# The threat about niqabs **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 15, 2020, 5:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-threat-about-niqabs/853839 "2020-05-15T05:32:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2020, 9:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-threat-about-niqabs/853839/81 "2020-05-30T09:22:14Z")
> [@Muffin](#): > > _Well let’s see what they say for themselves._ > > Here’s a link to a study commissioned by one of Canada’s leading feminist organizations for just that purpose. It seems dubious to call the Canadian Council of Muslim Women a “leading feminist organization”. I know nothing more about the other values it espouses than what’s stated in the introduction to the study, but that makes clear that it is first and foremost a Muslim organization. And this is not a “study”, which implies at least some attempt at scientific methodology to obtain a representative sample. It’s is a collection of anecdotes (N=38), and here’s the method by which the anecdotes were gathered: > [@](#): > > Gathering of data began with an online survey created in July of 2012. The > survey included seventy questions. We received thirty-eight responses from women five resident in British Columbia and all the rest from the province of Ontario, with a large number from Mississauga, a city adjacent to Toronto, Ontario. The > survey was also offered in French, but the French version received only one response, > from a woman not wearing niqab also resident in Ontario. Participation was solicited > by posting a notice on the CCMW site, sending out appeals to religious and community organizations, and ultimately by word of mouth. So this is barely more meaningful as evidence than citing the murderer upthread. How hard would it have been at any time in history in any society, however patriarchal and misogynistic, to find 38 women who enthusiastically endorse the structure of their society, adopting their roles “of their own free will”? ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2020, 10:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-threat-about-niqabs/853839/82 "2020-05-30T10:21:56Z")
^ You could always check out what [they have to say about themselves](http://ccmw.com/about-ccmw/vision-mission-guiding-principles/): > [@](#): > > **Vision** > > All Canadian Muslim women are treated equitably and equally and are empowered in Canadian society. > > **Mission** > > Our mission is to affirm our identity as Canadian Muslim women and promote an understanding of our lived experiences through community engagement, research, influence public policy and strive for positive change. > > **Guiding Principles** > > [ol][li]We are guided by the Quranic message of God’s mercy and justice, and of the equality of all persons, and that each person is directly answerable to God.[/li][li]We value a pluralistic society; foster the goal of strength and diversity within a unifying vision and the values of Canada. Our identity of being Muslim women and of diverse ethnicity and race is integral to being Canadian.[/li][li]As Canadians, we abide by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the law of Canada.[/li][li]We believe in the universality of human rights, which means equality and social justice, with no restrictions or discrimination based on gender or race.[/li][li]We are vigilant in safeguarding and enhancing our identity and our rights to make informed choices.[/li][li]We acknowledge that CCMW is one voice amongst many who speak on behalf of Muslim women and that there are others who may represent differing perspectives[/ol][/li] > Yet most importantly, reflecting the principles and spirit of the Canadian Charter of Rights of Freedoms, the [Universal Declaration of Human Rights](http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html), the [Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women](http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/) (CEDAW), the [Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women](http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/RES/48/104&Lang=E&Area=UNDOC), the [Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Elimination_of_All_Forms_of_Racial_Discrimination), and the [url=]International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. What is clear is that they are first and foremost a Canadian Muslim women’s organization. Just because you have some bone to pick with Islam does not negate what this group is nor who they are, nor even what they do. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2020, 12:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-threat-about-niqabs/853839/83 "2020-05-30T12:09:02Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > I know nothing more about the other values it espouses than **what’s stated in the introduction to the study** , but that makes clear that it is first and foremost a Muslim organization. > [@Monty](#): > > ^ You could always check out what [they have to say about themselves](http://ccmw.com/about-ccmw/vision-mission-guiding-principles/): > > What is clear is that they are first and foremost a Canadian Muslim women’s organization. Just because you have some bone to pick with Islam does not negate what this group is nor who they are, nor even what they do. And you could check out what I wrote in my post. This is exactly what I _did_ read, as I stated, and my opinion was based upon that. It is disingenuous to refer to them as “one of Canada’s leading feminist organizations” when the Quran is the first item in their mission statement. What is their record/position on apostate (_ex_-Muslim) women? That’s a genuine question, not a rhetorical one - I don’t know, and if you have some evidence on that I’m open to being convinced that their primary mission is really to support women’s rights. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2020, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-threat-about-niqabs/853839/84 "2020-05-30T12:59:22Z")
