Site Meter

Sharia-Compliant Fashion

April 25, 2016
Share

Screen Shot 2015-12-17 at 4.39.23 AM“…The first victim of the Islamist war in Algeria was a girl who refused the veil, Katia Bengana, who defended her choice even as the executioners pointed a gun at her head. In 1994, Algiers literally awoke to walls plastered with posters announcing the execution of unveiled women….”

Have you paid any attention to the oppression of women in Western society, in order to appease radical Islam.  Do you know what Sharia Compliant Fashion is?  A recent headline calls Western women to task. Iranian women call on Western tourists to violate hijab law to fight against oppression.

“...The decision by a British department store to include Sharia-compliant bathing suits in its summer swimwear collection has ignited a debate over the “mainstreaming” of Islamic fashion in Europe.

Marks & Spencer (M&S), the iconic British retail chain, is now marketing the burkini, a full-length swimsuit ostensibly designed to protect the modesty of Muslim women.

Supporters of the move say it “liberates” Muslim women in Europe by giving them the choice to wear whatever they want. Detractors argue the exact opposite: they say the burkini “enslaves” Muslim women, many of whom are facing mounting pressure to submit to Islamic dress codes, even though they are citizens of secular European states.

Viewed more broadly, a growing number of European fashion companies are seeking to profit from the rising demand for Islamic clothing. Business is business, they say. But critics argue that by jumping on the Muslim fashion bandwagon, those companies are encouraging the visible public expression of Islam in Europe — and promoting Muslim separateness rather than integration….”

The black monstrosity on the left is an Islamic bathing suit.   It suits a religion where women are increasingly brutalized and threatened with rape and physical violence.

Gladstone Institute

Gladstone Institute

Hajib Day

Gladstone Institute

Gladstone Institute

“…First we betrayed these women by accepting their slavery as a “liberation,” then Air France started veiling women while in Iran as a form of “respect.” It is also revealing of the hypocrisy of most of Western feminists, who are always ready to denounce the “homophobic” Christians and “sexism” in the U.S., but keep silent about the sexual crimes of radical Islam. In the words of the feminist Rebecca Brink Vipond, “I won’t take the bait of a patronizing call for feminists to set aside their goals in America to address problems in Muslim theocracies.” These are the same feminists who abandoned Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the brave Dutch-Somali dissident from Islam, to her own defenses even after she found refuge in the U.S.: they prevented her from speaking at Brandeis University.

For how long we will maintain our ban on female genital mutilation (FGM)? A study just published in the U.S. suggests that allowing some “milder” forms of female mutilation, which affect 200 million women in the world, is more “culturally sensitive” than a ban on the practice, and that a ritual “nick” of girls’ vaginas could prevent a more radical disfiguring practice. The proposal didn’t come from Tariq Ramadan or an Islamic court in Sudan, but from two American gynecologists, Kavita Shah Arora and Allan J. Jacobs, who published the study in one of the most important scientific journals, the Journal of Medical Ethics….”

Veiling women in Islam is something new.  Yet liberals insist that we are being culturally aware by accommodating such barbarian practices without noting that in doing so they are legitimizing the very worst of those who oppress and brutalize women.

Gladstone Institute

Gladstone Institute

I’ve been writing about the Islamic War on Muslim Women for some time, now.  One of the problems with cultural sensitive liberal values is they don’t quite understand that all women have a right be modern.  Cultural sensitivity is so obscenely pandering, now, that there are even some American physicians who are saying that there are ways to mutilate a young woman’s genitalia, and have even written a paper about it.

“…A controversial new study published in the Journal of Medical Ethics says “nicking” the genitals of young girls is an acceptable compromise for the practice of female genital mutilation (FGM) in the West.

Arguing that criminalizing FGM in Western countries such as the U.S. and U.K. has pushed the practice underground, the authors suggest a “compromise solution” that would legally permit a minimal form of genital mutilation “in recognition of its cultural and religious obligations.” Despite being perceived as a practice linked to Islam, FGM is a cultural practice that has no basis in religion. No religious texts prescribe FGM, according to the World Health Organization (WHO), while Human Rights Watch says the practice is “erroneously linked” to religion and “is not particular to any religious faith.”

In the study, published on Monday, U.S.-based authors Dr. Kavita Shah Arora, director of quality, obstetrics and gynecology at the MetroHealth Medical Center in Cleveland and Dr. Allan Jacobs, professor of reproductive medicine at Stony Brook University, write that “in order to better protect female children from the serious and long-term harms of some types of non-therapeutic [FGM], we must adopt a more nuanced position that acknowledges a wide spectrum of procedures that alter female genitalia.”

One must be culturally sensitive, nick the privates of a girl to appease to barbarism the same way one must culturally sensitive about the hijab, even it has absolutely no basis in fact in the Koran.  The worst bigotry against people who are Muslims who want to be normal Muslims and normal Americans, and not stick out like a sore thumb being required to adapt restrictive dress are not conservatives but well meaning liberals.

Share

1 Trackback or Pingback


WordPress SEO fine-tune by Meta SEO Pack from Poradnik Webmastera