Dress Code: Australian Senator Appears in a Burqa

Australian Senator, Pauline Hanson, wore a Burqa to the Australian senate in a request to ban it for national security reasons. Of course, her actions were labeled as a stunt and other senators, form opposing parties, were outraged by her lack of respect towards the Muslim faith.

Today I want to speak about the burqa. Although it may appear that the burqa is a simple issue, the factors behind it have not been clarified as of yet. So in this paper, I will start this clarification by speaking about the burqa in relation to appearance , freedom of religion, and freedom of expression.

dress code: australian senator appears in a burqa Dress Code: Australian Senator Appears in a Burqa Burqa Afghanistan 01First, if you do not know, the Burqa is a type of hijab worn by some Muslim women that covers a woman’s face while having a netted area to allow her to see through. The burqa is considered a religious garment and people have fought for their rights to wear it on the grounds of freedom-of-religion and freedom-of-expression. Before getting to the garment part of this, let us take a look at “freedom of religion” and “freedom of expression”. It is to be noted that women are born into a religion and very often have no choice or say so on how it is practiced and what is important in it. It is also true that Islam is more strict in abiding by that than most other religions. Usually a Christian woman or a Jewish woman are at least allowed to practice a secular non-religious or atheist life. Yet, this option is not so welcomed within Islam. Hence, on the grounds of freedom of religion, it is important that such freedom is given to the women and not just to the men and it is important that such freedom is not decided on by men in terms of how a woman is allowed to practice the religion and which part of it, if any, she values the most and the least. To be born into a religion is one thing; freedom of religion usually allows one the right to leave that religion as well. On the grounds of freedom of religion, if the religion offers the woman the right to wear the burqa, it must be mentioned that freedom of religion also offers her the right to NOT wear the burqa. Hence, if one was to say that, “I do not have the right to take the burqa off!” then we need to be certain that the woman’s freedom of religion has not been infringed upon. Hence, in pertaining to those who argue that Islam does not force a woman to wear a burqa, then it needs to be understood that it is the duty of men to make sure that a woman is not forced into wearing a burqa whether through the lack of harassment in the streets or whether through the lack of threats in forcing her to abide by an optional choice within Islam.

When it comes to freedom of expression, the burqa is said to be a way for a woman to express her religious beliefs. Yet, due to the fact that women wear the burqa when she is around men, then the burqa is a religious expression in relation to men. And in relation to men, we understand that men who feel regarded by a woman wearing a burqa are ones who have their manhood, pride, respect, honor, authority, and power regarded by the woman through the burqa. Hence, in terms of expression, the burqa expresses a state of submission from the woman towards the men it is in regards to. And in doing so, it is no longer true that the burqa is a way of expression for women; but it is men’s beliefs that are being expressed through the woman wearing the burqa. Hence, this is not “freedom of expression” but it is a “freedom to express an imposition”. It appears to me, in addition, that men are the ones who have a freedom of expression. And in having that freedom they have imposed and infringed on the liberty of the woman. The burqa becomes an expression of that infringement. Although this freedom of expression is supposed to be protected by the freedom of religion, we have seen that Islam has not been protected from the sexism of men and hence, they are the ones who have infringed upon a woman’s freedom of religion where such expression of the religion serves as a proof of that.