Good Lord, you’re fucking stupid. Goodbye. ---
**Author:** ![saucywench](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/85e7bf/32.png) [@saucywench](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saucywench)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2020, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-threat-about-niqabs/853839/85 "2020-05-30T14:40:40Z")
Monty-The poster you insulted has posted thoughtfully and intelligently, and asked some pertinent questions. You, on the other hand, have contributed zilch to this thread. No loss. Now you have more time to post your “sack of dung” on a loop tirades. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2020, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-threat-about-niqabs/853839/86 "2020-05-30T17:23:48Z")
Riemann, Apostacy is a subset of sharia. When it comes to bringing sharia into Canadian law (e.g. applying sharia through binding arbitration, which was a hot issue here a few years ago): > [@](#): > > CCMW Position on the application of Muslim family law and human rights for Muslim Women. > > . . . . > > CCMW holds that human rights as declared in the United Nations Universal Declaration are consistent with the ideals of Islam, and as believing Muslim women we can adhere to the Quran and to the U.N Declaration. We see no contradiction between the rights and responsibilities as expressed in the divine message and those articulated by the nations of the world. As Canadian Muslim women we uphold the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and expect it to apply to us as fully as to any other Canadian. > > There is no incongruity between the Quran and the U.N declaration which recognizes the “inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.” Further, it states that “ a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge.” We believe that all peoples must come to a recognition of the commonality and universality of these rights as they do not contradict nor are they limited to a specific culture or country. > > An important right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 7 states “all are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law.” > . . . . > > We know that Muslim law is not monolithic, nor simple, nor applied consistently across the world and so we seriously question how it will be applied here in Canada and why is it needed here? The idealization of Muslim law based on a patriarchal family model does not work for women. We suggest that as with any law, it is problematic to apply some aspects and not consider the “totality” of the system, its context and its underpinning principles. > > CCMW sees no compelling reason to live under any other form of law in Canada, as we want the same laws to apply to us as to other Canadian women. We like the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which safeguard and protect our equality rights. We know that the values of compassion, social justice and human rights, including equality, are the common basis of Islam and Canadian law. > . . . . > CCMW is advocating with law makers that there has to be a common civil code for all citizens of Canada and allowing the use of other legal systems discriminates against a group of Canadian women. [http://archive.ccmw.com/activities/act\_arb\_muslimlaw\_sharia.html](http://archive.ccmw.com/activities/act_arb_muslimlaw_sharia.html) ---
**Author:** ![EmilyG](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/emilyg/32/364_2.png) [@EmilyG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EmilyG)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2020, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-threat-about-niqabs/853839/87 "2020-05-30T17:27:18Z")
> [@Leaffan](#): > > You racist fucks. You thought covering a portion of your face was blah, blah, anti, blah blah, in public, blah blah. > > And now you have no issue with the general public wearing face masks for viral protection. Agreed. It’s especially bad/hypocritical here in the province of Quebec. When the current Quebec government got elected, they worked hard to quickly put limitations on religious clothing and symbols. Which is not only racist/prejudiced, but also diverted attention and resources from more important things, like healthcare. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2020, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-threat-about-niqabs/853839/88 "2020-05-30T17:27:37Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > …Just because you have some bone to pick with Islam… As for this, it just seems to be a lazy virtue-signaling insinuation of racism, and a failure to engage with difficult issues. What I have “some bone to pick” with is misogyny, homophobia, theocracy, restriction of free speech, etc. And these things are objectively correlated with religious belief. To the extent that the majority of modern Christians and some reformist Muslims reject these things, they are welcome allies. To some extent, being “Muslim” is as much a cultural identity as a belief system, so social progress _must_ come from reform movements within Islam - people must have valid ways to reject the bad ideas without losing