Conflicts sway world of fashion- Muslim-ization' of Women's Fashion

[BryPGuy89]

inJESUS:

donno about the normal veil…but a face picture is a face picture not a burqa one…faces identify people, burqas no.

she can wear whatever she wants but a picture is a picture…thats the law…

is it haram for a nun to show her face or hair?

My overall point is that she wanted to wear her traditional clothing for the picture, she didn’t want to americanize her way of life to fit others wants.

 

[BryPGuy89]

StMarkEofE:

Now your being funny. Can you see police trying in vain to compare the licence photo with the owner. This photo could be a match for thousands of women wearing Burkas. How would you know who you are dealing with? Huh?

Im not making fun of the women but Muslim women do drive and need the correct requirements inorder to be legal to drive. Im sure you cannot see this do you? Or if you do, you are being slightly rediculous in your argument. But should we westerners be surprised by this? You live in a contradictory world when you come out with “logic” like this. Im sure that most women given the chance to shed the Burkas would do so, but you and I know that this choice would never be given to the women of your world.

I know Indian women who refuse to get their license because they have to bend around ways of their life and traditions to get one. Many culture and what not have things were women can’t show their faces and hair and what not. We want freedom of religion as long as it doesn’t interfere with other things right? Is that what you’re telling me, freedom only if you do what exactly we want you to do?

Side note, where do you think I live? I’m an American citizen in the United States of America. I see the things I do in the land of the “free” where muslim women often choose to continue wearing traditional things.

 

[pro_universal]

My overall point is that she wanted to wear her traditional clothing for the picture, she didn’t want to americanize her way of life to fit others wants.

Right, and watching that case, it was clearly something the woman wanted to do. It seems like for some on this thread: choice is good if women wear less clothes to protest islam, but it’s bad if they choose to wear more clothes because they’re muslim. That isn’t rational to me.

I’ll ask the question again: Why are we harping on clothing customs that are not that different from our own Catholic tradition of modesty? Women used to cover their hair in church, some even wore veils.

The principle involved here, namely that people should dress modestly and not to accentuate sexuality in public, is a good one. I see no principled way to bash muslims over their fashions without also bashing our own Church.

 

[inJESUS]

BryPGuy89:

I’m not Muslim nor is Pro Universal that is lying for one. It is rude to attack to individuals who do the Church’s will and follow the teachings of their faith. You can call me what ever you want, but I don’t have to worry about what you say, I know the truth and so does God. I could call you a Hindu, but I know Hindis with more appropriate behavior and opinions. It means nothing to lie about the faith of an individual.

i don’t think the Church forbids me from saying my opinion; here it is again: yes to modesty, no to muslim outfit coz its not about modesty but fear from man and fear from your own body and fear from what people might think about you…i have a muslim friend who wears modestly without the veil or islamic outfit …that IS about modesty. Hair or hands or ankles are NOT sexual objects…if muslim men cant see them without “feeling” something then they have some psychological problem called repression…in my country it is muslim men who stare and open their mouthes even when they see a modestly dressed woman.
Jusus said : know the truth it shall set you free…

 

[BryPGuy89]

pro_universal:

Right, and watching that case, it was clearly something the woman wanted to do. It seems like for some on this thread: choice is good if women wear less clothes to protest islam, but it’s bad if they choose to wear more clothes because they’re muslim. That isn’t rational to me.

I’ll ask the question again: Why are we harping on clothing customs that are not that different from our own Catholic tradition of modesty? Women used to cover their hair in church, some even wore veils.

The principle involved here, namely that people should dress modestly and not to accentuate sexuality in public, is a good one. I see no principled way to bash muslims over their fashions without also bashing our own Church.

Exactly!

 

[BryPGuy89]

inJESUS:

i don’t think the Church forbids me from saying my opinion; here it is again: yes to modesty, no to muslim outfit coz its not about modesty but fear from man and fear from your own body and fear from what people might think about you…i have a muslim friend who wears modestly without the veil or islamic outfit …that IS about modesty. Hair or hands or ankles are NOT sexual objects…if muslim men cant see them without “feeling” something then they have some psychological problem called repression…in my country it is muslim men who stare and open their mouthes even when they see a modestly dressed woman.
Jusus said : know the truth it shall set you free…

The church does say something about your opinions if they are negative and heteful to others, escpecially those excepted by the Church.

 

[pro_universal]

Hair or hands or ankles are NOT sexual objects…if muslim men cant see them without “feeling” something then they have some psychological problem called repression…in my country it is muslim men who stare and open their mouthes even when they see a modestly dressed woman.

Okay, so what is your point on this thread exactly now? Are you posting to take an opportunity to claim that all muslim men are depraved, or are you talking about clothing?

It seems like some people will take any opportunity whatsoever to find a way to bash muslims. This is definitely not in tune with the Spirit of the Church.

And one thing to consider…maybe in the west no one stares because nudity, half-nudity, and sex are so common that it won’t even offend anymore. That’s a bad direction to follow, in my opinion.