Let us get to the garment part: Although clothes do cover a body, they do so while allowing others to recognize the person wearing them. In fact, sometimes we know who a person is from the back by the type of clothes they wear. Clothes become part of an identity only after we have separated that person from the rest as to distinguish him/her. The burqa covers a woman without allowing others to know who she is. And so the question becomes, why is it important to know who a person is and why is it important to distinguish one person from another? This question has been answered by the fact that we are able to distinguish one person from another and from the fact that people look different from one another. Hence, the importance of that factor is not something that we can argue about neither is it something that we need to reason (even if we are able to reason it) because that is something that is a matter of fact and is proven to be so by the fact that we exist as separate individuals each with his/her own unique facial features, height, weight, and personality. Hence, god did not make it so that we are all born with the same facial features while having different personalities. No, a difference in facial features and a difference in personality is noted between people. So why is it important for us to distinguish the difference? Because there is a difference and that difference is distinguishable. To say, “no I do not want there to be a difference!” is something you need to take up with god and not with me in order that he makes it so that if this mother and that mother were to give birth, both children would look the same. Such questions are similar to asking, “why was the grass not made purple instead of green?” Well, we can tell you the aspects behind what makes the grass green..and although those same aspects could have worked out to yield to the color purple, they did not. These things are not for us to argue about in terms of importance. It is something important. For those who want to say, “this is not important for me”, then I say, “it should not be important whether you wear the burqa or not, then”. For if it is not important to you whether others can recognize you or not, then let them recognize you. To say that this “not important” translates logically to “I want to cover my face”, is a fallacy. Yet, only if it is “important not to be recognized” can one logically say, “Therefore I must cover up my face”. Hence, we must now ask, “why is it important not to be recognized and why is it important if we cannot distinguish one person from another?” For wearing the burqa says, “it is important that people do not recognize which woman is which!” Why is that important? The answer to such question above is multidimensional. But one reason why it may be important that people do not recognize which woman is which has to do with cultural shaming. This shaming creates a lifestyle of gossip where the gossip is given enough importance to put a woman’s life in danger. Hence, not recognizing which woman is which provides a breathing room for women to be outside of their homes without bringing danger “onto themselves”. Another reason why it may be important that people do not recognize which woman is which has to do with spouse infidelity where it becomes difficult for a man to meet up with a woman when all women look the same.

In relation to why it is important to know who a person is and why is it important to distinguish one person from another, I have one more thing to say: the burqa does not say, although it has been argued that it does, that it is not important to distinguish between people. For the burqa does make a distinction between men and women. Hence, the questions becomes: Why is it important for us to be able to distinguish which man is which? And why should it be not important for us to NOT be able to distinguish which woman is which? In addition, this leads me to ask: Why is it important for a man to NOT be able to distinguish which woman is which while being able to distinguish which man is which? And why is it important for a woman to be able to distinguish which man is which while not being able to distinguish which woman is which? As you see, the terms of appearance lay on unequal grounds. Women cannot be distinguished from one another while men can be. The importance of that seems to lie on importance itself; where a man is to be seen as more important and more valuable in his own person and as his own separate person than a women is.

When it is important for one to cover her hair and her face, then a burqa becomes of use. Hence, the burqa is not a garment, but it is a way for a woman to cover her face and her hair using a garment. The difference between a garment and the burqa is the following: a garment covers that which is within the nature “of the same” in regards to identity—a person’s leg is not enough to identify him and a person’s torso is not enough to identify him and a person’s genitalia is not enough to identify him and they should NOT be enough to identify him (otherwise, it becomes objectifying). Yet, the burqa covers that which is within the nature “of difference” since a person’s face is enough to identify him and it is okay for us to use someone’s face to draw distinction between two people. Hence, the burqa uses a garment for a reason that a garment is not made to do—which means that it is NOT a garment. A burqa is a way for a woman to cover her face (something that a garment is not for) using a garment.

When a woman is fully dressed in a shirt and pants and she needs to go out in public, she may say, “I need to cover myself” and she would grab the burqa. This is similar to walking in on a woman while she is in the shower. Quickly, she may think, ” I need to cover myself” and then she would grab a towel. Hence, the burqa serves as a response to inappropriateness. And where a man may comment on a woman who is wearing a “skimpy” outfit, the burqa becomes a response to such “foreseen” comments with the assumption that such comments will always be heard by the woman from men. Hence, the burqa is worn before the fact in relation to sexual comments made by men towards them.

