Jesus ‘n’ Mo ‘n’ niqabs

Just a reminder: the niqab is the cloth that covers the face (and not the eyes), worn with a hijab (head covering) as part of Muslim religious garb. Here’s a woman wearing both:


Little comment is needed on today’s Jesus and Mo strip, expressing the hypocrisy of extolling such a garment as a symbol of either religious freedom or feminism:



  1. Posted January 25, 2017 at 12:04 pm | Permalink

    My easy way to remember.

    Niqab = Nose.
    Hijab = Hair.

    • Posted January 25, 2017 at 5:36 pm | Permalink

      Burka – body?

    • somer
      Posted January 25, 2017 at 5:58 pm | Permalink

      Freud always did think the nose is a sexual organ

    • Mark Beklem
      Posted January 26, 2017 at 1:25 am | Permalink

      Burqa = Both

  2. eric
    Posted January 25, 2017 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

    I’d be curious to know the statistics on how many 2nd and 3rd generation immigrants follow the 1st generation’s clothing proscriptions. My guess is that muslim immigrants to the US are not generally like the close-knit orthodox Jewish communities that have maintained their cultural separation successfully for decades. I wonder if (and I’m only talking in the west here) this issue mostly fixes itself by generation 3.

    • somer
      Posted January 25, 2017 at 6:46 pm | Permalink

      Definitely not the situation in the UK where generations on a large proportions segregate themselves in a Muslim community

  3. JonLynnHarvey
    Posted January 25, 2017 at 12:50 pm | Permalink

    I recently watched a 4 person discussion between the three living horsemen and Ayaan Hirsi Ali (apparently invited to be part of the original BBC “Four Horsemen” dialogue).

    I really liked Dawkins comment on being struck by her remark in one of memoirs, that the day she removed her Muslim garments [not sure if it was burqa or hijab] she was utterly struck by her not getting raped! She had been conditioned from childhood to expect this.

    [Having read all four of the main books by the horsemen, I really must get around to reading Ali!!]

    • Posted January 25, 2017 at 1:36 pm | Permalink

      Yep, you must!

    • Diane G.
      Posted January 27, 2017 at 2:13 am | Permalink

      Yes, you must! I bet you’ll find Hirsi Ali’s Infidel more compelling reading than even any of the Horsemens’ volumes. And that’s saying a lot. 🙂

  4. Heather Hastie
    Posted January 25, 2017 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

    People should be free to wear what they want, even the niqab. (I have days where I wouldn’t mind it being an option!)

    However, there are no circumstances in which a niqab can be representative of any kind of freedom.

    For a start, women don’t choose which days to wear it. Even when they have the option, it’s either all the time or not at all. They generally don’t just wear it when they feel like it.

    The niqab is a symbol of the oppression of women and there’s no way around that fact.

    It’s also representative of a lot of very screwed up ideas about relationships between men and women.

    All religions that have any kind of rules about women’s clothing, especially in relation to modesty, perpetuate the idea that they are responsible if they are the victim of sexual attacks.

    When a man is the victim of a sexual attack, I’ve never heard it said he has to take some of the blame because he looked good.

    • Kevin
      Posted January 25, 2017 at 2:18 pm | Permalink

      I agree. People should have the right to wear what they want. But both the hijab and the niqab are symbols of oppression. To be fair, if a Baptist mother forces her daughter to wear a sweater and long pants on a sweltering Southeast summer afternoon…that’s oppression too.

      • Heather Hastie
        Posted January 25, 2017 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

        I agree, which is why I was fairly general in my comment. The niqab and burqa are at the extreme end, but almost all religions do it to some extent. The Amish, orthodox Jews, and many others provide more obvious examples.

    • somer
      Posted January 25, 2017 at 6:51 pm | Permalink

      I Agree – people should be allowed to wear what they want – with exception of instances that it interferes with the effective or proper execution of their employment or their official role if publicly employed (e.g. teacher in public school wearing niqab or for that matter allowing niqab in public school due to the message it sends girls attending, the overt religious imposition on secular school and the interference with classroom activities and learning.

      • nicky
        Posted January 25, 2017 at 8:52 pm | Permalink

        Yes, Harris’ ‘motorhelmet criterion’.

      • Heather Hastie
        Posted January 25, 2017 at 10:02 pm | Permalink

        Yeah, that’s a good point. You wouldn’t want a niqab around machinery either – that could lead to a very messy ending!

