The moderating Islamophobic propaganda – which I see for my part, as a feminist fools, in the very sense of anti-Semitism has been rightly considered a "socialism of fools" – regrets that Muslims and Muslim s do 'express little to defend feminism, the republic, secularism, etc.. Sometimes, however, Muslim women speak on feminism – or trying to do. For those that take time to read what they can have to say that most interested in the eternal lament of the invisibility of their way, here are some stories of women wearing the veil and claim their feminism on the conditions under which they do, and the obstacles they face. L emancipation of Muslim women could not be better achieved by the Muslim themselves, will you side with those who are promoting the image, or against them? Will you, despite their veils, along with those who claim the free disposal of their. Pharisee @ Liberated You're right, it is misleading not to commune with the current xenophobic French companies in its stigma and amalgamedes immigrants through Islam and the staging of its media avatars more obviously alienating. With demand for critical thinking of Marx and not give any credibility to a government and a head of state, especially those we are currently experiencing with regard to their claims for a secular and feminist commitment is obviously a contradiction on my part rough, and you've seen. Mea culpa. Exclude veiled teenage school system, punishing women victims of oppression archaic as the port imposed a cover in public, that's obviously emancipatory measures to help them free themselves from the grip against their of bearded fundamentalists, but as I have very bad spirit, I am just being biased. @ Sick 'n Destroy I totally agree with you that no one can seriously say feminist claim a religion in itself without causing considerable contradictions. But the problem seems to me another priority in. But the problem seems primarily other eneffet. The context of stigma and racist repression does not seem at all conducive to the maturing of this kind of contradiction – like many others, too. Instead, the defense of free discussion, confrontation and therefore the free access to public space, and the possibility of conflicting arguments with veiled women – which also means they do not prohibit them under the pretext of their veils, voice, and that scans do not have anything they can say on behalf of it: what many feminists have done so far, alas -: the radical rejection of the blackmail Official therefore the so-called "secularism" – seem to present a minimum.

To answer the question! "Will you, despite their veils, along with those who claim the free disposal of their bodies and the right to abortion? Give you just a little attention to what they have to say? "Yes, always!

To answer you: "Will you, despite their veils, along with those who claim the free disposal of their bodies and the right to abortion? Give you just a little attention to what they have to say ? "Obviously. A woman is a woman, with or without a veil for me. So yes, a woman has the right to freely dispose of his body, and yes I listen when I speak. I listen even those I do sometimes think of evil. Simply because if I refused to listen, I will feel to become even more pitcher than I already am. By the way, I liked the two links.

Of course he must support them, they like others, for "the disposal of their bodies and the right to abortion." The veil is another subject that appeals to nostalgia for certain authoritarian policies. The veil is the Muslim religion that the skirt is to the Catholic religion. Should we assume that all women who wear skirts to submit to the constraints of old states who obeyed blindly patriarchal concepts of the Catholic Church, and therefore they are Catholic fundamentalists, who do not deserve to comment on feminist cause? it would be funny. and even if they did, they would have every right to comment on the feminist cause (and on any subject!). and yet it is the trial is being done towards the veil.

Personally, I make the distinction between Muslims and jihadists. If I chose my side in the psychological warfare that we are one sly, it does not stop me from treating others as I have always done in public. Because, as a democrat, I find it normal. And more reason, it would give a victory for jihad that unite all Muslims.

