From: ys3359@thor.albany.edu (Yazmasterj)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian
Subject: Re: Modest Dress
Date: 14 Sep 92 20:56:24 GMT
Organization: State University of New York at Albany

In article <1992Sep12.055928.905@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> darice@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Fred Rice) writes:
>In <1992Sep11.115707.13123@sei.cmu.edu> psc@sei.cmu.edu (Peter Capell) writes:
>>>"Prevention is better than cure..."
>
>>Agreed, therefore men should work on their minds and souls, and let women to
>>choose what they wear as they please--precisely.
>
>All post-adolescent men (& women) have a biological sex drive.  In my
>personal experience, the sight of scantily clad women just seems to
>enhance my lust, etc.  I'm sure this is a biological fact for the vast
>majority of men, I would be surprised if anyone disagreed. 

I have been silently observing this debate and now feel that I must respond.
Let me state first that I am a muslim woman.

In response to your point above, first of all, how do you define "scantily
clad"?  Secondly, do you regard your own biological responses to be the
responsibility of others or yourself?  Third, why are men not required to
cover their hair or their face or their legs (from the knees down) or their
chest (from the navel up)?  Do you believe that a bare chested male with
nice legs and an attractive face walking down the street would not draw the
attraction of women?  So why is it not required for men to cover these parts
of their body?  If you believe that the woman should not have looked in the
first place then shouldn't a male not look as well?

Finally, will you answer these questions as systematically as I have asked
or will you just preach?

>Now let's assume that one aim of the Islamic requirement to dress
>modestly is to help prevent sexual immorality as Islam defines it.
>These are "greater" sins such as pre-marital or extra-marital sex, or
>other sins such as just looking lustily upon women other than your wife.
>Most men, when seeing a scantily-dressed "sexy" woman, are sexually
>attracted - this is (at least partly) a biological thing.  Immodest
>dress codes clearly enhance the probability that the man will want to
>plunge into one of the sexually immoral acts Islam defines above.
>
>Now, you are undoubtedly thinking, *why* should women have to do
>something to prevent men sinning?  

You're right.  That's exactly what I am thinking.

>The fact is, if pre-marital or
>extra-marital sex is engaged in, it is *both* who are sinning, not just
>the man (except in the case of rape, of course, the where wrongdoing is 
>fully the man's).  So modest dress by *both* men and women helps to
>prevent sexual immorality as Islam defines it.  

Am I to infer that any woman who is not dressed completely covered from
head to foot will inspire dangerous lust in all men?  That such a female
can be defined as "scantily clad"?  Since men can define this for women,
can women define a modest dress for men and impose it upon them?

I am also confused as to why it is assumed that a female would respond 
positively to advances made by a male who is turned on by a few strands
of hair or an ankle, etc.  Is it assumed that these women have absolutely
no strength of faith of their own and would go to bed with the first
hyper-hormonal male to make lewd advances in their direction?

>The second factor, is of
>course, the Qur'an as well as instructing modest dress also instructs
>men and women to avert their gazes from viewing the opposite sex with
>lust in the case of someone not their spouse.  Islam attempts to prevent
>sexual immorality from both sides - by specifying modest dress both men 
>and women, and by instructing both men and women to try to avoid lustful
>gazing and sexually improper behaviour.  

Where is the self control that men and women are supposed to have?  Why
is it assumed that men and women alike will be so sexually desperate that
they will be unable to have even an iota of control over their own 
responses?

>>>*If* what you say is true, I disagree with your interpretation.  Men who
>>>have been raised in a culture in which modest dress is valued, clearly
>>>don't know what kind of behaviour is expected when confronted with a
>>>situation in which sexuality is overtly displayed.  On the other hand,
>
>>Irrespective of culture, men should treat all "men" with respect and
>>dignity--whether they are clothed or naked.  
>
>>>Men are also required to dress modestly in Islam.  Both men and women
>>>are required to cover a region of their body defined as their "`awra".
>
>>Yes, but are men required to wear a cumbersome cloth from head to toe that
>>forces them to put it in their teeth if they want to do anything coordinated
>>with their hands?!  Give me a break.  I say let Iranian women choose freely
>>whether they choose to encloak themselves this way.  
>
>Islam as a religion is _not_ just a personal religion, it is also a
>social religion.  Islam tries to build a society of people who help each
>other to do the right things Islamically.  With the total freedom you
>advocate, the only result you can get is chaos.  No society allows total
>freedom, in every country individual freedom is restricted in some ways
>for the good of the society.