  5. Tom
    Posted January 25, 2017 at 2:12 pm | Permalink

    Since the overwhelming majority of male Muslims in 21st Century Europe do not wear “traditional” robes etc one can only assume that those who insist that their women do may be their way of showing their defiance of the West without placing themselves at the risk of ridicule or attack.
    These heroes have become vicarious martyrs for their beliefs.

    • gravelinspector-Aidan
      Posted January 25, 2017 at 4:00 pm | Permalink

      Since the overwhelming majority of male Muslims in 21st Century Europe do not wear “traditional” robes etc

      I’m definitely seeing more people wearing the traditional “Salwar Chemise” these days. But of course, that’s only traditional to the Former Mughal Empire (approximately). And of course, it’s traditional to pretty much everyone from the FME – regardless of whether they’re Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist or Jain.
      On the other hand, the traditional “robes” of the West African Muslims – the “ensemble leger” – are certainly not common around here. I’m the only person I know who wears one, and that only occasionally (it’s not very good in the snow!)
      I don’t see a lot of people wearing the “traditional robes” of the largest Muslim country – Indonesia.
      In fact, I think you need to elaborate a little on what you think the “traditional robes” of Muslims are. And indeed, who you think you’re talking about.

      • Tom
        Posted January 26, 2017 at 12:47 am | Permalink

        Perhaps if you indicated which country you are in and whether my observation that the overwhelming majority of Muslim males in Europe dress in the Western style is incorrect. Also whether women still appearing in “traditional” attire are overwhelmingly accompanied by male family in Western dress.
        You might also consider the reason why some men force their women to look outlandish in public whilst making efforts to blend in themselves.

        • gravelinspector-Aidan
          Posted January 26, 2017 at 11:31 am | Permalink

          Well, I’ve worked in Scotland, the UK, multiple other European countries Azerbaijan (where the Iranian influence is strong), Abu Dhabi, Tanzania, Korea, Russia, Canada, Benin, Gabon. And travelled in a number of other countries.
          Now, which style of robes are you considering to be traditional? Indonesian (numerically the commonest)? Pakistani/ Indian? Arabian (different to Iranian/ Azeri, who are Persians, not Arabians)? East African, West African?
          Personally, I suspect the reason most people don’t wear robes of any sort in Europe is a combination of (1) availability and (2) climate. Same as for any other clothes really.

  6. enl
    Posted January 25, 2017 at 4:36 pm | Permalink

    What is done to avoid torture is not freedom

    • somer
      Posted January 25, 2017 at 6:52 pm | Permalink

      exactly – a lifetime of brainwashing plus the intense family structure and community pressure/threat enforce it.

  7. Ken Kukec
    Posted January 25, 2017 at 5:16 pm | Permalink

    I think any type of religious head-covering would be a deal-breaker to my getting involved with a woman — not as bad as her being a registered Republican, of course 🙂 — but, still, not a good thing.

    • nicky
      Posted January 25, 2017 at 8:56 pm | Permalink

      Maybe ‘westerners’ should start raping all women wearing the niqab or burka? (/s)

  8. somer
    Posted January 26, 2017 at 12:42 am | Permalink

    One of the organisers of the women’s march was Linda Sarsour, a fundamentalist veiled Muslim woman, whose tweets advocate sharia law (saying it would deliver social justice, and interest free economic nirvana, and that veiling promotes “purity”)which has appalled some feminists who are dismayed that the march agenda has been highjacked by identity politics as mainstream outlets like the New York Times celebrate it as a form of progressivism

    Sarsour has inspired some non western women to march wearing hijabs in “support” of Muslims. Has defended the government of Saudi Arabia (she is Palestinian, not Saudi). She is pro sharia (e.g.
    or “You’ll know when you’re living under Sharia Law if suddenly all your loans & credit cards become interest free. Sound nice, doesn’t it?”

    Unfortunately Sarsour poses as progressive and is an avid supporter of Bernie Sanders and he seems to appreciate her input. He tweeted the other day “Thank you @lsarsour for helping to organize the march and build a progressive movement. When we stand together, we win.” I wish he wouldn’t support this woman

    • somer
      Posted January 26, 2017 at 5:36 am | Permalink

      Oh I apologise as I didn’t realise the twitter links would embed.

    • nicky
      Posted January 26, 2017 at 11:07 am | Permalink

      If Sasour is opposing the Cheeto, I seriously have to consider if I’d rather not have a Cheeto.

%d bloggers like this: