Pauline and the burqa
Islam | Alaa & Randa Abd El Fattah | Ashin Wirathu - warrior Buddhist monk | Battle of Broken Hill 1915 | Charles III and Islam | Ilhan Omar - Somalia & the US | Life of Muhammad | Muslim Brotherhood in Australia | Pauline & the burqa | Politics | Qur'an quotes | Rational fear of Islam | References |
 |
| Pauline Hanson donning a burqa, Parliament House, Canberra, 2025. |
[Wearing a burqa is a] seemingly unnatural practice for someone not living in a desert and trying to protect herself from sandstorms...... the [negative] effect of wearing the burqa on Vitamin D levels and health is profound. (Reyaz 2012)
Abstract: This article addresses the vexed question: When can defence of a human rights issue also be labelled racist and Islamophobic? Answer: When it concerns the mandatory wearing under Islamic Sharia law of the female-only full-body covering known as the burqa and related full or partial coverings. And what stance are those in the West, and especially of the political Left and feminists, to take in addressing this issue and supporting a ban on the forced wearing of such garments as implemented in both Islamic and non-Islamic countries and societies around the world, without, once again, being labelled racist or Islamophobic? In addressing this issue, the specific case study presented herein is of action by Australian senator and leader of the One Nation Party, Pauline Hanson, during 2017 and 2025 to ban the burqa, and her conflict with government of the day, including Australian Greens senator and Pakistan-born Muslim, Mehreen Faruqi. The issue is addressed on both an international and local level, highlighting the violence used within Islamic societies around the world to enforce the wearing of such garments. This is contrasted with the widespread opposition by females to the practice, in light of its known harmful psychological and physiological effects.
-------------------
Content
- Ban the burqa
- Pauline's quest
- Left or right?
- References
-----------------
1. "Ban the burqa"
The burqa and other items such as head (hair) -coverings are required by Islamic law (Sharia) to be worn by all Muslim women when they go out in public. It proclaims that it applies to all other women, including those who visit, or live in, Islamic state countries operating under Sharia. This is strictly, and often brutally, imposed according to Islamic ideology and the teachings of Muhammad since 622AD, based on the decrees of God (Allah) in the Qur'an and later biographical and interpretive Hadith texts. Examples of the brutality applied in adhering to the wearing of covering can be seen in the following select headlines, wherein women and young girls have been beaten, tortured and murdered for not wearing head and body covering properly or refusing to wear it at all.
* Driven by Hate: Dad & sons who tied & drowned daughter, 18, in ‘honour killing over her refusal to wear headscarf’ face 25 years in prison, The US Sun, 2025. Age: 18.
* Women flouting hijab deserve death penalty, ex-[Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps] commander says, Iran International, 2025.
* Death of Jina Mahsa Amini, 2022. Murdered by Iran's "moral police" for failing to wear a head scarf properly. Age: early 20s.
* Slain Over Hijab? Father Allegedly Strangles Daughter Over Head Scarf, ABC News, 2007. Age: 16.
Such death-inducing brutality, including decapitations, drownings, strangling and burnings, is referred to as "honour killings" in Islamic societies. It is often carried out by male members of the immediate family such as fathers, uncles, brothers and husbands, both within and without Islamic countries. This is just aspect of the burqa problem. Another is the manner in which non-Islamic nations and peoples address, or fail to address, it. For example, the following video asks the question: Why don't feminists fight for Muslim women? It is especially relevant to this issue, as it approaches it from a global perspective, and not simply in regard to forced complete-covering of the female body whilst women are out in the public.
Why don't feminists fight for Muslim women?, PragerU, 27 June 2016, YouTube, duration: 5,35 minutes.
The burqa is a misogynistic tool of enforced female inferiority. Its wearing is both supported and opposed around the world, even within Islamic societies and amongst the almost two billion adherents known as Muslims, or those who "submit" to Islam. Where women, of their own free will, agree to the wearing such body coverings, that is acceptible, except in societies where laws exist limiting the wearing of full face coverings for security reasons. However, where women are forced to don the garments from an early age, and threatened with death if they disobey such a command, this is clearly not acceptible. Or is it?
|
| Islamic female body coverings. |
Obviously many in the West believe the such coercion is not, in all instances, acceptible. And they are right. However, this can also reveal their naivety in regards to the true situation and the belief in a supposed universal desire of women to be uncovered, like those in the rest of the world. Revelation of the body and one's natural beauty is a normal part of the male : female mating and reproduction process. The Islamic forced covering goes against this, due purely to misogyny. This Western support for covering is reinforced by a so-called "respect" for Islam's presentation as a religion, and therefore the need by Westerners and their governments not to be seen to be impinging upon the right to the expression of religious freedom in this instance. The fact that, in acceding to such an erroneously perceived right, the health, well-being and welfare of females - girls and women - is negatively impacted upon to varying degrees.
