Face veils? No. Racy lingerie? Yes. - Macleans.ca

Face veils? No. Racy lingerie? Yes.

If banned, face veils could result in jail time in Belgium


Veils, Sex store, IslamThe sometimes fraught, often conflicted world of European Muslims took a strange turn last week. On the same day media outlets covered a Belgian parliamentary committee’s decision to outlaw face veils in public, the press also reported on a new online sex shop in next-door Holland selling sex aids deemed halal, or permissible under Islam. And, interestingly, reactions from Muslim leaders to both developments have been muted at most.

If the Belgian parliament approves the ban later this month, wearing anything “that covers all or most of the face” in public could be subject to a $40 fine, or possibly a week behind bars. While a similar proposition in France has caused an uproar, this proposal, which would ban the niqab and burka, has garnered few vocal opponents, even among Muslims. “I really don’t have a problem with the ban itself,” Semsettin Ugurlu, a leader of the Belgian Muslim community, told the Wall Street Journal. “I just worry it could be a slippery slope to taking away other freedoms.” One reason for the lack of fuss is that most of Belgium’s Muslims are from countries where face coverings are rarely used.

Meanwhile, in the Netherlands, Abdelaziz Aouragh has launched what he believes is the first Islamic online sex shop. The devout Muslim is selling everything from “sensual stimulators” to cocoa-butter lubricants. Before opening the site, Aouragh consulted an imam to see whether the trade was allowed. Boularia Houari, who also gives sex advice to couples, approved, as long as the products were halal and meant to improve the marriage. So while racy underwear is okay, toys and porn are out. “It’s important in Islam that both men and women reach orgasm,” explained Houari to NRC Handelsblad. “If a woman is not satisfied, she will use impure methods such as masturbation or vibrators.” Aouragh hopes his website will change the “image of women in the kitchen, submissive, dressed in a burka.”

Filed under:

Face veils? No. Racy lingerie? Yes.

  1. If I'm skiing in windy or unusually cold temperatures, I cover my face with a facewarmer. Would I be subject to a $40 if I were in Belgium?

    I understand Quebec's bill to prohibit the wearing of these garments when using government services, but just walking around? Really? Can't the government ban men wearing skinny jeans instead?

  2. These Niqab women who try their luck at schools, gov't offices, polling stations, etc. are not innocent victims, they are enemies who are probing for weaknesses. They are just as much national enemies as a Nazi spy would have been in the 1940's. They are trying to see what they can get away with and what the responses will be from various sectors of Canadian society.

    • "these Niqab women" really? Since when is it a crime to express one's culture. Niqab's aren't hurting anyone. All I'm hearing is a whole lot of uneducated drivel about blah blah blah. . . terrorism. . .blah blah blah. . . enemy. . . get over yourselves, the world is bigger than your shrink-wrapped brain.

  3. That people who wear this type of clothing in first place is more a political statement than anything else. I believe they do it to draw attention to themselves and I take it as a deliberate provocation to create controversy and social dissent.

    • Maurice, you are completely insane. "Social dissent"? Should we all wear matching suits, then? Speak the same language? Act exactly alike? And who will decide this new code of universal expression? YOU?!

      I want nothing to do with your ego-centric society. You terrify me.

  4. my, my, islam says both male and female have to experience orgasm!….well isn't that just a first….in the west it is trivial to assume this…. canuckian or alien….would never have it any other way…if they are so liberal in the bedroom why the dickens hide their beautiful woman…jealousy and ownership rights i suppose! don't these people own their wives like a car or other things…pathetic

  5. Don't think many of "their – who they?" women can be "liberal" in the bedroom or anywhere else, if YOU had your clitoris cut off, preferably with no anaesthetic, as a child, by bitter and angry women who had had it done to them. Re previous comment, if you had your balls cut off, would you care about politics – or anything else, for that matter?

  6. C'mon Mark, try and stay on track…..

    Are the cops going to be handing out tickets on ski slopes ?

    But what happens when you wear one into a bank ? A police station ?
    Given recent history, I don't blame them for adding many more public places to that list.

    The thing that really got me about the story was this quote:
    “If a woman is not satisfied, she will use impure methods such as masturbation or vibrators.”

    That's remarkably pragmatic and liberal for ANY religious mind. The catholic church has spent its entire history trying to repress basic urges, and here we have a proponent of a that's religion seen as "savage" by many displaying an understanding of human behaviour as it is and not what some dogma says it ought to be.

    Personally I disagree with the dress customs because of WHY they are there in the first place. The fact that it can be used to cover a criminal's identity is just fanning the fire. If we change our names, the change has to be documented. In many instances, we are required to resent picture ID ***TO CONFIRM OUR IDENTITY***

    This is nothing new – it's just closing a loophole used by criminals.