Due to the fact that the burqa covers a woman’s hair and face, then the burqa is a response to the lack of appropriates in men seeing a woman’s hair and her face. And although this may seem like an act that is done in defense of the woman and her rights not to be objectified by men, it is to be noted that the covering of a woman’ face is not in defense of her rights to not be objectified. For if men were to start identifying and regarding women by their legs and thighs, then the covering of that area becomes a defense of her rights not to be objectified (since in terms of identity as stated above, tells us that we should not identify people by these areas) . Yet, the face of a woman becomes objectified by the opposite: the face of a woman is objectified if she was to cover it—since it is NOT wrong to identify a woman and to draw a distinction between women using their face. Hence, if a man was to say, “your face looks different than her face”: it should look different and it is correct for her face to be different than the face of another woman. And if he was to say, “your thighs are just a tiny bit thicker than her thighs”, then he should not have cared that much to notice—and the woman can respond to such comment by saying, “look at me in the face and not down there! My face is right here!” The difference between the facial features of men and women is not enough to make the covering of the face something that protects women from objectification either. For such difference does not require the woman any additional preparations for them to appear different. Meaning that a woman’s legs get a feminine form due to her shaving her legs and removing the hair on them. Otherwise, her legs may not be so “sexy” or so “feminine”. And a woman’s arms and underarms are of the same nature as her legs. Yet, when it comes to the face, the difference between a man’s face and a woman’s face is naturally distinct in femininity and masculinity which speaks about the appropriateness of revealing them without that being enough to objectify a woman. For example, the difference between a car and a minivan is huge enough to make “choosing between these two” something that depends too much on the buyer and his status and his needs. Yet, the difference between two minivans is not huge enough to give the buyer an ability to make a quick decision in regards to which van he wants to buy. Hence, when choosing between the car and the van, many can give a quick answer depending on their need and lifestyle. When choosing between two minivans, a person may need to look at specifics of each model and decide carefully on which van is better. In that similar regards (without intending to compare women to cars), it is to be assumed that a woman’s face is not enough to make a person draw quick objectified conclusions about a woman; but her face is assumed to be something that preserves a woman’s value for herself where a level of consideration needs to be made, when it comes to her face, from men towards a woman. In that, we can see that the burqa ends up serving an opposite role in terms of the objectification it has against women where men are able to make quicker decisions in regards to women and quicker decisions for them and on their behalf. In addition, the burqa increases the level of sexual objectification of women since her face, which is an area of correct consideration, is allowed to be dismissed. And in being allowed to be dismissed, other areas become highlighted as a place of “correct” identity when they are NOT the place of correct identity. Furthermore, when a woman’s face is dismissed in that manner, it becomes true that her entire body receives one bundled identity: A sexual identity. In that, the burqa gives women an exaggerated sexual identity as it increases the level of sexual objectification due to the covering of her face.

Some may say that the burqa is similar to wearing make-up. The burqa is NOT similar to make-up, however. To wear make-up is an attempt to unify a woman’s face by giving it a single tone and by exaggerating its lines and curves as an effort to overcome the layer that was used to unify its tone. The burqa unifies all women and gives them the “same face” in the public sphere. And although this seems to be a thing that speaks for a sort of an equality; the truth is that within a sexist world, the burqa asserts the correctness in an impersonal treatment towards women where the rules of the culture/religion are to be applied onto all women despite the individual woman. When there is sexism in the world, the burqa becomes a way of saying, “all of you are the same…don’t think you are so special!” all while giving men the rights to be different and the right to be special over her. Although the burqa is seen as a way for a woman to be modest in terms of her facial features, I must note that a woman’s face can be modest and a woman’s face is modest without the burqa. And although the burqa is seen as a way for a woman to be respectful towards herself in terms of facial features; I say that a woman’s face is already in respect to herself. To combat the disrespect that men may subject her to, does not change the truth that a woman is naturally a modest respectful woman without the need to combat the lack-of-understanding that claims otherwise. Yet, in the sexist world we have today, one may be able to understand how wearing a burqa gives a unifying sense of existence that allows the woman to move around without being targeted. This unified sense of existence, should not be seen as “equality” since a difference does exist between equality and unification—in that, unification does NOT respect natural difference while equality respects a natural difference. And here we must ask, did a woman wear the burqa and then men became sexist, or are men sexist and that is why women wore the burqa? I think the latter is true.

Some may say that it is not within the rights of others to determine what someone else wears or how someone should display his/herself and that if one feels more comfortable with her face covered, it would not be within other people’s rights to make her do otherwise. And to that I say that the determination of a right comes not from the harm that is received from others when one does otherwise. For some may note that a woman who wears the burqa is less harmed by others than if she was to take it off. And to that I say that if a million stood up against me when I speak as an attempt to make me see it as a wrong, then it took a million to make a wrong out of it. For when a person’s rights have come under attack, the person either is deprived from it or the person is given something else to replace it as a way of undermining the right in it. To attack a person’s right is to ruin that right or to deprive him/her from it. It is clear that a  woman’s rights have been ruined with the attempt to overcome that by making a right out of her wearing the burqa. To ruin the rights of a person, and to tell her that “a burqa is the new thing that causes her no harm” due to the harm others want to inflect on her if she was to take it off; then despite that being a new thing, it is not a new right. For let us not forget that man is not the new definer of what is right and what is wrong. He is not the lord almighty. Amen. And, hence, in relation to the discomfort a woman may feel if she was to take off the burqa, I say that men may also harm her if she was to take it off. Therefore, I must ask: Is the discomfort in relation to the harm that men have promised these women or is the discomfort in relation to taking the burqa off whether there is a harm from men or not? In addition: If a woman is more comfortable with her face covered, then she is more comfortable with her face covered. Although, this would lead me to ask you, dear men: which one of these women sitting there did you say is more comfortable with her face covered? And you must necessarily be able to identify that women by her face if I or others were to try to comfort her.