The aforementioned headlines reveal the horrific brutality often associated with the forced wearing of a burqa. Whilst outrage in the West is common over such stories involving the brutal and tragic treatment of women, little if any action is ever taken to stop it, either on the international or local level. Only 24 nations have taken any such action to date. In addition, since the early 2000s, with significant increases in Muslim migration to the West - both legal and illegal - from countries in the Middle East, north Africa and Pakistan, such cases have been on the increase, as have instances of Muslim men and authorities imposing these aspects of Sharia law on non-Muslim women in countries where Sharia has no standing. A good example of the latter is the recent case where in Germany a local resident of Cologne was out walking on New Year's Eve and was stoned in public by a group of Muslim men who disagreed not only with what she was wearing and not wearing, but also with the fact that she was out in public on this specific evening Muslims do not support the Western celebration of New Year's Eve as it is not a designate Islamic holiday, though in this instance Muslim men can be seen to be both celebrating and protesting at the same time.
Streamer Kunshikitty attacked during New Year’s in Germany, Live Gone Wrong, 4 January 2026, YouTube, duration: 0.22 minutes.
This event had followed on even worse events back in 2015 when, in the same town, 467 German women reported being sexually harassed or assaulted by men of North African and Arab origin. Of the 73 suspects subsequently detained, their countries of origin were as follows (in order of prominance): Moroccan, Algerian, Tunisian, Libyan, Iraqi, Iranian and Syrian. In that instance the government of the day treated the situation with kid gloves and, as a result, the behaviour continued. The connection between the two examples was in all probability an adherance to Islamic ideology and belief in the inferiority of women, as noted throughout the Qur'an. For example, one section presents the word of God (Allah) as follows:
Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other.... Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts..... As for those whom you fear disobedience, admonish them, and foresake them in beds apart, and beat them. (Qur'an, verses 4:34-35)
The violence associated with maintenance of the female body-covering decree is brutal and reveals how fear of Islam is not unreasonable, but real. The Qur'an is full of such mandatory, threatening behaviour on the part of Muslims, arising out of fear-inducing decrees by God. As a phobia is an unreasonable fear, therefore Islamophobia is not a word which is relevant in the present era when referring to people who seek to highlight the true state of the spread of Islam in the West, and inherent dangers contained therein, such as enforcement of body covering in Western countries on Muslim women, in direct opposition to their laws and cultural norms. The fear is real. For example, Australian beach culture supports female wearing of the bikini, yet in recent years Muslims and non-Muslim supporters of Islam have put pressure on local governments to restrict this (Abdel-Fattah 2017). As one Australian headline read during 2010: Pool bans skimpy outfits for Ramadan (SBS 2010). Another said: Australian swimmers ordered to cover up for Muslims. Needless to say, this caused concern amongst certain sections of the non-Muslim population. Was opposition to it racist and Islamophobic? "Yeah but, yeah but ..."
 |
| Local government ban, Melbourne, September 2010. |
As noted in the following video compiled by an American lesbian in 2020, Muslim women have identified the hijab as a tool of rape culture, the sexualisation of very young girls and women, and so-called slut shaming within Muslim societies. It is for these and other reasons that many in the West have rejected the practice.
No, you can't be a feminist Muslim, Arielle Scarcella, 23 November 2020, YouTube, duration: 13.13 minutes.
---------------------
2. Pauline's quest
 |
| Pauline Hanson, November 2025. |
On 24 November 2025 Australian senator Pauline Hanson, leader of the One Nation Party, caused outrage inside the Australian parliament and public debate when she donned a burqa and entered the senate chamber in support of her Bill to Ban the Burqa and other Full Face Coverings in Public Places. At the time of the incident, and following on the political opposition she received to the process, Hanson posted the following comment on her social media site:
Today, the Senate stopped the introduction of my Bill to Ban the Burqa and Other Full-Face Coverings in Public Places. Despite the ban in 24 countries across the world (including Islamic countries), the hypocrites in our parliament have rejected my Bill. So if the parliament won't ban it, I will display this oppressive, radical, non-religious head garb that risk our national security and the ill treatment of women on the floor of our parliament so that every Australian knows what's at stake. If they don't want me wearing it - ban the burqa.
