burqa ban
© AP Photo / Fred Ernst
Warning: I'm going to say a number of things in this post that will upset a variety of people on both sides of this issue. Don't get your undies in a twist at the beginning; read to the end.

I've given a lot of thought to the hijab issue in the past, and now that Marine LePen says she wants to ban them in France, maybe it is time to think about it some more and try to clarify my thinking. First, let me define a 'society'. It is a group of interdependent people distinguished by mutual interests, participation in characteristic relationships, shared institutions, common culture, activities and interests.

Having said that, let me say that, as a Western woman, my gut reaction to the hijab WITHIN Western society, is quite negative; it doesn't belong there. It seems to express and represent a deep shame about a woman being a woman. It is part of a larger set of rather misogynistic cultural norms that are generally incomprehensible to the Western mind. A lot can be written about this, but that would make this too lengthy. I can just say shortly that it is a practice that originated with the idea that the hijab or burqa is designed to prevent men from looking 'perversely' at women. A woman, simply by being female, is something that must be hidden because she can incite negative outcomes in society by her mere existence. Men, at the same time, are too weak and hapless to resist. From my perspective, that attitude is insulting to both men and women.

I've read that many Muslim women who wear the hijab in some variation, feel 'safe' and 'protected' by it. I try to understand that and think that it is due to the general culture they are raised in described above: misogynistic. If a woman feels that deeply, then she is unlikely to ever get over it and feel comfortable without the hijab. Perhaps that means that she will never feel comfortable within Western culture in general, in which case she ought to stay in a place where the culture she is comfortable with is the norm. (Easier said than done, as we will see.)

Wearing jewelry that advertises one's membership in a particular religion or social 'club' is a Western tradition. People wear crosses of different types to show their affiliation to a particular denomination of Christianity; Jews wear their own type of religious jewelry; Masons and Eastern Star clubs wear rings and such; Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, school alumni, Shriners, and so forth and so on, all have some kind of insignia or jewelry. In general, these signs of membership are discreet. They are worn amongst people who wear, generally, the same style of clothing, who would otherwise be indistinguishable from one another. Such people emphasize first, that they are more like each other than not, and the jewelry only enables them to signal their 'club membership'.

The hijab (and Burqa), on the other hand, are something like grand scale declarations of membership that emphasize very large differences. Within their own culture, Muslims are 'like everyone else' around them. In the West, they are signalling a vast difference between them and those around them; they are signalling that they are less like those around them than they are like them. And even if that is not altogether the case, it still comes across that way and immediately creates barriers.

If a Muslim wants to live in the West because, for some reason, they admire or seek benefit from Western culture, then they should signal that they are 'like everyone else' in the larger sense, and restrict their 'club membership' displays to jewelry like other Westerners do. They can dress modestly in a Western style if they like. (In fact, I wish Westerners in general would dress a bit more modestly.) But setting themselves up to emphasize their differences within a culture is just not friendly toward that culture in which they must live. That's a hard fact and Muslims ought to take it into account if they are choosing to live in the West.

Having said all that, I think the same rules should apply to some sects of Jews who wear separatist clothing and hair that make them stand out for their differences more than their similarity to people around them. It's just not part of Western culture to do that. Stick to jewelry. Ditch the beanies, the dangling strings and curls, bizarre hats and so on. Same for any other group that seeks to maintain a distinct and different style of dress because they think it makes them special. The Mormons have a neat trick: they wear their differences UNDER their clothes. The undergarments more or less represent their personal relationship with their God. The key thing is that they are not on public display and do not create differences between people within a larger culture. The other key thing is that one's relationship with their god is a private thing.

My conclusion to these thoughts is that if Muslims, Jews, or whoever, wish to live in Western societies, they should seek to emphasize their similarities to those around them and participate in that society to a considerable extent. That is not only for their own comfort, but for the comfort of those around them. If they are not comfortable with Western society in its totality, then they should seek out a society where they are more comfortable. But, as we will see, that is often not possible.

Over the past couple of decades, Western society has been overwhelmed with a flood of Muslim refugees thanks to the aggressive wars of the West itself, mostly at the behest of Zionist Israel. The West is being destroyed by this uncontrolled immigration.

At the same time, the West has suffered internal assaults on its culture, again mostly at the urging of Jewish intellectuals promoting post-modernist ideologies including transgenderism, pedophilia, 'diversity, equity and inclusion' and so on. The West has watched its resources being squandered while its standards of living have gone into the gutter. The Western peoples appear to be unable to check this decline since, once again, Jews (mainly Zionists) and their minions control governments, media, and education either by blackmail or bribes or terror. Elections are now blatantly rigged by those in power so that they stay in power.

And so, many Muslim refugees and migrants find themselves thrust into Western society by no choice of their own. Gaza is only the latest, and most horrific, case in point.

The whole world is now a powder keg just waiting for a spark. It's not okay to say "just send them back where they came from". In the case of Muslims, their homes and lands have been subjected to violence and destruction by the West for decades now. Where do they have to go? The same is true of many other refugees, but the worst case at present is the violence inflicted on Muslims who were perfectly happy to live their lives their way, in their homes, until wars were launched on Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Libya, etc. at the behest of the Zionist Neocons of the USA.

Israel thought they could just eject the Muslims from the Middle East and take over all the land 'from the river to the sea' and that would be that. They thought they could subjugate the West by flooding it with these refugees while they would sit comfortably in their kibbutzes on Mount Zion and lord it over everyone else.

It's not working out that way, however. It's hard to imagine that the planners of this strategy actually thought things through, unless utter chaos was the intended outcome. But what is becoming clear is that it is becoming more and more dangerous to be a Jew these days with millions of Muslim refugees and migrants now scattered throughout the Western nations, unwillingly ejected from their homes, and put under increasing pressure to conform to something that they feel is a violation of all they believe in.

As another commentator pointed out, the migrants that the Zionist neocons flooded the world with, are now after Jewish blood; the Jews demanded the dropping of bombs on their hated enemies, and now those enemies are everywhere the Jews formerly felt safe. What's more, those enemies are now radicalized in the extreme due to the violence that has been inflicted on them and their cultures.

There is a solution to all of this, but it is not one that would be acceptable to the psychopathic Jews and Neocons. The solution would be to fix what we broke so all the Muslims (and other refugees) could go home and live in peace and prosperity as they choose. That would mean, of course, Jews giving up their claim to Palestine and going back to their original homes in the various Western/European countries from whence they issued at the Zionist call. That would mean spending money on fixing things instead of destruction. That's not possible because psychopaths can only destroy; they have no creative impulse. And, at this point in time, is such a solution even possible? Millions of people have been violently killed and ejected from their homes. Millions of psyches have been damaged and radicalized. Anger, betrayal, and grief are a potent mix.

Coming back to the issue of the ban on the hijab. All things considered, I don't think it is a good idea as it only adds insult to injury. Muslims, as a people, have been dreadfully injured. I may not feel favorably toward hijabs and burqas in general, but they are normal in their culture and they are entitled to their culture and their lands and homes. They always were. It is only those in the West who sought to impose their own norms on other peoples in their homelands, to forcibly eject them from their homes, to force them to enter the West in an effort to destroy their culture, and the whole project is backfiring on the West. Before, the two cultures could always interact and maintain good relations with honor, but they were never meant to intermingle in so intimate a manner. Neither culture is better than the other overall; each is better in one way, and worse in another. But that is even irrelevant since they are entitled to their culture even if I don't find it particularly appealing.

In the end, we have the Jews to thank for all of it: destruction of Muslim society and destruction of Western society.