 

[inJESUS]

pro_universal:

Right, and watching that case, it was clearly something the woman wanted to do. It seems like for some on this thread: choice is good if women wear less clothes to protest islam, but it’s bad if they choose to wear more clothes because they’re muslim. That isn’t rational to me.

I’ll ask the question again: Why are we harping on clothing customs that are not that different from our own Catholic tradition of modesty? Women used to cover their hair in church, some even wore veils.

The principle involved here, namely that people should dress modestly and not to accentuate sexuality in public, is a good one. I see no principled way to bash muslims over their fashions without also bashing our own Church.

really? so it is either pornography or tent-like outfit? cant you find something in between? no one is asking muslimas not to wear islamic outfit…we are talking about modesty and modesty doesnt have to be THAT extremist…do you feel something if you see hair or arms or ankles??? so you either walk naked or wear a hundred tent?

So far we all agree here that modesty is required…but not the islamic one not because it is islamic but because such extremism makes no senses…

 

[pro_universal]

really? so it is either pornography or tent-like outfit? cant you find something in between? no one is asking muslimas not to wear islamic outfit…we are talking about modesty and modesty doesnt have to be THAT extremist

As you well know from your friend, the vast majority of Muslims do not wear burqas. Another poster pointed out above that this is a fashion show, and hence is an extreme version of the trend. Now, if because of the notoriety of muslims fashion is getting more conservative, I’m saying that’s a good thing. We could use a serving of modesty in Europe and America.

So far we all agree here that modesty is required…but not the islamic one not because it is islamic but because such extremism makes no senses.

Who is 1) saying that all muslims must be under a complete tent or 2) saying that a tent is what we non-muslims should wear also?

 

[inJESUS]

Okay, so what is your point on this thread exactly now?

my first post was about the difference between modesty and islamic outfit.

Are you posting to take an opportunity to claim that all muslim men are depraved, or are you talking about clothing?

if that was my intention, i should have said it earlier…i just said my experience of years living with muslim men.

It seems like some people will take any opportunity whatsoever to find a way to bash muslims. This is definitely not in tune with the Spirit of the Church.

you dont have to bring the Church everytime one is agaisnt your opinion; the Church does not prohibit you from saying your opinion/experience…

And one thing to consider…maybe in the west no one stares because nudity, half-nudity, and sex are so common that it won’t even offend anymore. That’s a bad direction to follow, in my opinion.

you dont stare when you understand who you are and who the other person is…i don’t have to dress a thousand stuff because the OTHER might think in a bad way…i dress with modesty…if the other person cannot see my hair or arm or ankle is because he has some problem not myself…when you indoctrinate people that your hair or arm are sexual, then you cant blame them if they become “weird” everytime they see some hair…this is because they are taught to look at the human body from a purely wordly and fleshly perspective.
Know the truth, it shall set you free, thats the difference between heavenly teachings and earthly teachings…know who you are.

 

[StMarkEofE]

BryPGuy89:

I know Indian women who refuse to get their license because they have to bend around ways of their life and traditions to get one. Many culture and what not have things were women can’t show their faces and hair and what not.

All well and good that they CHOSE not to get their license but again it is a choice not a obligation. I can respect that. Chosing what to wear is a lot more virtuous than being commanded to wear a certain uniform. Im sure there are Indian women who do get their license and do drive. I have seen them and continue to see them everyday.

BryPGuy89:

We want freedom of religion as long as it doesn’t interfere with other things right? Is that what you’re telling me, freedom only if you do what exactly we want you to do?

No, Im not infering this at all. Freedom of religion is just that, but if you want to drive in the U.S. there is a resposibility to get your photo taken for identification. Your choice: Get a license and get your photo or dont drive. It is still your choice. We dont force drivers licenses on people here.

BryPGuy89:

Side note, where do you think I live? I’m an American citizen in the United States of America. I see the things I do in the land of the “free” where muslim women often choose to continue wearing traditional things.

I honestly thought you lived in a muslim land because anyone living here in the U.S. and have been here a while wil surely see the points I was trying to make especially the democracy issues in previous posts. So you dont want to assimilate into our society? You want all the advantages of western democracies that are non existant in Muslim countries but yet you feel compelled to condem us while reaping the fruits of our republic. How interesting and sad.

 

[inJESUS]

As you well know from your friend, the vast majority of Muslims do not wear burqas. Another poster pointed out above that this is a fashion show, and hence is an extreme version of the trend. Now, if because of the notoriety of muslims fashion is getting more conservative, I’m saying that’s a good thing. We could use a serving of modesty in Europe and America.

no one is talking about whether it is an obligation or not…as you have already read, we are all agaisnt extremism…modesty does NOT have to be like muslim outfit; as simple as this. If muslims say it is a muslim tradition then fine, but it is NOT about modesty.

 

[inJESUS]

BryPGuy89:

The church does say something about your opinions if they are negative and heteful to others, escpecially those excepted by the Church.

hateful? yea right…stop being either paranoic or pc…there is NOTHING hateful in : yes to modesty , no to extremism that is not about modesty.

