[kj] Jaz Straw

Wed Oct 11 16:09:19 EDT 2006

"My comment was in reference to their ability to remove distraction from 
clothes as symbols of status or sexuality, providing focus on the inner 
person, rather than the outer. "

  I must disagree. The expensive designer arabyas gives the wearer status . 
How much skin they show can also be classed as displaying their (limited) 
sexuality . It also doesn't make people focus on their inner person, it 
turns the wearer into a non entity . It turns them into a (literally ) 
faceless non entity. It dehumanises them.

>From: culturevirus <culturevirus at yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: "A list about all things Killing Joke (the 
>band!)"<gathering at misera.net>
>To: "A list about all things Killing Joke (the band!)" 
><gathering at misera.net>
>Subject: RE: [kj] Jaz Straw
>Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 12:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
>
>I understand that they are not all the same and I agree that by 
>accessorizing them they are in effect subverting any democratic potential. 
>My comment was in reference to their ability to remove distraction from 
>clothes as symbols of status or sexuality, providing focus on the inner 
>person, rather than the outer. This is also one of the reasons why school 
>uniforms exist. From this frame of reference I can appreciate such 
>motivations.
>
>flight Bringer <flightbringer at hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>   "If you ask these women many of them will respond that like school 
>uniforms
>it keeps them equal with their peers"
>
>That is incorrect. There are different types of hijab and arabaya(full
>body covering) some are cheap and some are expensive , they are NOT all the
>same . The hijab belongs in the dark ages , in an age where men could nt
>control their urges and women had to be covered up.
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: culturevirus
> >Reply-To: "A list about all things Killing Joke (the
> >band!)"
> >To: ade at the-lab.zetnet.co.uk,"A list about all things Killing Joke (the
> >band!)"
> >Subject: RE: [kj] Jaz Straw
> >Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 18:17:07 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> >coming out of lurkdom again... being a US based person, the politics of
> >Britain are mostly unknown to me, but we have roughly the same set of
> >circumstances in the US. I have yet to hear/read of any of our 
>politicians
> >speaking on the subject in such a level-headed manner as Mr. Straw. Our
> >politicians tend to speak in small words and short sentences so as to
> >discourage deep thought on issues and therefore maintain knee-jerk voting
> >based on political hatred for "the other party".
> >
> >Ade's comment (echoed by a few others) reflects the way a lot of us
> >Westerners view the hijab: as a way to keep women down or force women to
> >shoulder the burden of policing the male sexual drive. I know part of me
> >feels that way as well. But as Straw pointed out early in his column, 
>many
> >women do choose to wear head coverings of some type. If you ask these 
>women
> >many of them will respond that like school uniforms it keeps them equal
> >with their peers and reduces the distraction of clothing differences and
> >focuses peoples attentions on the wearer and not the clothes. Such 
>clothing
> >can make women feel empowered as they no longer face distracted men who 
>are
> >(even subconciously) checking out their physical features and are forced 
>to
> >deal with the woman as a social equal.
> >
> >I recently read a book on the history of The Habit (Catholic nun garb) 
>and
> >many nuns feel the same way. Within the communities of these women there 
>is
> >disagreement over whether such attire has an overall positive or negative
> >affect on their place in society. Nearly all agree however, that it sets
> >them apart from other women and puts them in a frame of reference that is
> >unique among their sex.
> >
> >In a perfect world women will choose to wear such attire for what they 
>feel
> >it does for them as a person and not what their sub-culture expects of
> >them.
> >
> >I am culturevirus
> >
> >ade wrote: I dunno. I just think it's odd
> >to defend a way of keeping women down. Nevertheless, I'll defend the 
>right
> > to wear the things!
> > -----Original Message-----
> >From: Jim Harper [mailto:jimharper666 at yahoo.co.uk]
> >Sent: 10 October 2006 21:32
> >To: ade at the-lab.zetnet.co.uk; A list about all things Killing Joke (the
> >band!)
> >Subject: RE: [kj] Jaz Straw
> >
> >
> >So I take I'm missing the real issue then?
> >
> >ade wrote: Look, I'll make my
> >point again - imagine the subject has no colour, so we're not talking
> >about race
> > now. That seems to be the subtext on BOTH sides in many cases. Now
> > imagine a subject female
> > being told she has to cover up *her* 'adornments'. Sort've puts the
> > blame at her door doesn't it.
> >
> > It's like as if the 'institutionalised treatment of women as
> >cattle' is shorted out by the 'race' aspect.
> >
> > A lefty nightmare.
> >
> >
> > ade.
> >
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------
> >How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger’s low PC-to-Phone call
> >rates.
>
>
> >_______________________________________________
> >Gathering mailing list
> >Gathering at misera.net
> >http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Be the first to hear what's new at MSN - sign up to our free newsletters!
>http://www.msn.co.uk/newsletters
>
>_______________________________________________
>Gathering mailing list
>Gathering at misera.net
>http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering
>
>
>
>I am culturevirus
>
>---------------------------------
>How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger’s low  PC-to-Phone call 
>rates.

>_______________________________________________
>Gathering mailing list
>Gathering at misera.net
>http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™ Messenger has arrived. Click here to download it for free! 
http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/?locale=en-gb