Islamic organisations publish controversial new rules for British women

May 10, 2016


Islamic organisations in the UK are under fire for decreeing that women should stay off Facebook and seek their husband’s permission to leave the house.

The controversial new “rules”, published online by Green Lane Masjid in Birmingham and endorsed by several mosques, even prohibit women from wearing trousers.

Such garments “show off the detail of (women’s) bodies”, which the publication deemed inappropriate, “even in the company of their husbands”.

In lockstep with Green Lane were the Blackburn Muslim Association, Croydon Mosque, and the Islamic Centre.

They went so far as to state that women should not be able to travel more than 75km without a male chaperone.

Blackburn’s Central Masjid also warned against the “dangers of Facebook”, claiming the social media platform has “opened the doors for sin. Muslim girls and women alike have become prey to this evil.”

The extreme “guidelines” have outraged “moderate” Muslims and sparked calls for the Muslim Council of Britain to sever ties with the staunchly traditional mosques.

Continue reading by clicking the name of the source below.


14 comments on “Islamic organisations publish controversial new rules for British women

  • “Some men of an older generation may find these freedoms hard to stomach, but they will have to accept them.”

    Or they can just get too old and die. I doubt seriously that any other outcome can be expected from dyed-in-the-wool faith heads, as the obstinacy is just their theocratic position being lived every day. Things will change when they are changed, one generation passing away and leaving another generation, hopefully less ideologically driven, in their place.

    Report abuse

  • @OP – They went so far as to state that women should not be able to travel more than 75km without a male chaperone.

    I think the old die-hards are going to have lots of mental breakdowns and giddy fits facing reality in the modern world!

    Royal Brunei Airlines All-Female Crew Land Boeing 787 Dreamliner In Saudi Arabia

    The crew Captain Sharifah Czarena Surainy, Senior First Officer Dk Nadiah Pg Khashiem and Senior First Officer Sariana Nordin flew flight BI081 to Saudi Arabia.

    Report abuse

  • Alan #2

    It already exists and has done for a long time in another form. To me, and I have described before how the jewish immigrants have shown the way for subsequent influx’s of other immigrants in business’s such as the ‘rag trade’, it all seems too familiar. As a lobby group ourselves, our hearts sank when we heard the Greek Cypriots were taking advise from jewish lobbyists after the altercation between Israel and Turkey with the ‘Mavi Marmaris’ affair.

    The army of professionals you can utilise, if organised, is an attractive way to go.

    Report abuse

  • Royal Brunei Airlines All-Female Crew Land Boeing 787 Dreamliner In Saudi Arabia

    Hope they wore their burkahs when they got off the plane, or they would be in trouble from the Religious Police. It might have been better to sleep on the plane.

    Report abuse

  • 7
    Pinball1970 says:

    This is what it all about, forget terror.

    Legal patriarchal micro theocracies operating within a democracy.
    Unqualified elders, clerics and rabbis (all men probably) residing over points of law over members of their own ethnic communities.

    I wonder how much say the women have during their hearings? Homosexuals? Youngsters?

    Sex abuse? Domestic violence? Forced marriage? Divorce and separation? Infidelity? Homosexuality? Business deals? Inheritance?

    We have laws in the UK and courts and agencies to police and enforce them.

    Why should tolerate a parallel system?

    This is the antithesis of integration and dry rot to a civilized democracy.

    Combine this with faith schools and you can hold a person hostage to tribalism from the cradle to the grave.

    Report abuse

  • Why should tolerate a parallel system?


    Namazie’s cry, “One law for all!”

    Communities are not legal entities. Individuals are and they deserve protection from coercive (male) elders (too often the bullies at the gates).

    When and how can personal choice happen? That should be the first consideration of the state in delivering its services to all its citizens.

    Report abuse

  • Pinball1970 @ # 6.

    We in Britain have a unique historic document which was ratified in the year 1215, at Runnymede, near London, which has enshrined within it the dictum of one law for all; including the Monarch.

    More sod’s law than god’s law, tin pot tosh such as Sharia have no place outside of theocracies, and should never be permitted in democracies.

    FGM is finally being dealt with, but the fact that this hideous treatment of young girls has been allowed to go on and proliferate for so long is a National disgrace.

    Oh, that document I mentioned? It has a Latin name; I expect you know of it.

    Report abuse

  • I wonder what the rules are regarding sedition ? It appears to me that these people are attempting to set up their own justice system, counter to and opposing the existing UK system. You don’t get to do that. I have often wondered if it would not be a good idea to read a list of beliefs and social practices to prospective immigrants. They would have to sign they both understand AND agree to follow them before being allowed in. If these ideas conflict with their firmly help personal beliefs, well too bad. Change, or don’t bother applying. No one is forcing you to emigrate to the UK. Any later infractions will result in deportation of the individual, but not of family members. Re-applying to emigrate would involve a 5 year wait, and passing marks on citizenship tests.

    Report abuse

  • 12
    Pinball1970 says:

    @rod-the-farmer and Stafford/phil

    Yes I think we have every right to ban Beth Din/Sharia, and any other tribal/ethno-religious court.

    Report abuse

  • Rod @# 11.

    “Sedition”, yes; but treason has a more satisfactory ring to it I think.

    A declaration of allegiance would indeed be an excellent thing too.

    My old mum used to say, an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure.

    Report abuse

  • Husbands permission? Husbands permission? You mean owner’s permission. The muslim world is about men owning women….hmmm…I think I’ve heard something like that before….Oh, that’s right, it’s a substructure of islam, judaism and christianity: where women are not seen as equal to men.

    What is it? What is the common denominator here?
    What could the tool of nonsensical, ludicrous, and grotesque oppression be? RELIGION! (no surprise)

    How backward; muslim culture is comprised of abhorrent, disgusting, behavior. I think there are too many mentally challenged religious people who do the subjugation; and there are too many women ripe for subjugation, because too many let their owners own them.

    In the UK where they like to think they are a free society, muslim, christian, jew, hindu, atheist, trekie or whatever, everyone should be treated with the same rights, not one set of rights for one sex, and not the other. Any islamic organization that publishes restrictions on women’s behavior should be discredited, just as promoting of debasement or slavery isn’t taken too serious.

    Any parent that teaches their children to be subservient to men, just because they are men, should lose custody.

    Parents and teachers, it is up to you to teach children (they are the future), to accept the fashions, styles, and individuality of others. Teach live and let live, at the same time teach the importance of accepting equal rights of all. And most of all, teach rational thought, and allow each child to have a chance to perform their own material (for extra credit) on the school stage in a “How Absurd Is Religion” stand-up comedy night.

    [Slightly edited by moderator to bring within Terms of Use]

    Report abuse

Leave a Reply

View our comment policy.