However, this was not the first time she had done this. On 17 August 2017 Hanson had entered the senate chamber wearing a burqa. In that instance she was severely criticised by the then leader of the chamber, Liberal Party senator George Brandis. He chastised her in the following threatening, cautionary terms:
Senator Hanson - no, we will not be banning the burqa. Now Senator Hanson, I am not going to pretend to ignore the stunt that you have tried to pull today, by arriving in the chamber dressed in a burqa, when we all know you are not an adherent of the Islamic faith. And I would caution you, and counsel you, Senator Hanson, with respect, to be very, very careful of the offence you may do to the religious sensibilities of other Australians.
Brandis was given a standing ovation by his colleagues for the remarks. However, it is worth posing the following question: Would Senator Brandis have made the same comments if Senator Hanson walked into the chamber wearing the garb of the Australian Catholic Sisters of Saint Joseph, including the nation's first saint, Sister Mary McKillop?
 |
| Mother Mary McKillop. |
The answer is, in the view of the present writer, "No". Why? Because - and Brandis was too afraid to directly say this on the day - the Islamic ideology is, and has been for over fourteen centuries, both threatening, violent and fear-inducing in regards to any critical comments coming its way from both Muslims and non-Muslims. Throughout those fourteen centuries Christians, Jews and everybody else who is put under the label Infidels, have been threatened with a "jihad of the sword" death if they dare to criticise or even comically or satirically comment upon the teachings of the Qur'an and the ideology arising therein as set down directly by God / Allah through the Angel Gabriel to Muhammad between 622 - 632 AD and supplemented by Islamic scholars over the following years.
The aggressive nature of the Brandis response and the widespread "taking offence .... to [Islamic] religious sensibilities" has been seen on numerous occasions in recent decades, most notably in the fatwa issued against British author Salman Rushdie over his book The Satanic Verses, and in the slaughter of the staff of the French publisher Charlie Hebdo for the production of cartoons of Muhammad. The satanic verses were and are a legitimate, though controversial, text within the Islamic canon, though efforts are made to minimise their exposure and censor them. The fact that faith leaders around the world condemed Rushdie rather than come to his defence is evidence of the equally controversial and censored element of Islam known as Taqiyya, or deception and deceptive conduct by Muslims in the act of supporting and promoting Islam. It has been defined as: .... dispensing with the ordinances of religion in cases of constraint and when there is a possibility of harm ... precautionary denial of religious belief in the face of potential persecution (Hussein 2015). As an act of Taqiyya, Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa which was the equivalent of putting a price on the head of the English writer and calling for his murder. He accused Rushdie of blasphemy, or showing disrespect to God / Allah. Unfortunately, one person's legitimate critical assessment can be another person's irreverence or lack of respect. In Western societies such an action is not considered warranting the death penalty, and numerous faith leaders condemed the action, alongside community members. These included the following (Wikipedia 2026):
With most Western societies having a Christian democratic basis where the teachings of Jesus Christ is regards to forgiveness, "turning the other cheek", and compassion reign, rather than revenge. In other words, in no way did Rushdie's work of fictional expansion upon an element of Islamic lore warrant the death penalty.
Significant, profound and numerous negative psychological and physiological effects have been identified arising out of wearing partial and full-body coverings in high temperature equatorial climates such as exist in the Middle-East, north Africa and the India - Pakistan - Bangla Desh Asian belt (Rayez 2012). For these and many others, wears in large numbers object to them. The wearing of the burqa also limited exercise and has a resultant impact on general health and obesity (May 2010). A 2010 study by the King Fahd University Hospital, Saudi Arabia revealed low female vitamin D levels"
A study performed by doctors at King Fahd University Hospital in Saudi Arabia showed that out of all 52 women tested, all had seriously deficient levels of Vitamin D and were at risk of many serious health problems, despite living in one of the sunniest places on the planet. Furthermore, in a study undertaken in Jordan, 83.3% of women wearing the most covering style of Islamic dresses were found to be deficient in summer time. Jordan, like Saudi Arabia, holds the distinction of being one of the sunniest places on the planet, so the effect of wearing the burqa on Vitamin D levels and health is profound.
