Apropos of my first blog entry on the Burqa and what I thought of the banning or otherwise of its use in Western Society, I decided to have a look further at the genesis of its appearance in society.
I postulated its beginnings in the desert trade routes and realised that it pre-dated any religite holy book, dictates or whatever.
In the Wikipedia article there is mention of the concept of Namus which I touched on briefly in the earlier blog.
Anyway I looked up this word ‘namus’. Talk about bizarre. It is an ethical category, a virtue, of Middle Eastern patriarchal character and has, of recent times, come to be strongly gender-specific; surprise, surprise.
Talk about an idiotic concept that is used (sorry, nearly said abused) as a cover-all for anything to do with the male head of the family – sometimes extended out to the titular head of a tribe; patriarchy again and in spades. What is wrong with these people?
Namus represents obedience, faithfulness, modesty (in behaviour and in dress), ‘appropriateness’ – for the women of course. It can be translated as ‘virtue’ or ‘honour’.
Therein lies the raison d’etre for barbaric murders, suicides, infanticides, forced abortion, and other yucks that have come to be associated with these societies that also practice some form of Islam. These barbarous practices are called overall the ‘restoration of namus’.
The ‘violations of namus’ are numerous, including – wait for it! – giving birth to a daughter instead of a son. In some cases it includes encroachment on a man’s plot of land.
It should be pointed out that support for namus does not exist in any of the holy scriptures. Apart from the fact that all holy scriptures are man-made fairy tales embodying wish fulfilment, eternity and ultimate acceptance, namus is a man–made construct of the vilest nature.
In the middle of the high flown and fly blown words describing heavenly perfection as seen by man, we find a culturally driven, religiously sanctioned concept that allows, nay encourages murder, mayhem, destruction all in the name if ‘honour’!
In this context, I am reminded of George Carlin who described Christianity as the best bullshit story ever told.
So here is a list of countries where namus manifests as honour killings. This is often (usually) done by throwing stones at the head of the victim who is buried in a public place – often a sporting field – and unable to escape. The male members of a female victim’s family are offered the first throws.
Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Great Britain, Brazil, Ecuador, Egypt, India, Iraq, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Lebanon, Pakistan, Morocco, Sweden, Turkey, and Uganda are countries in which “honour killings” occur amongst the Muslim population.
This is because among adherents to this barbarism, men are supposed to control the women in his family.
The other interesting point to make is that is the namus of the whole family that is violated if a female of the household is raped. Wiki states that an estimated 5,000 victims are killed or forced to commit suicide and that number is on the rise worldwide.
It sounds like a sick form of losing ‘face’; very sick.
Wikipedia also states that namus is still an active force in rural societies.
Well yes, I guess those rural societies mentioned are the sort that we would refer to red-neck societies. You know – those communities that don’t really interact with the outside world and as a consequence stay stuck in the religious and social mire through which their leaders wield despotic power. And woe betide anyone who wants to leave; or transgresses the “RULES”.
But it isn’t just rural societies. Here is an excerpt from a page about a young, brave woman in Sweden of all places:
|Social Reformer, Murder Victim. She made her name in her struggle for women’s liberation and integration, from an ethnic point of view. Being a Kurdish immigrant to Sweden, she fought for young women’s acclimatisation into western society, often in opposition with old tradition. She delivered a speech on the subject to the Swedish Parliament and gave those issues a public face. Fadime had a Swedish boyfriend, something that meant ”disgrace” to some of her relatives. She was brutally killed on the 21st of January 2002 by her own father; a so-called ”honour killing.” Her funeral became a manifestation, broadcasted on Swedish TV. It was attended by many officials, as well as members from the Swedish government.|
So, at the end of all this, I can only come down on the side of France, Syria, The Netherlands, Belgium and Egypt and anywhere else that is trying to ban the burqa. I would do away with all religiously motivated clap trap, apologetics and raison d’etre for piss poor behaviour; especially that which results in death or mental and physical abuse, disfigurement and other mutilations.
The symbolism of the burqa as the really observable face of female subjugation and religious tyranny means its days must be numbered; by legislation and policing. Everywhere; and disenfranchised women must be able to call on, expect and be given full support by the law.
I am no longer interested in being politically correct about this barbaric, backward and stifling religion. This is Islam, it is practised in this manner by a seemingly increasing number of adherents.