In this case the freedom of one group is being restricted for the benefit
of another.  It has been stated above that the sin of sexual misconduct
is for men and women.  Stipulating this however, there is an implied 
assumption that a woman who does not dress in the severely restricted
manner specified by the clergy would readily accept and cooperate with
any advance made by any male.  This is an invalid assumption.  The choice
of a less restrictive manner of dress does not automatically imply a
willingness to accept any sexual advance.  Therefore the complete covering
of the female is for the benefit of the male who would be making such an
advance and thereby "sinning".  A society is made up of men and women.
Societal laws are for the benefit of men and women.  A law which severely
restricts (and don't tell me that a heavy full body and hair garment in 
the heat of summer in the Middle Eastern and Asian countries is not severely
restrictive!!!) females in favor of the comfort and protection of males is 
unjust.

>Islam only requires that a specific area of the body be covered.  It
>does not have to be a single piece of cloth, so there is no reason why
>"it forces them to put it in their teeth if they want to do anything
>coordinated with their hands."  An Islamically dressed women could
>simply be wearing loose fitting Western clothing with a cloth to cover
>her hair, according to my understanding of Islam.  

Please correct me if I am wrong but isn't the color of a woman's dress
also of issue in Iran.  I am not from Iran and while I am familiar with
muslim laws and customs, my knowledge of the exact implementation of these
laws and customs in Iran may be inaccurate.  In addition, I have argued this
concept of "Islamic requirement" for female dress many times.  Would you
care to defend your above statement using the Quran (specific surahs and
ayat #'s requested).  I have read over the passages in the Quran concerning
this many times and one of the problems I encounter is the assumption that
one passage addressed to the Wives of the Prophet is meant for all muslim
women, then and now.

>>Do you think it is the
>>will of Allah for women to be harrassed on the streets by powermongering
>>boneheads?!  I have heard many a story from Iranians themselves of women being
>>taken to jail and forced to wait for a family member to come and pick them up
>>to attest that they were not prostitutes just because their hair happened to
>>be showing.
>
>I do not specifically know about what happens in Iran, so I cannot say
>anything (positive or negative) about anything there until I know more
>about the facts of the situation. 
>
>There does seem to be oppression in Iran, but I do not know enough about
>present day Iran to intelligently discuss it.  I _do_ know about Islamic
>teachings, however, but since I don't know much about Iran I cannot say
>whether I think Iran is or isn't following fully Islamic teachings.
>(The majority of Iranians are Shi`a Muslims as well, so their
>interpretations of some aspects of Islam may differ from my Sunni
>understanding.)
>
>>I'm sorry, but this is bullshit, no matter how you cut it buddy.
>
>With this attitude, how can we have an intelligent discussion?  The 
>statement above seems to be saying, "It's useless talking to me, I've 
>already made up my mind and I'm very closed-minded."  However, I'm sure
>you are not really closed-minded, but sometimes we fly off the handle a
>bit and say things we wouldn't otherwise. 
>
>Peter, please forgive me if I have offended you in any way.  I do not
>think that requiring modest dress in any way is oppressive to women, as
>women can still do anything work-wise etc.  Note that I am supporting
>the Islamic position here, which may not be the same as the situation in
>present-day Iran.  
>
>Islam simply requires of women that the wear opaque,
>loose (so it doesn't show the form of the body) clothing covering their
>whole body excepting their face, hands, and according to some
>authorities, their feet.  The requirement is the same for men except men
>must cover from navel to knee, although it is better if they can wear
>more.  The colour of the cloth *does not* have to be black (as some
>probably wrongly assume).  The clothing does not restrict at all what a
>woman can achieve in society. 

As I have stated above, despite having read over the passages in the
Quran over and over, I cannot find the dress requirements you mention.

Salaam

Yasmin

**************************************************************************
*                                   *                                    *
*  Yasmin Sohrawardy                *  "Only Nixon can go to China"      *
*                                   *                                    *
*  Internet:  ys3359@csc.albany.edu *            - Ancient Vulcan        *
*                                   *              Proverb               *
**************************************************************************