Why Naomi Wolf Loves the Burqa
The shameless phenomenon of Western leftist feminists abandoning millions of persecuted Muslim women under Islamic gender apartheid continues.
Naomi Wolf has now come forward to say that she finds the Islamic chador sexy and supports its institutionalization throughout the Islamic world.
Naomi Wolf
Never mind that Muslim women in most cases do not have a choice of whether or not to cover themselves, and face bodily harm and death if they do not veil. How much, one wonders, does Wolf care about Aqsa Parvez, a 16-year-old Muslim girl who was murdered by her father for refusing to wear the veil? Does Wolf think that honor murder is sexy too? Does it warm Wolf’s heart that Aqsa’s grave remains unmarked because her family is doing its best to erase all remnants of her 16-year existence on earth?
Aqsa Parvez
Phyllis Chesler, a hero in the fight on behalf of persecuted Muslim women, has made mince meat out of Wolf’s arguments in her recent superb piece in Pajamas Media.
Phyllis Chesler
The David Horowitz Freedom Center has powerfully exposed leftist feminists’ lack of attention to women’s rights in the Muslim world
It is, of course, very clear why leftist feminists would ally themselves with the persecutors and mutilators of Muslim women. It makes total sense that they would reach out in solidarity to misogynist monsters who enforce the veiling of women.
Leftist feminists have long sought to prevent men from appreciating women’s physical beauty. Labeling this appreciation the “objectification” and “exploitation” of the female body, these feminists have tried to prevent women from using their beauty and sexuality as they themselves see fit. Just as fellow travelers such as Orville Schell, Claudie Broyelle, and Shirley MacLaine were enchanted with the enforced Maoist dress that attempted to desexualize Chinese citizens, so the new generation of leftist believers and feminists genuflects before the Islamist burqa. The burqa, like the Maoist uniform, further attracts them by virtue of the fact that women in Islamist societies have no say in whether or not they will wear it. Longing to submerge themselves in a totality where their own choices will be negated, these leftist believers, like Wolf, are always drawn to a totalitarian ethos that forbids freedom of conscience.
Wolf is now in great company with Dr. Unni Wikan, a professor of social anthropology at the University of Oslo. Wikan’s solution for the high incidence of Muslims raping Norwegian women (who are committing the crime of being unveiled) stresses neither punishment of the perpetrators nor repudiation of the Islamic theology that legitimizes such abuse of women. Rather, Wikan instructs Norwegian women to veil themselves. “Norwegian women must understand that we live in a Multicultural society,” she states ” and adapt themselves to it.”
Question to Wolf, Wikan and the rest of their leftist feminist flock: Have you no sense of shame, at long last?
Editor’s note: Get the whole story of leftist feminists’ alliance with Islamofascists in Jamie Glazov’s new book, “United in Hate: The Left’s Romance With Tyranny and Terror.”
Trackbacks and Pingbacks
- No Naomi Wolf, You Apologize « NewsReal Blog
- Feminst Hawks Flock Together « NewsReal Blog
- More on How Utterly Wonderful Burqas Are… | Little Miss Attila
- And this is the new “feminism“? « Tea and Politics
- America-Haters Like Naomi Wolf Judge the West by a Different Standard « NewsReal Blog
- Naomi Wolf finds support in Debate About Women’s Rights in the Muslim World « NewsReal Blog
- Dissent of the Day: Naomi Wolf Disputes Characterization of Her Views on the Burqa | NewsReal Blog
- Introducing The Naomi Wolf Award | NewsReal Blog
- News You Need to Know 30Jan10 | Mega Glomerate Main-Stream Media
Naomi Wolf here. Mr Horowitz, you and I have met, and I am simply appalled at this misrepresentation. I am writing to ask strongly that you remove this falsehood from your site and correct the record. Ms Chesler’s piece is factually inaccurate as is this. I have never said any such thing. I do not find the burqa `sexy’ and do not wish to institutionalize it and it is shameful that you and she would traduce discourse with these kinds of falsehoods. In my original piece — which neither of you see fit to reproduce fully — I note that Muslim women struggle with such serious forms of oppression as infanticide, genital mutilation, legal inequities and so forth and that many of them have told me that they wish that Westerners would focus on support for these issues rather than what they wear. I also am making the point that we should listen to Muslim feminists rather than assuming we know what their priorities are. I insist you correct this and I will ask the same of Ms Chesler. I am happy to have a serious debate about these issues whenever you like but this is not the way to advance intellectual debate about important issues.