In understanding sexism, I can say that a woman’s face is for herself. And if she wears make-up, it should be worn so that a woman can feel more like herself and more comfortable with herself. Yet, to say that a burqa is worn in order that a woman is able to feel more like herself and in order for a woman to be more comfortable with herself would lead to think of that woman’s mentality as to try to understand what it is that is behind a woman’s self that would make her more comfortable and more like-herself by wearing the burqa. Does she feel invisible? Does she feel like she does not matter? Does she feel this? Or does she feel that?! And in reaching such place of questioning that are in themselves invasive, I am realizing that this comfort conclusion is flawed and that I need to find another conclusion in regards to the burqa. Hence, I must assume that the wearing of the burqa does not make the woman comfortable enough to make up for the problems that it causes and the problems that continue due to her wearing it (meaning that wearing the burqa is not about comfort). For instead of looking at the woman for how on earth she feels if she is comfortable in covering up her face; I will instead question the level of comfort and assume it to not be that significant in relation to comfort but that this comfort is in relation to the level of problems that would be faced if she was to take the burqa off. And the reason for my lack of analysis of the woman in wondering what it means if she wears the burqa given that we do things in accordance to what makes us feel comfortable, is because it becomes contradictory if I was to say, for example, that “the woman must feel invisible if she wears the burqa because that is the reason why she is able to wear it and feel more like herself” (Meaning that she feels invisible and the burqa caters to that feeling). And the contradiction emerges from: A. the element of comfort as being bound to a certain level of existence of the self. And B. The fact that we know men have a say so in this issue where their say so has a list of punishments and consequences that can alter that level of comfort and make it not only that for a woman in herself but that for a woman due to the woman not wanting to lose more of herself. This self preservation is something that the burqa aims to protect; hence, to question how the woman feels in regards to comfort and what it says about her mentality is not appropriate to do here. Therefore, while a woman wears make-up to be more comfortable with herself; a woman does not necessarily wear the burqa to be more comfortable with herself since the task becomes more about the preservation of self instead of being comfortable with one’s self. And this self-preservation is in regards to keeping the woman away from punishment, unnecessary arguments and fights within her family against her, unjust consequences, and the limitation of further mental abuse. By protecting the self from these, in turn, becomes a way of adding “more comfort” to the woman and for her to be allowed to be more like herself than she would feel if she was to take it off.

In relation to beauty, some women claim that women who wear the burqa do not care about how they look and that beauty is not important to them. Yet, for one to not care about how they look is something that is in respect to beauty nevertheless (a naturally beautiful person does not care so much about how they look). And to not see one’s looks as important is also in respect to beauty (a person who is beautiful does not think that their looks is all they got). Although if one was to claim that these women are ugly and that they do not care about looking ugly as to “fix” it, then I will tell you that I have never ever seen an ugly person. Not to mention that beauty is in the correctness of a meeting point towards you (towards the eyes looking at something/someone). A beautiful sunset: correctness in the meeting point of all elements as seen by you. A beautiful night: correctness in the meeting point of all elements in how you like to feel (breeze, amount of lighting, etc). The vitruvian- man: The correctness in the meeting point of the entire man towards himself as represented by a circle  to highlight free-movement and a square to highlight stiffness. A beautiful woman: correctness in the meeting point of the entire woman towards herself. Hence, if the burqa is worn due to the fact that a woman does not care about beauty, then I say that beauty is in respect to the entire woman as her entirety become the meeting point. And if the burqa is worn due to the fact that a woman wants to keep to herself (herself towards herself as a meeting point) AND she claims that beauty is not important to her, then that is not possible to be true—she must care about how she looks for that to be true.