Admittedly, this is a realistic observation and "positive." But if we abandon this political fact for a moment that you husk with a sharpness too rare in political thinking, still does not he still a contradiction between women's emancipation and being eligible to remain in the religious affirmation of liberation? No monotheistic religion does not tolerate really feminist demands. It can be practiced without some contortions and feminist notional perfectly hypocritical. Or is that reinvents his religion on a personal level, which is in contradiction with "re-ligere. Every religion is pro-life and pro-herd. The individual is an idea, a word without reality in the mouth of a practitioner, and ideological freedom is not compatible with. Not that there is a religion more stupid than the others, just different states of acceptance by the progress of individual liberties in the West and elsewhere … So I would fully agree with your resume and less on Marx. So I would fully agree with your resume and less on Marx ladefense Muslim women supposedly feminist, and I am far from being aligned with Marxism in general …

I do not terrorism in the other direction, that addresses Islamophobic anyone who criticizes (in the sense argument against argument) Islam. As for those women, yes we are still at their side that's the criticism I address them: – Wearing the veil is placed anywhere in the Quran, the Muslims of France are mostly North Africans who have never worn the veil in France or in their countries of origin, veiling is therefore an expression of political Islam and committed. It raises the perennial problem of representation of Muslims. This group can speak in its name because it is not representative of Muslims or Islam … – They say the choice of abortion but point "is an acquired right, which is accurately recognized and codified in texts of Islamic reference. " What does that mean? they oppose the laws feminist / Republican who are not recognized by Islamic law? – they will be for the separation of men and. What does that mean? they oppose the laws feminist / Republican who are not recognized by Islamic law? – they will be for the separation of men and desfemmes in universities, swimming pools, hospitals, … current demands of the Muslims 'involved' – What is their position on Muslim countries that impose the veil on women, they can not ignore the reality of Islam that rightly cause an outcry here: the minority of veiled French are protected by the laws of the Republic but the majority of veiling in the Muslim world suffer. So once again I'm alongside all feminists without distinction, but there you arrive quickly at the edge of the thing …

oops … these stories are too long to read, but for me, browsing in the diagonal I realize there are a lot of Islamophobia in all this. By putting things in my view white woman's secular France from below, I admit be uncomfortable with women wearing the veil but he'll come to me any insult to the spirit of these women as in the cases described in these articles. Each his way of living, secular or religious! (Who am I to judge?) I am also sure that if I had the opportunity to speak with a veiled woman (from this and many other things, there's so much to share among women!) that this gene would disappear. Ignorance is certainly the cause of much misunderstanding. … In short I'm scared to see women's movements can also stigmatize violently veiled woman, while the latter they also fought-for freedom of women! "Will you, despite their veils, along with those. I'm scared to see women's movements can also stigmatize veiled woman violently, so that they are fighting themselves, also for the freedom of women! "Will you, despite their veils, along with the free cellesqui claim disposal of their bodies and the right to abortion? Give you just a little attention to what they have to say? "Yes, yes of course

I will always side with women and their rights! That is clear. But the veil is not and never will be a right to dispose of his body as abortion. Certainly not! Women do not have to be submitted! Women do not hide … NOTHING can justify it. However, wear a scarf over her hair and veil, this is not the same thing. But it can not be justified by religion.

very interesting, you let me take your links on R & S

>> "If Islamophobia is satisfied, therefore, ample room for a media storm stigmatizing the staging of repression, and a pseudo unanimity principle (of the extreme left to extreme right, all of agree to attack Islam, "the conceptual framework is biased, one wonders what is the rest of it? In fact, we can both ambient and Islamophobia invoqeer a claim of Marx" criticism of religion is the prerequisite to the review of the policy. "For example:>>" Will you, despite their veils, along with those who claim the free disposal of their bodies and the right to abortion? "The problem is not" to be with. "The claim of right to abortion is not" the right of free disposal of their bodies. "This includes the right to be veiled or not the right to challenge the patriarchal order of virginity imposed on women and not men, short of a moral sexual double. This included the right to be veiled or not, the right to challenge the patriarchal order of virginity imposed on women and not men, short of a moral sexual doublestandard. The right to contraception and Abortions should be supported wherever women deem necessary. We must also remember that this right is intensely political in that it is a right "of free inquiry" is not a right "requirement" but a "right-choice" in this sense offers q'uil women all that he denies the ongoing reform of Islam is confined to the limitation of the freedom of women (the Algerian family code, so-called obligation of the veil, etc. …)