She finds it sexy? Isn’t the Burkha supposed to squelch any sex in her mind and demeanor?
So now we see it only contributes to her lusts.
Naomi Wolf makes a comfortable living out of her pro Islamic ‘position’. That much we can all understand – whether we agree with her or not. This is a well-known fact not subject to interpretations or ‘explanations’. Her claims notwithstanding, Naomi Wolf never went full out in condemning Sharia emphatically, energetically and honestly. She usually did it in a
by-the-way manner that underlines the lack of the moral fibre we all came to expect from the politically correct cohorts that infest our environment.
Mr. Horowitz, please DO NOT remove your comment. If anything, reinforce it with additional data. After all, the struggle to save our civilization will be long and bloody and we must all be prepared for it.
From the column you referenced– ” The Western Christian tradition portrays all sexuality, even married sexuality, as sinful. Islam and Judaism never had that same kind of mind-body split. ”
What a load of manure! In the article, Wolf tries to portray Islamic attitudes toward women and sexuality as more freedom oriented than Christian attitudes. This is nuts. The “even married sexuality” line is just crazy, and she can provide no textual basis for that extreme statement. It’s not the WESTERN CHRISTIAN TRADITION to forcibly circumcise women…
Folks, check out “Ban the Burka” on YouTube – great commentary on this atrocity….
I don’t know where Wolf got her view that Western Christianity regards marital sex as sinful. I will agree that there have been distortions of the Church’s view on sex. Some have even thought that the sin in the Garden of Eden was sex. Not so! Adam and Eve were told to be fruitful and multiply BEFORE sin entered the world.
What is and always has been sinful (until the past few decades)is sex outside of marriage.
Even believers regarded sex as sinful, Song of Solomon would never have been in the Bible.
Ms. Wolf is so open minded that her brain has fallen out. It pains me to read her article. There is no way to compare orthodox jewish headcovering and muslim headcovering, because an orthodox jewish woman will never be gang raped or killed for not covering. Of course, her children may not get into a good yeshiva, and she might mess with their prospects of finding a good marriage partner, but social consequences and death are not equivalent.
Of course muslim women are passionate about sensuality in the privacy of their homes. The emphasis is on male pleasure, as evidenced by the ubiquitousness of female genital mutilation in the muslim world. She has an obligation to please him. Her orgasms (or lack thereof) are irrelevant.
Ms. Wolf throws the issue of choice in near the end of the article, like an afterthought. It’s the whole point. It’s everything. Naomi Wolf gives feminism a bad name.
Ban the buqa and Sharia Law while we’re at it.
If M/S Wolf can’t see that then she should go home and bake cookies and stay there. We don’t need your rubbish polluting the media.
We are in a fight for peoples souls and I don’t mean spiritually though maybe I’m wrong there. Who can they rely on but us who are free?
Women are discriminated against throughout the Islamic world to an extent that even my 13yr old understands that Sharia Law is evil and so are those who promote, defend and treat it lightly like Wolf.
So how come an educated woman like Wolf doesn’t understand that basic premise about Sharia?
I read her article and it was tripe. it airily fantasied the daily reality of millions of women in Islamic Countries.
She should be ashamed, Smack her hard and do it often and all her ilk too.
For the sake of those who can’t defend themselves.
Wolf is now in great company with Dr. Unni Wikan, a professor of social anthropology at the University of Oslo. Wikan’s solution for the high incidence of Muslims raping Norwegian women (who are committing the crime of being unveiled) stresses neither punishment of the perpetrators nor repudiation of the Islamic theology that legitimizes such abuse of women. Rather, Wikan instructs Norwegian women to veil themselves. “Norwegian women must understand that we live in a Multicultural society,†she states †and adapt themselves to it.â€
Excuse me? Why should western women adapt to muslim culture? It’s the muslim people who must adapt to the freedoms of the west. In the west, it’s unnaceptable for a man or a women to force another woman to wear something she doesn’t want to wear. The Burqa fits that description.
If muslim boys can’t control themselves, and fear a woman’s body so much, maybe they should return to Iraq, Iran, and Saudi Arabia and get out of the west.
I am tired of hearing that we should just accept their honor killings, and their stoning of gay people, and their killing of jews.
’nuff said.