Another study from Jordan in 2001 revealed similar effects:
Abstract: Jordan is a sunny Middle Eastern country where no vitamin D fortification of milk is undertaken, and where women wear dress styles that cover the body to a variable extent. This may produce variable effects on vitamin D, parathyroid hormone and bone mineralization. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the vitamin D and parathyroid hormone levels in healthy young women of child-bearing age, and to examine the effects of dress style and season, in a survey of the effects of these parameters on vitamin D metabolism, and the possible bone mineralization consequences. One hundred and forty-six subjects (22 men, 124 women) were selected, according to established inclusion criteria. Of the women, 21 wore Western-type dress styles (group 1), 80 wore dress styles covering the whole body but the sparing face and hands (group 2) and 23 wore dress styles covering the whole body including the face and hands (group 3). The study was conducted in summer and winter. All volunteers underwent initial interviews, answered a food frequency questionnaire, and underwent essential laboratory tests (serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) by radioimmunoassay, and serum parathyroid hormone (PTH) by chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay). The 25(OH) D levels in groups 2 and 3 were significantly lower than in the men (p less than 0.05 in both comparisons). No significant differences were noted between women wearing different dress styles. PTH levels were in the upper limits of normal but failed to show statistical differences between study groups. The prevalence of hypovitaminosis D was 62.3% in the study groups as a whole. Dress styles covering the whole body, totally or nearly totally, have adverse effects on 25(OH)D levels and may produce a state of secondary hyperparathyroidism on the long run. Although Jordan enjoys plenty of sunshine, these data are suggestive of widespread hypovitaminosis D in Jordan. (Mishal 2001)
------------------
3. Left or right?
The present writer is not advocating the rampant disrespecting of religious beliefs; neither is he supporting the killing of individuals and innocent people over such actions. What he is seeking to address is the secrecy and the fear generated and existing in Western society giving rise to censorship of aspect of Islamic ideology - a self-imposed censorship which is nothing more than a pandering to the fear induced by Muslim clerics and adherents directed towards non-Muslims. Yes, this is a non-conspiracy reality, as identified in Raymond Ibrahim's Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen centuries of war between Islam and the West - a history of Islam's efforts to conquer the Christian West and exterminate the Jewish race (Ibrahim 2020).
The comments of George Brandis to Pauline Hanson as noted above were a good example of the effect of that fear which reaches the highest levels of Western political establishments and provides a veritable "Get out of jail free card" for the so-called Islamic religion. The fact is, the Qur'an preaches violence, fear and discrimination which outside of a religious context would be dealt with according to the laws of the country, but are exempted due to a fear of being labelled as religious bigots of showing religious intolerance. In fact, an honest addressing of many of the tenets of Islam would be banned in open, free and democratic nations, and even in some Islamic nations, such are the abhorrent nature of some of them. These include rampant and brutal mysogeny, paedophilia, and racial discrimination, especially towards Jews and Christians. The evidence for this can be seen in world history since 622AD when Muhammad first arrived in Medina and began implementing a barbaric and brutal philosophy termed "jihad of the sword" - a philosophy which, since the implementation in 1928 by the Muslim Brotherhood, has actively worked at creating an international caliphate or regime of Islamic states under the rule of Sharia law, with the West very much a focus.
A strong opponent to Hanson's burqa banning activities, both inside and outside the parliament, is Pakistan-born Muslim and Australian Greens senator Mehreen Faruqi. This can be seen from the following video of her statements in parliament at the time:
Mehreen Faruqi, Parliament 'drips now in racism': Faruqi slams Pauline Hanson's 'pathetic' burqa stunt, Guardian Australia and Guardian News, 25 November 2025, YouTube, duration: 2.22 minutes.
When in November 2024 Faruqi won her case in the Federal Court over Hanson's tweet containing the abusive phrase "piss off back to Pakistan" (aka. go back to where you came from) she stated outside the court:
.... Today's ruling tells us that telling someone to go back to where they came from is a strong form of racism, and it sends a strong message to racists that they will be held accountable. And it is also an affirmation for migrants, that people of colour do not have to be grateful, or to keep quiet. And I will be speaking out more loudly, and more strongly, than ever before.
Hanson's blatant racism in 2024 has meant that her efforts to have the burqa ban considered in parliament the following year have fallen flat, with the issue conflated and no longer seen as one of human rights. Is she at fault here? Yes. However, there is a worldwide covert and highly successful program by Islamic organisations such as the Muslim Brotherhood in Australia and CAIR in the United States, often in league with Leftist and humanitarian groups, to stifle any and all criticism of Islam and bury them under the claims of Islamophobia and racism. Despite this, women suffering under Sharia regimes nevertheless continue to speak out against the burqa and other body coverings. For example, during the recent (December 2025 - January 2026) Iranian revolution images of local women throwing off their head and body coverings and celebrating were common.
