, or even that weird deep-bowing-with-tripple-hand-wave that hollywood likes us to think arabian knights used to use.
At the end of the day, the “culture” she is trying to fit in to here is that of “british public service” - the real ritual here is “brown-noseing”, the handshake is just one of many acceptable ways, surely.
I don’t remember hearing that Islam had any rules against brown-noseing.
January 24th, 2007 at 8:17 pm
How the fuck are you suppose to do your job, if your religion prohibits you from doing anything involving men?
January 25th, 2007 at 1:38 am
I think some Muslims has to understand in order to live in foriegn country, we should be at least open about what society we are in, and how to deal with this traditions with out losing ours.
I agree with Gasonmo, it’s something I don’t like about Muslims, and it really makes me mad, we have to communicate, we have to understand other people in order for them to understand us.
I don’t think if she shows the judge her face, the face is not one of things that our prophet said to cover.
I hope that Muslims change the attitude some how, and try to be part of the society without changing the basic tradition.
January 25th, 2007 at 1:40 am
“Do Muslim men need their women covered because they can’t contain themselves?”
Well, there is the “defense” of rape “she was not completely covered, therefore she wanted it”. It thus seems like they indeed can’t contain themselves - precisely because their women are covered and they are thus to assume that a woman only uncovers herself if she does “unclean” things like sex.
In any case it is not in the interest of a muslim to make any concessions even if Americans are “properly” clothed when they go to muslim countries (which should rather be seen as some form of self defense), because they want not to fit in but all societies to be muslim.
On the other hand, I myself also do not like to shake hands - though I don’t do that because of some religion but because I consider courtesy yet another superficial tradition which I want to be part in as much as in religion.
January 25th, 2007 at 2:26 am
My wish for the future is that all the governments in the world grew some balls and banned wearing of religious signs/clothing in public. Not just schools, colleges as in France, but all public places. BTW this should include all symbols no matter what religion.
Further this by banning any religious restrictions, by defining them as means to control another person. If a man denies his wife walking alone out in the street, or even beside him, then of to court he goes.
I’ve had it with this shit. In my country we have laws that have emerged through critical thinking during the last 1000 years, if you claim you have something that trumps our law then try to get it accepted/included as a general law, do not tempt applying another set of laws for the people close to you.
As it is today we accept this BS because they hide behind the right to follow any religion, but somewhere along the way we forgot that many religions don’t only limit the believer’s actions, but also the actions of the people close to him/her. This should not be accepted because it actually violates the very same principle, since the (usually the wife) can’t believe and act according to what she defines as correct.
January 25th, 2007 at 4:34 am
@NewOne
That would be a short trial:
judge: You are charged with bla bla bla the first witness, your wife
wife: I don’t get it! This is how I want to live, this is how I enjoy my life, why do you interfere?
Of course you could argue that she’s brainwashed, bullied or whatever you like, but in the end she’s a grown up person who is (supposed to be) able to handle herself.
Oh, on an other note, for once I agree with Mohammed. The face cover is not Islamic, it is some Persian tradition(ever saw those half naked dancers who cover their faces?) But the thing about handshaking with men is still Islamic, many women here do it.
January 25th, 2007 at 4:49 am
Well we could fix that, no witness, no judge and no jury, just straight to execution^^
January 25th, 2007 at 4:51 am
NewOne said:
“…this [ban] should include all symbols no matter what religion.”
Wow! Yeah. That sounds like the free society that I want to live in.
Perhaps we could all wear exactly the same thing in order to avoid any controversy.
Which would you prefer:
* The classic Maoist all-black everyman uniform, or
* more of a Brave New World jumpsuit.
Do you not realize that your magic solution to religious restrictions is, in fact, a proposal for a neo-fascist society?
====
As for the police officer and the school teacher, the answer seems simple:
As a private citizen you can wear whatever you want, refuse to touch people, etc. But as an employee of the state you have to fulfill the basic job requirements. If you’re not willing to do that — because of your religion, or due to some other mental illness — then [b]don’t take the job.[/b] Duh. WTF were you thinking in the first place? Why are you wasting our time?
As for the woman in court who refused to remove her veil? She loses. Religious belief doesn’t trump societal necessity. The Amish have to put headlights on their buggies and you have to show your face to the trier of fact (judge or jury). Simple, no brainer.
January 25th, 2007 at 9:38 am
Well, fotomatt you know, facism doesn’t happen by accident, we have to help it along.
And what kind of question is that? pffft, I would of course go for the Brave New World jumpsuit.
January 25th, 2007 at 10:41 am
This is really scary. Muslims are getting out of control. The problem is that no one have the balls to draw the line. NO, it should not be acceptable to drive a car with your face covered. No, it should not be allowed to travel with your face covered. No you should not be in court with your face covered. No yoyu cannot be a teacher or a doctor or a police officer or … with your face covered. This is COMON SENSE.
January 29th, 2007 at 6:14 pm
What the hell is a muslim doing in Hamtramck? That’s a Polish neighborhood.
Detroit is doomed!
January 30th, 2007 at 5:53 pm
it is worth saying that in 80’s , the queen of england went to saudi arabia and respected their beliefs and weared hijab.
while other people, dont accept to take a driving license photo without the little thing that coveres all the face(without the eyes).
July 30th, 2007 at 8:52 am
So she didn’t shake hands? How about some respect for her beliefs? It’s common in Europe for people to greet each other by embracing and kissing; I’ve met plenty of Americans who weren’t comfortable with that. Their hosts, however, were enlightened enough to understand that cultural and/or religious differences are just that: differences. Those differences in themselves do not make someone rude.
That being said, if you’re going to wear Niqqab (the face veil), don’t insist on teaching children who aren’t used to listening to women in niqaab. It’s common sense. If they can’t understand you, buckle down and figure out what’s more important to you: you’re resolve to wear niqaab or your desire to teach. Same goes in the courtroom. If you’re a niqaabi, chances are you’ll have some difficulty in the Western World if you choose a profession that requires a lot of public speaking. In its most basic elements, religion has nothing to do with it: you’re speaking through a piece of fabric that may prevent others from hearing you well enough to understand you.
But hijab in drivers license photos? I sincerely don’t understand what the big deal is against it. Hijab doesn’t cover up anything that is used in normal identification procedures. Sure, it covers a woman’s hair, but hair is not a reliable marker anymore as it is: a blonde one day can become a brunette the following day and bad a month later. Even eyecolor can be changed with colored contact lenses. So how, in reality, does hijab take anything of necessity away from a photo ID?
July 30th, 2007 at 10:03 am
Hello Emily,
Why should we have respect for her beliefs? She certainly deserves respect as a person, but what entitles her beliefs to automatic respect? Hell, I would even respect her discomfort with physical contact, whatever the reason. But her beliefs? No.
How can this be? Let me present an analogy. I know someone who is afraid of snakes. I respect her fear and do not expose her to any snakes. But the reason she fears snakes is not rational. I do not respect her beliefs about snakes. So you see, one can respect the odd behavioral needs of an individual without respecting the underlying beliefs that give rise to those needs.