Naomi Wolf finds the burqa and chador SEXY?!!! I wonder how many of the women under these “mobile tents” actually feel that way too, considering that many of them have had female genital mutilation from a very young age. Wolf and her ilk SHOULD feel thoroughly ashamed. She disgusts me.
Chardor is not Islamic, only belongs to some traditional Middle East etnics. Beauty should be admired, prohibited to hidden. “Jilbab” (headgear) should be interpreted as ethics and identity, the goals are economic growth and employement. It is analog with Crown for kings and queens, or “head cap” for male Moslems (population growth). Thanks for your attention.
After I’ve read the referenced Naomi Wolf’s column “Behind the veil lives a thriving Muslim sexuality,†I’ve got lost.
A woman whose almost entire writing career proves that she, like many young damsels suffering IGS*, preaches, lauds, and fiercely fights for unbounded sexual freedom (in full concordance with the foundress of the “sex as a glass of water†ideology and free love practice, fervent Bolshevik Alexandra Kollontai, girlfriend of Lenin’s mistress Inessa Armand), now suddenly recalls modesty, “demureness,†and sexual restraint in public. Wow!
Particularly, I adore her sentence: “And are we blind to our own markers of the oppression and control of women?â€
The woman seems to forget the rule: never compare an apple with a nuclear power plant. Let me make it more clear to this female creature: “Are you blind to put in one context an imaginary “our own markers of the oppression and control of women†and the actual stoning of women in Muslim countries�
Why not to let victims of stoning in Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan, Somali, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates, Nigeria listen before they died to your “I learned that Muslim attitudes toward women’s appearance and sexuality are not rooted in repression, but in a strong sense of public versus private, of what is due to God and what is due to one’s husband. It is not that Islam suppresses sexuality, but that it embodies a strongly developed sense of its appropriate channelling – toward marriage, the bonds that sustain family life, and the attachment that secures a home.â€
It seems your IGS drastically affected your brain while your Liberast agenda forces you to forget any decency (oh Gosh, do you know what decency is?) in your fierce attempts to promote so-called “multiculturalism†only to dismantle pillars of the Western civilization that gave the world so many genius achievements.
Yes, yes, I agree with you, sanctimonious Naomi, that European or North American streets are full of “women in halter tops, miniskirts and short shortsâ€; of “immense billboards on which women swoon in sexual ecstasy, cavort in lingerie or simply stretch out languorously, almost fully naked.â€
But it’s you who your entire Liberast life promoted just this: unbounded sexual freedom.
And that unbounded, unrestrained sexual freedom became a huge money business exploiting natural genetic reproductive sexual desire to cook as much money as possible, thus converting the noble call of Life reproduction into a dirty immoral money machine.
It amazes me when I read your “young men in the West, who grow up on pornography and sexual imagery on every street corner.â€
I beg your pardon! And who is being photographed for the pornography? The bronze Statue of Liberty or live shameless exhibitionist damsels suffering IGS? Who is ready to strip? Who is ready to shake their artificial udders before public while caressing their privates with their clawed hands?
What was the purpose of so much applauded by female Liberasts, like you Naomi Wolf, “The Vagina Monologue†lauding obscenities but full of wrong biological terms? Other than promoting promiscuity, lechery, and debauchery under hypocritical pretext of “tearing off sanctimony from public minds . To ‘epater les bourgeois’ for making money?
Why didn’t I hear your call for modesty then?
I may completely agree with your “When sexuality is kept private and directed in ways seen as sacred – and when one’s husband isn’t seeing his wife (or other women) half-naked all day long – one can feel great power and intensity when the headscarf or the chador comes off in the the home.†And “pleasure and sexuality, both male and female, should not be displayed promiscuously – and possibly destructively – for all to see.â€
But such a standpoint – if it is a honest one – should serve you as a stimulus to promote modesty among the Western youth and adults rather than trying to mask the Muslim rabidity in preserving their taste of demureness.
*Oh, sorry, I forgot to explain what I mean under the abbrevation IGS.It’s my allegoric description of typical sexual obsession and addiction among Americans…and media specifically; stands for Itchy Genitals Syndrome
Cockroaches can’t be blamed for being cockroaches; the ones who don’t want to clean the apartment from cockroaches are to be blamed.
Wolf together with her rabid perverted accomplices, lke that so-called “professor” Wikan, seem to adore living in the infested apartment. But why should we allow that in our homes?
I applaud you Constantine!