their community identity. If the Canadian Council of Muslim Women is one such progressive movement, they have my wholehearted support. But if you’re prepared to _assume_ that without evidence, it’s not me who’s fucking stupid. And a pro-niqab propaganda piece is not a favorable sign on their views of the role of women. You reproduce their mention of many admirable documents on human rights. Neither you nor they have any substantive comment on their position on specific issues where traditional Muslim values (and interpretations of the Quran) have often been in conflict these values. I think there’s a qualitative difference between modesty and subjugation. As mentioned upthread, there is obviously no difference between choosing a scarf-like head covering and choosing a hairstyle. But there’s a qualitative difference in covering large parts the _face_ and what that represents. I would strongly defend any individual Muslim woman’s _right_ to wear whatever she chooses, I think banning the niqab or burqa is an outrageous violation of human rights. Similarly, I’d defend the _right_ of an 18-year-old Mormon girl to become the 4th wife of a 50-year-old man, if she chooses this freely. I can at the same time believe these are _bad_ choices, that they are a result of broader “cultural coercion”, of misogyny and the subjugation of women. Where freely-choosing individuals are concerned, their rights always trump any notion of “cultural coercion”. But that doesn’t preclude my belief that these bad choices arise from an unfortunate desire to conform with deplorably misogynistic practices under the guise of religious virtue; and that I hope these things can disappear in a better-educated and more civilized world where women will freely choose _not_ to be willing participants in their own subjugation. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2020, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-threat-about-niqabs/853839/89 "2020-05-30T17:36:34Z")
ETA: I posted the above before seeing Muffin’s post above detailing some of the CCMW’s positions. That does seem very encouraging on the values they represent. But I’d still question how they reconcile… > [@](#): > > The idealization of Muslim law based on a patriarchal family model does not work for women…[etc.] …with the niqab. I’m not talking about the _right_ to wear it, but the cultural practice. And as for… > [@](#): > > We see no contradiction between the rights and responsibilities as expressed in the divine message and those articulated by the nations of the world. Well, I do. But of course I realize that they have to start from a statement like this, and that progress will always be incremental. ---
**Author:** ![Unreconstructed\_Man](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/76d3ee/32.png) [@Unreconstructed\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unreconstructed_Man)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2020, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-threat-about-niqabs/853839/90 "2020-05-30T17:41:16Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > What I have “some bone to pick” with is misogyny, homophobia, theocracy, restriction of free speech, etc. And these things are objectively correlated with religious belief. To the extent that the majority of modern Christians and some reformist Muslims reject these things, they are welcome allies. To some extent, being “Muslim” is as much a cultural identity as a belief system, so social progress must come from reform movements within Islam - people must have valid ways to reject the bad ideas without losing their community identity. Muffin’s “study” noted that homophobia was rife among niqab wearing women, which is to be expected. As such, I think it’s fair to view niqabs, like MAGA hats, as signifiers of bigotry. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2020, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-threat-about-niqabs/853839/91 "2020-05-30T18:04:49Z")
Riemann, if what you are getting at is extremists killing or demanding the killing of people in the name of god and demanding that all people must follow god’s law as they decree it to be or else be exterminated, or if all you are getting at is a patriarchy of Imans using appelum ad verecundiam to pressure people in to adhering to their extremist hate filled beliefs, you should read this article by Junaid Jahangir that was published by the Huffington Post and further disseminated by the Canadian Council of Muslim Women. > [@](#): > > **Hateful Muslim Imams Do Not Speak For Islam** > Posted March 10, 2017 by CCMW & filed under CCMW National. > > Source: Huffington Post > > Author: Junaid Jahangir > > **Hateful Muslim Imams Do Not Speak For Islam** > > A few weeks ago a video surfaced on YouTube about a Canadian imam who supported the death punishment for apostasy. Such videos, of which there is no dearth, capture the comments of Canadian imams who preach wife beating, condemn gays and support medieval punishments and the Caliphate. > > These videos stoke Islamophobia, as evident from online comments that call for the exile or extermination of Muslims. This has dire consequences especially under the current climate where mosques have been burned, Muslim women have been assaulted, worshippers have been murdered and a Muslim MP has been threatened for her motion on condemning Islamophobia. > > Muslims are tired of being constantly on the defence, having to answer for the crimes of radical groups like ISIS, and experiencing prejudice from bigots in Canada. > > Those who circulate such videos paint