In relation to appearance, a woman who wears the burqa is a woman who is hidden behind appearance itself. For if a person was to walk in a room, we can say, “Josh made an appearance”. And Josh would be the man with a face that others are able to identify as Josh. But if we want to describe, not Josh, but his appearance (or him showing up to that room) alone without Josh, then we can show a silhouette of a man that is dressed as Josh was (let us say he was wearing a baseball cap) and is standing in a similar attitude (let us say he stand with hands folded). The burqa further removes the person from their “appearance” to others while giving such silhouette a female identity. In relation to Josh, the burqa would be similar to multiplying Josh’s silhouette and for them to be a silhouette of Josh, Mark, Tom, David, Ali, Tony, etc, etc. Take a look at the illustration below:

 

dress code: australian senator appears in a burqa Dress Code: Australian Senator Appears in a Burqa burqa2

As you can see, the woman in figure 1, 2, 4 and 5 look the same behind the burqa. Once the burqa is removed, you can see a vast difference between these 3 women. Yet, just by standing with her leg out (in a feminine stand), one can begin to see the personality of that woman if she was to wear a burqa (fig 3): although the woman without the burqa is posing, that same woman, if she was to wear a burqa, seems to be having a conversation with another person. In figure 4, the difference between that woman and the ones in figure 1, 2, and 5 is just that one is holding the phone and the others are not. Take your fingers and cover all women who are NOT wearing the burqa (you should be able to use your fingers to cover them all at once by placing your fingers ahead of you in front of the screen and closing one eye)… after looking at those women, go ahead and move your hand to the right in order to cover the women who are wearing the burqa. Collectively: What is the difference between the women wearing the burqa and ones that are not? Think about the answer on your own for a few minutes before reading on to see my answers:

The first difference is that the women in burqa make a statement that says, “We are none of your business!” And although this seems to be a great message in a world that harasses women wherever they go, the truth is that in that sexist world, this message emphasizes a falsehood that says, “Our condition and yours are two separate things!” The second difference is that the women who are not wearing a burqa seem to have a personal lifestyle and a personal choice in their own personalities while the women in burqa seem to have their personality confined by the society they live in as they are not allowed to display it. And although one can argue that these women are free to display their personality when they are around other women or when they are at home, if you are like me, I know that sometimes the walk from one place to another is something that is important for my mood and my personality and my mental well being. To minimize the aspect of life where a person is out-and-about as being a time of restriction is indeed an oppressive thing given that such time is the time of free expression.To be restricted at home is understandable since home is the restricting thing…but to be restricted outside is unnatural since outside is no longer the restricting thing but the woman becomes the one who is restrictive of herself towards herself.

The third difference between these women has something to do with the ability to identify a person by the “way” they carry themselves. In that, the women without the burqa get a unified sense of self when looked at by others (their personality matches their hair and it matches her clothes and it matches the way she stands and it matches the way she carries herself—she is unified as a woman distinct from other women). This unified sense of self is different and distinct when looking at each woman. Yet, the women in the burqa do not get a unified sense of self  but they are, ALL-AS-ONE, given a unified sense of a woman. And do not think for a minute that the women who are not wearing the burqa do not get a unified sense of a woman as well! No, these women do get a unified sense of a woman—and that unified sense of a woman is a natural connection that happens when each woman is able to have a unified sense of self. Yet, for the women in burqa, we get an exaggerated display of this unification as if we have reached the bottom of the barrel when it comes to the ability of the woman to be herself. Anything more, and the woman would be deprived of life itself. Meaning that in relation to women and their identity, this is the bottom-of-the-barrel in terms of how much womanly identity a woman can possibly have. And what is even more, is that the burqa creates a new definition of a woman where she is unified by the aspect of restriction itself.

dress code: australian senator appears in a burqa Dress Code: Australian Senator Appears in a Burqa burqa2