 

[inJESUS]

BryPGuy89:

inJESUS:

My overall point is that she wanted to wear her traditional clothing for the picture, she didn’t want to americanize her way of life to fit others wants.

let her wear whatever she feels like…even her bed sheet…but if she wants to drive, she must have a photo…it’d be great if she killed someone with her car and no one could identify her coz of the burqa right??

 

[pro_universal]

you dont have to bring the Church everytime one is agaisnt your opinion; the Church does not prohibit you from saying your opinion/experience…

Okay, which is it now: are you accusing me of being Muslim, or are you claiming that I rely on the Church’s teachings too much to support my points? Or that I focus too much on what the Church wants from us?

Do you see a bit of a schism there between those two claims?

i dress with modesty…if the other person cannot see my hair or arm or ankle is because he has some problem not myself…when you indoctrinate people that your hair or arm are sexual, then you cant blame them if they become “weird” everytime they see some hair

Okay, but you are again not getting the point. The Church used to be full of women who covered their hair. That is a custom that Christians have undeniably practiced in the past. So were all of our ancestors weird? Was it wrong to ask that women cover their hair in the past?

Strangely, the relaxation of all of those customs has now turned to short skirts and wide-open blouses. I do not see how that is a good thing.

 

[pro_universal]

You want all the advantages of western democracies that are non existant in Muslim countries but yet you feel compelled to condem us while reaping the fruits of our republic. How interesting and sad.

StMark, I think you are misreading BryP’s point. With the good comes the bad, and there is no denying that.

Sure, it’s great that we have freedoms, but we also have scandalously relaxed sexual and social norms. Do you think it’s good that the average European or American parent doesn’t find it unusual that a sixteen year old girl is having sex? Is it good that teens have almost unlimited freedom to spend time together while mom and dad are at work, and no one seems to have a problem with it?

Yes, we live in a great country here in the US and it gives us very good lives, but to put it beyond criticism is to concede defeat to the people who think it’s “backwards and oppressive” to forbid one’s teenage daughters from having “safe sex” with boys.

 

[inJESUS]

Okay, which is it now: are you accusing me of being Muslim, or are you claiming that I rely on the Church’s teachings too much to support my points? Or that I focus too much on what the Church wants from us?

Do you see a bit of a schism there between those two claims?

show me where does the Church teach you not to give your opinion/experience…if you can’t find it, then do not bring the Church issue anytime you find a different opinion.

Okay, but you are again not getting the point. The Church used to be full of women who covered their hair.

yes, in the church…

That is a custom that Christians have undeniably practiced in the past.

correct, CUSTOM.

So were all of our ancestors weird? Was it wrong to ask that women cover their hair in the past?

no…and it could apply now as well in a sacred place…furthermore, i dont think these people had a problem showing their face or hair to get a photo…thats the difference between modesty and non-sense extremism.

Strangely, the relaxation of all of those customs has now turned to short skirts and wide-open blouses. I do not see how that is a good thing.

yea sure coz it is either nakedness or tents…you cant see in between…and as if these outfit is “Christian”…that how muslims are indoctrinated : don’t be like infidels who have no modesty ! thats sheer stupidity.

Yes to modesty…hair is not sexual…early Christian women used to cover a bit their hair in the church coz it is a sacred place…in the case of islam, hair is looked at as if it were sexual (ankles and arms as well)…thats pathetic extremism…these come out from someone who looked a women in a sexual way…

 

[pro_universal]

show me where does the Church teach you not to give your opinion/experience…if you can’t find it, then do not bring the Church issue anytime you find a different opinion.

This isn’t about differing opinions. This is about harboring anger towards people with different opinions, ie, like the way you speak in angry terms about muslims and condemn everything they do. That is what is against Church teaching.

yea sure coz it is either nakedness or tents…you cant see in between…and as if these outfit is “Christian”…that how muslims are indoctrinated : don’t be like infidels who have no modesty ! thats sheer stupidity.

See above. Neither muslims nor anyone on this forum is claiming that full tent-suits must be worn. You yourself said you know Muslims who do not wear burqas. Most muslim women don’t; however, standards of dress in the muslim world are definitely more conservative than the US. If they can influence us to be a little more reserved, that’s a good thing.

 

[inJESUS]

pro_universal:

StMark, I think you are misreading BryP’s point. With the good comes the bad, and there is no denying that.

Sure, it’s great that we have freedoms, but we also have scandalously relaxed sexual and social norms. Do you think it’s good that the average European or American parent doesn’t find it unusual that a sixteen year old girl is having sex? Is it good that teens have almost unlimited freedom to spend time together while mom and dad are at work, and no one seems to have a problem with it?

Yes, we live in a great country here in the US and it gives us very good lives, but to put it beyond criticism is to concede defeat to the people who think it’s “backwards and oppressive” to forbid one’s teenage daughters from having “safe sex” with boys.

who said we accept this? or are you impying that “Christians” allow this? is the US a Christian country? do you want us to oblige them to live according to Jesus?

 

[JimG]

People will wear what they want to wear. It is quite possible to dress modestly without being completely covered up or wearing a shapeless garment. There is a lot of room between the extremes, in my opinion.

As to the driver’s license issue, I guess the question is whether the license photo will be able to serve it purpose of identification. That’s a legitimate state interest.