all Muslims with the same hateful brush. The contribution of Muslim researchers, doctors, teachers, engineers, taxi drivers, janitors, et al. are ignored and Muslims are reduced to the viewpoints of rabid Shaykhs who confirm Orientalist tropes by selling Islam as a caricature of a medieval past. > > Yet, this is no time to play hot potato in relinquishing responsibility for the vicious cycle of hate where religious supremacism and xenophobia feed off each other. > > Islamophobia does not end by apprehending bigots just as terrorism does not end by bombing terrorists. They end when systems of oppression are dismantled. That happens when everyone plays their part — less foreign intervention and bombing on the one hand and less supremacist speakers and putrid ideologies on the other hand. > > Critics of Islam cannot paint millions of diverse Muslims in Canada with the viewpoints of a few clerics while ignoring the voices of Muslims that do not fit their agenda. Likewise, Muslims cannot remain quiet when supremacist speakers speak on behalf of their religion. > > The Canadian cleric whose video on death for apostasy was circulated last month, had the following to say on apostasy: > “When a person in an Islamic state apostasizes, leaves religion, let Allah be a witness that I am telling the truth that the punishment for apostasy is death. Anybody telling you on a minbar (pulpit) anything else, wallahil azeem (and Allah is great), they are lying to you, this is an Islamic law, if you apostasize, if you turn your back from Islam, according to the law it is death … > > The viewpoints of this imam are completely at loggerheads with hundreds of other Muslim imams, scholars and academics, as follows. > > 1. Imam Mohamad Jebara > Ottawa based Imam Jebara clearly refers to those who reject critical thinking and isolate their devotees with threats of death for apostasy as those who follow a cult. He opines: > We are looked upon with suspicion by those on the outside, while being viewed as traitors and deviant apostates by extremists who claim to be Muslims. We stand between a rock and a hard place. > > 2. Dr. Shabir Ally > Toronto based Dr. Shabir Ally has many videos on apostasy. In one video he goes to explain how the texts attributed to the Prophet may not be authentic and should be confined by time and circumstance by the Qur’anic verse on there being no compulsion in religion. In another video he expresses: > > “The apostasy law has been much misunderstood in Islam, it became a standard law that the apostate should be put to death, … quite the contrary the Qur’an speaks of people embracing Islam, leaving it, toying with it, going back and forth, and if the Prophet Muhammad himself were killing people for doing such thing, they wouldn’t dare to do it in Medina where Prophet Muhammad had risen to power, so it’s very clear from the Qur’anic evidence that there should have been no such law in Islam that the apostate should be killed.” > > 1. Dr. Khalid Zaheer and Al Mawrid Canada > Like Dr. Shabir Ally, Dr. Khalid Zaheer, who is affiliated with Al Mawrid Canada, has expressed that the popular Muslim understanding on apostasy goes against the Qur’an. He asserts that the Qur’an restricts capital punishment to only two cases, murder and creating disorder, and that apostasy does not fall in either category. > > “Muslim community stakeholders need to send out a strong message that such speakers, some of whom are quite popular, do not speak for them.” > > 1. Alia Hogben > The Executive Director of the Canadian Council of Muslim Women (CCMW), Alia Hogben, has written in her blog that women groups experience hostility from conservative, traditional Muslims and that the awful punishments for apostasy and adultery prescribed by jurists are not mentioned in the Qur’an. > > 2. Dr. Mohammad Fadel and 100+ notable Islamic voices > The blog post on 100+ notable Islamic voices captures Muslim voices across time from the 8th century Caliph Umar ibn Abdul Aziz and from academics, scholars, imams, community leaders and students that indicate how the apostasy law is contrary to Islamic values and principles. The blog post mentions: > > “The longstanding problem of the traditional position, as held by Classical jurists or scholars, can be explained and excused as not being able to see apostasy, an issue of pure freedom of faith and conscience, separate from treason against the community or the state.” > > Among these voices is that of University of Toronto Law Professor Dr. Fadel, who mentions that the death punishment for apostasy was not a universal position. He reiterates that apostasy was viewed in the context of political and military treason and defection instead of freedom of conscience. > > The above indicates how the viewpoints of the hateful Canadian cleric are in stark contrast to hundreds of Muslim academics and community leaders. > This means instead of milking hateful imams for political gains and stoking more hatred in Canada, critics of Islam should work with Muslim community stakeholders to isolate such hateful voices. > > On their part Muslim community stakeholders need to send out a strong message that such speakers, some of whom are quite popular, do not speak for them. This necessitates nurturing the tradition of critical thinking and refusing the pulpit to hatemongers. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2020, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-threat-about-niqabs/853839/92 "2020-05-31T00:42:16Z")
Riemann, here’s a taste of what the CCMW has been up to. [http://ccmw.com/category/ccmw-resources/ccmw-projects/](http://ccmw.com/category/ccmw-resources/ccmw-projects/) > [@](#): > > Over the past 30 years the Canadian Council of Muslim Women has successfully completed a number of projects and tools that help empower Muslim women and their families. This has been accomplished through its collaborations with Canadians of various religious and cultural backgrounds. Pushing the boundaries on traditional gender roles and cultural understandings, CCMW has never shied away from challenging the issues that affect Muslim communities. The organization has responded to global and national crises and mobilized initiatives and projects to tackle issues including Prayers in Public Schools, the Niqab, Polygamy, Muslim Family Laws, Femicide, Diversity among Muslims, Anti-Semitism and Religious Accommodation. > > Collaborating with civil society groups, educational institutions, cultural community groups and government agencies, CCMW has sought to promote an Islam that is humane, egalitarian and equality-driven. At the community level CCMW has developed projects, events, grassroots workshops, and research publications in the areas of women’s leadership, Muslim youth identity, family dynamics, gender equality, racism and discrimination, anti-violence, unemployment, inter-faith work and civic engagement. [http://ccmw.com/what-we-do/projects/](http://ccmw.com/what-we-do/projects/) > [@](#): > > National > CCMW’s innovative projects and toolkits have been developed with leading experts, practitioners and activists in order to address the practical needs of Muslim communities and ensure lasting social change. To date all have yielded positive impacts. The CCMW marriage contract toolkit has been used in a number of social service workshops across the country. In 2012 we had the opportunity to extend our highly successful My Canada project to an inter-faith, inter-cultural cross-Canada initiative. Aptly called the Common Ground Project, the central tenet of this project is to find common ground across faiths and cultures. Our most recent projects include the Trillium funded project on Women in Niqab Speak, our Violence Against Women: Health and Justice for Canadian Muslim Women with the Status of Women Canada and the Mussawah Project. > . . . . > International > CCMW representatives have also presented policy briefs, consultations and testimonials at Federal and Governmental hearings and international conferences, some of which include the Beijing Conference on Women, the World Conference Against Racism (Durban, South Africa) consultation for Canada’s Anti-Terror Legislation (Bill C-36), the 4th Parliament of World Religions (Barcelona, Spain), the Public Hearing Committee for Religious Arbitration in Ontario, the Mussawah Global Meeting (Kuala Lampur, Malaysia), the Public Hearing Committee for Quebec’s Bill 94, the Inter-Parliamentary Coalition for Combating Anti-Semitism, an Affidavit for the BC government on Polygamy, The OSCE Conference on Combating Discrimination and Promoting Mutual Respect and Understanding (Bucharest, Romania), The OSCE Human Dimension Implementation Meeting (HDIM) (Warsaw, Poland), the Family Violence Conference and most recently the UN’s 57th session of the Commission on the Status of Women (New York, USA). Local This year, the CCMW has been holding two-day family law workshops across the country (covid-19 has delayed some of them, including the one that I am conducting), and has an online webinar “Introduction to family law & legal rights for Canadian Muslim Women”. [https://ccmw.com/ccmw-national/webinar-introduction-to-family-law-legal-rights-for-canadian-muslim-women/](https://ccmw.com/ccmw-national/webinar-introduction-to-family-law-legal-rights-for-canadian-muslim-women/) . If you want to get into the meat of it, read through CCMW’s “MUSLIM AND CANADIAN FAMILY LAWS: A COMPARATIVE PRIMER” by L. Clarke and P. Cross. [http://ccmw.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/PRIMER.pdf](http://ccmw.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/PRIMER.pdf) ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2020, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-threat-about-niqabs/853839/93 "2020-05-31T02:05:50Z")
> [@Unreconstructed\_Man](#): > > Muffin’s “study” noted that homophobia was rife among niqab wearing women, which is to be expected. As such, I think it’s fair to view niqabs, like MAGA hats, as signifiers of bigotry. I agree. > [@](#): > > In terms of religious orientation, the majority of the respondents in the study adopted what can be viewed as a “conservative” approach to Islam. For instance, the majority of respondents did not agree with the practice of dating and did not believe that homosexuality was an acceptable practice. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=22328274&postcount=80](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=22328274&postcount=80) The MAGA hat is an “in your face” “I’m coming for you” expression of identity and purpose, whereas the niqab is more along the lines of an expression of identity and/or religious obligation without the aggression. Either way, the headgear represent conservative religious ideologies that disparage LGBTQI2S people, with the former being an active threat to LGBTQI2S people in the USA, and the latter (conservative islam) having proven itself in many countries over many years to be strongly opposed to LGBTQI2S people. I would not expect to find any MAGA or niqab at the [Toronto Unity Mosque](http://www.jumacircle.com/). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-threat-about-niqabs/853839.md?page=4)