The fourth difference between the women in the burqa and the ones who are not wearing it is that, in real life, there are no more additions to the images of the women in burqa. Meaning that this silhouette image is how the women wearing the burqa appear in real life while this silhouette is NOT how the women who are NOT wearing it appear in real life. Let us for a minute imagine that we have figured out a way for the women who are NOT wearing the burqa to appear as their own silhouette images in real life. It is important for you to understand the mental issues this would create for both men and women: society and walking down the street would become a hypnotizing act that would drag people into a whole new state of existence where things are merely passing by you without a difference. Think of sitting on the train where the landscape around you is just unfolding and unfolding and unfolding. It is not a healthy position for one’s mental well being. Imagine if we found a way to make those women appear as these silhouette figures: first there may be an excitement in regards to how these women appear and disappear without any further detail… then it would become an obstacle where the woman in figure 1 has appeared a 1000 times already and the woman in figure 2 has appeared a 1000 times already and the woman in figure 3 has appeared a 1000 times already etc etc without any further details. And each person is full of details in terms of appearance. Hence, I imagine that when these women take off that silhouette, that their appearance are exaggerated…and in being exaggerated, one feels too exposed….and in feeling too exposed, one feels that it is an absolute must to cover up again. Women would become a figure to men and to each other as they start to see themselves as a figure. And to see one’s self as a figure is to turn appearance into a function or a job—a woman becomes employed as (works as) a figure thereby making her mind take ownership of the reasons why she covers up. Furthermore, the woman starts to oversee her appearance as something other than herself although she manages it over herself and onto herself. Hence, when women wear the burqa, we can assume that it changes her mentality and the mentality of others around her as it changes all of their default mood. We can also assume that wearing the burqa makes the woman feel more exposed when she takes it off than how others normally feel when their face is exposed. In addition, we can assume that wearing the burqa makes the woman oversee her appearance as something other than herself as she manages it onto herself and over herself. And we can also say that the burqa makes the woman a figure that is responsible over how she appears as if it is a duty she has when the truth is that how a person appears has something to do with the person as it also has something to do with the eyes of others who see her—hence, a woman who wears the burqa may feel responsible for the reasons why she wears it. The west can find similarities in this last point I made in regards to a woman’s appearance becoming something of a duty since many women are consumed in their appearance and how they look. Two things I would like to say about that: First, it is okay to spend time on yourself—yet, the issue is when we are spending time on ourselves in terms of objectification. Second, we can see that the more a woman spends time on herself where it becomes almost a full-time-job that it removes the issue out of the issue in the minds of women. Hence, becoming sexy is no longer an issue as it is something that becomes part of looking pretty…and in becoming “part of looking pretty”, the woman no longer associates it with a problem in sexism but a problem in the time it takes to look sexy. In that, we can relate to the influence that appearance has on how women view the problems they are facing.

dress code: australian senator appears in a burqa Dress Code: Australian Senator Appears in a Burqa burq3

The fifth difference between the women in the burqa and the women who are not wearing it is in the placement of the woman in relation to appearance itself. When others see the women who are NOT wearing the burqa, the women make an “appearance” where this “appearance” is made out of: the connection between the eyes of others as they land on the woman. Looking at the illustration above, the man can say, “I saw Victoria walk by today” or “I saw a woman wearing a business suit walk by today”. Yet, when others see the women who are wearing the burqa, the appearance of these women is made out of: the connection between the eyes of others as they land on appearance itself. Looking at the illustration below, the man who sees the woman in the burqa can say, “I saw a woman wearing that which-tells-me-that-it-is-a-woman-whom-I-saw walk by today”. This “which-tells-me-that-it-is-a-woman-whom-I-saw” is: A sexed appearance . For if both women and men were to walk around in a burqa, we would say, “I saw a person today” or “A person made an appearance today and I saw IT”—hence, pointing us to the fact that looking at people in a burqa is to look at appearance itself. Translating this onto the women wearing the burqa, we can say, “a woman made an appearance today and I saw IT”. Yet, let us get the truth included in that statement by saying it correctly: “A woman made an appearance FOR men today and I saw IT”. Hence, this “FOR men” shows us the sexism in how the woman made an appearance for men despite her burqa saying that she is wearing it for her own sake. When a woman wears a burqa, she wears it in places where she will be around men. In doing so, she is dressing for men and only for men. ONLY FOR MEN. Most women in this world do not dress only for men’s sake. Whether I decide to wear short shorts or cover up completely, to dress ONLY for men, is not an empowered gesture. And this, right here, becomes a solid proof of oppression since the viewer that these clothes are worn for is merely looking at his own idea of what it means for a woman to be seen. Appearance itself appears and men gave it a female sex where the woman carries it up to his terms of comfort. Furthermore, when looking at a silhouette of a woman (without the burqa), one is not looking at that woman, but they are looking at a possible “appearance” of a woman. And when looking at the burqa (which is similar to a silhouette), one is not looking at that woman neither are they looking at a possible appearance of a woman; but what they would be looking at is a definitive appearance as if this appearance is strictly defined without further possibilities. And this “strictly defined without further possibilities” speaks about a definitive that does not belong onto a woman but is a character of an object.

 This is the first article in regards to the burqa. In the next articles, I will be analyzing the burqa from Islamic Perspective as well as in terms of national security and terrorism. 

Share this Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *