Veil in Vogue: Burqa brings freedom for non-Muslims, covering face gets social sanction in India

Indscribe

The burqa or the veil that is demonised in the Western world and even looked at suspiciously among non-Muslims in India is proving to be a boon for the young ones.

Teenaged girls are preferring to cover their faces. The style is exactly similar to that of a Muslim veil. They cover themselves while going out with friends or even boy friends.

One of the main reasons is that middle-class girls when in company of their boyfriends, don't want to be recognised or seen by their relatives. So it's safe to cover your face and you won't have to worry about being identified during a visit to park or a mall.

That's not a Muslim girl...

This phenomenon is not restricted to a few isolated places but all over India.In small cities like Jamshedpur, the college authorities are in a fix, how to deal with the problem.

The girls take the burqas from a shop on rent before going out on date. Of course, there is no criticism of the practice. It's fashion now.

Burqa gives them anonymity and there is no fear being caught by parents or acquaintances. Earlier, girls claimed that they were protecting their skin from the harsh sun in Indian summer by covering their faces.

But now, throughout the year, you can see women covering their faces. They use a piece of cloth--like a head scarf or 'dupatta' to cover their faces.

Now it has become a perennial sight across India. In all seasons, girls in Pune, Nagpur, Bhopal, Raipur, Ranchi and other cities, go out covering their face and hair, that provides them the anonymity which they need to meet their lovers.

Veil has brought this independence to girls, which is otherwise not possible in our society. So how can you say that Burqa restricts. If Muslim girls generally used black burqa [Bohra women wore vibrant veils], then now its colourful veils for all. 

Bangla migrant Vs Nepali migrant: Bangladeshi is foreigner, Nepali immigrant is welcome in India?

No to Bangladesh (Left), Yes to Nepal (Right)

A recent Delhi-based English newspapers editorial on the issue of migrants' influx is thought-provoking.

The entire nation and politicians cutting across the party lines have made the issue of Bangladeshis' influx as the biggest threat to India.

Strangely, the Marxists are also crying hoarse like the right-wing groups and the BJP that always did it in the past over this issue.

The communalization of Indian politics is so intense that on one hand the country has open border with Nepal, the entry of Bangladeshi migrant who is culturally more closer to India is a strict no-no.

Lakhs of Nepalese citizens enter India every year just because Nepal is a Hindu country? Though culturally, it was not a part of India. It was a separate kingdom. 

But Bangladesh [that was just 57 years ago part of India], is a Muslim country and is it the reason that the migrants from this country are unwelcome.

What the Bangla migrant does? He mingles easily and lives peacefully. On the other hand, even if a man from Nepal is involved in an offence, there is no anger against the entire group. But in case of Bangladesh, if a man is even termed 'Bangladeshi', is is used as a derogatory term in media.

Had there been even a couple of incidents of crime by Bangla migrants, the national media would have made a great hue and cry. The Bangladeshis and the West Bengal residents share same language, culture and traditions. 

They were a unified race that was divided. It was the British administration that once tried to divide Bengal in 1905. Barely 42 years later, the British again chose to cut Bengal, with the assent of the leaders of Congress as well as other parties.

Of course, that's history. But, as long as Hindus came to India from Bangladesh, it was not made an issue. The settlements of Bangladeshi Hindus through out the India are reminder to the fact but now the Bangladeshi has been labelled as troublemaker.

The difference between figures of immigrants, is huge. In fact, there is a clear exaggeration about claims regarding figures of Muslims from Bangladesh, and the constant rhetoric that Muslim immigrants are arriving purposely to affect religious demography of West Bengal.

These claims have been repeated so many times on a regular basis for years, that it has got into the minds of citizens. Certain people at the top positions, made wild guesses in order to create panic among Hindu population, that the arrival of Bangladeshis...

...would increase the proportion of Muslims, so dramatically, that it would affect the population balance. Actually, it's a form of hate. Demonizing a country and people is not fair. Besides, rather than taking it up seriously and at bilateral level, the chest thumping and hatred on display, affects our image & relations.

In Assam, we have similar issue that keeps raging perennially. Read an exhaustive post on the same issue that was written later on this blog. The article, 'Branding the Bangladeshi migrant as terrorist: Illegal immigration or a humanitarian crisis', is related.

Hats off to Britain for maturity in dealing with crisis

Despite the reports of rise in incidents of crime against ethnic minorities in United Kingdom, the country has largely remained peaceful.

Apart from minor incidents of arson, the British have maintained their calm in wake of London blasts. This is in sharp contrast with the manner in which right-wing groups act in India.

No sooner than a minor incident occurs, the entire Muslim populace has to bear the brunt of it and also the backlash despite no fault of its own.

On one hand, not only Tony Blaire but the entire leadership cutting across party lines has acted with great restraint, urging the people to maintain the harmony, here we have seen how head of states [Chief  Ministers] pay least attention even when mobs are out to kill at will.

In 1984 Sikhs were butchered on the streets of Delhi after the assassination of Mrs Gandhi. The state slept then and the police had turned Nelson's eye. The press was silent. Everything was hushed up and pushed under the carpet.

In 2002, the Gujarat riots saw Prime Minister and the entire central government turn away its face and the Chief Minister Narendra Modi almost supporting the carnage in which thousands were killed and millions displaced.

Hats off to you Brits. 

Linking Islam with Terrorism: What about IRA, LTTE, Hiroshima, Holocaust?

Once again the blatant use of the words like Islamic terrorism and Muslim terrorists has angered me. That people do not find it offensive, is strange.

Firstly, as a Muslim, I condemn all forms of terror and terrorism. Secondly, if misguided persons commit such acts, then their act shouldn't be linked to a religion, as we totally oppose such wanton killings and bloodshed.

Linking Islam with Terrorism, hurts Muslims. It also increased the existing fautlines within the society. Still, if some insist on using the prefix 'Muslim' or 'Islam', then  I need answers for the following queries:

1. Why the Irish Republican Army [IRA] that indulged in bombing in UK and the deadly Basque separatists in Spain never termed as Christian terrorists or Protestant/Catholic terrorists?

2. Why the LTTE that is Hindu [Tamil is their language and ethnicity] and has killed thousands of innocents including head of states in Sri Lanka besides destroying Buddhist temples never dubbed as Hindu terrorist outfit?

3. The killers of Hiroshima or Nagasaki are just not remembered as terrorists. Do we need to remind the horrors of Japan during the Second World War.

4. The massacre of thousands of Muslims in Bosnia was never termed Christian terrorism, why?

5. The murders by Jews, Buddhists, Hindus and Christian outfits are never linked to religion but only when a criminal is Muslim the entire community is associated. Why the words like Muslim terrorist and Islamic terrorism used in media.

Such irresponsible, objectionable and derogatory term is used frequently by mainstream, self-styled liberal media all over the world. This is causing divide among Muslims and the non-Muslims. And even the Muslim intelligentsia does not protest. Strange!

London blasts

It is indeed sad that the London blasts have again put the Muslims on the defensive. The blasts are highly condemnable but the peace-loving Muslims should not be put in the dock for such act of terrorism.

The bombings have led to precious lives being lost. But Muslims have also suffered. In Iraq and Afghanistan, the bombings resulted in deaths of hundreds of thousands innocents for whom few tears were shed.

Muslims have died in all terrorist attacks. Terrorism is neither Christian nor Islamic or Hindu. It is time to restore our faith in humanity and efforts are needed to ensure that one community is not pushed to a corner.

We don't even know who is really behind the terror attacks but unfortunately the suicide bombings and terror have been linked to Muslims.