Whilst Faruqi's accusation of racism towards Hanson in this instance is supported by the present writer - though what specific race is she referring to when it comes to the burqa? - the statement with regards to Islamophobia is not supported. Why? Because the term, in 2025, is a non-sequitur, i.e.,a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement.
The basis for this claim is that fear of Islam is unreasonable. In fact, there is ample evidence to state that fear of Islam is reasonable. The two main points of evidence are (1) the Qur'an and (2) Islamic jihadist terrorism, such as the Bondi Beach massacre of 2025. Based on direct statements by Allah / God in the Qur'an calling for violent action against all those who are not Muslim (i.e., have not submitted to the teaching therein), every person on the planet is told to fear God and obey the teachings of Muhammad or die in hell. This is repeated throughout the 400 pages of the text. As such, fear is reasonable, for the aim of Islam is implementation of a worldwide caliphate Islamic state operating under Sharia law. Because of this reality, which has been in continuous operation for more than fourteen centuries since 622AD, Faruqi's claim of Islamophobia on the part of Hanson cannot be supported. If it was, then it would mean that all of those women and men around the world who oppose the burqa or have implemented laws and policies to ban its use are likewise Islamophobic.
The Islamic head dresses and body coverings are elements of the misogynistic ideology, nothing less. They are forced upon women by men, as part of a culture which prescribes woman as lesser than men and subject to their orders. If they are disobedient, or believed that they may be disobedient, then the Qur'an orders the men to beat them.
Hanson's "stunts" and protests in regards to the enforced wearing of the burqa and other Islamic head dress and body coverings is therefore a human rights issue which would ideally be addressed and supported by the Left, and political parties across the board. Unfortunately they are not, as can be seen from the above examples of the treatment of Senator Hanson in the Australian parliament.
The present writer clearly sees the mandatory, forced wearing of partial or full body covering for women in Muslim countries and everywhere else, and as part of Islamic ideology, as a human rights issue. Other people do not. This does not therefore mean that both sides are not free to argue their point, or be called racist or Islamophobic for doing so. The vilification of Pauline Hanson over her campaign to raise this issue and seek its banning in Australia is a clear denial of free speech. The refusal of the parliament to openly debate her draft Bill is a denial of due process. To replace such a debate with a one-sided motion to censure the senator is in and of itself censorship of the parliament. Hanson's actions are obviously offensive to varying degrees to those who do not agree with her, but in a democratic society such as Australia this does not, and should not, make it a criminal offence or place it under the ambiguous labels of "hate speech" or Islamophobia which are used as censorship devices by current regimes and support groups.
Islam is a problem facing not only Western societies, Jews, Christians, Buddhists, homosexuals, children and young women, and all the other Infidels identified by it; it is an ideology which needs to be stripped of its abhorrent elements and transformed into something which is at least close to, and focused on, spiritual issues and the social trinity of peace, love and compassion. Islam's fear, revenge and hatred of all "unbelievers" must be removed forever. The Ban the Burqa campaign must be recognised as a human rights issue and not a political football.
Unfortunately, it has not in all instances been officially recognised as such. For example, as noted by Renee Baker, and Honorary Research Fellow at the University of Western Australia's Centre for Muslim States and Societies noted in her 2014 article opposing any ban:
..... the European Court of Human Rights rejected the argument that a ban on the burqa was necessary to promote equality between men and women. The court commented that: … A State Party cannot invoke gender equality in order to ban a practice that is defended by women. The applicant in that case strongly asserted that wearing the face veil was her choice. That she, along with many other women, chose to wear the face covering as a sign of devotion and even empowerment. (Barker 2014)
Whether the ECHR had ever received a request to support a ban is not known. As noted above, the covert and over actions by Islamic groups and their supporters to stifle and put paid to criticism of contentious issues of the ideology, both proactively and re-actively, has been generally successful in the West. Why? Probably because most people in the West, like the present writer, have never had any interactions with Islam and Muslims. As this has changed dramatically only in recent decades to the mass migration in the millions from Islamic countries in the Middle-East, Africa and Asia, Western societies have been slow to react to the reality of Islamisation of their cultures.
-------------------
4. References
Abdel-Fattah, Randa, Burkinis and belonging: 'It's this feeling the bikini and hijab don't mix, The Guardian, 2 January 2017.
Barker, Renee, Banning the Burqa Is Not the Answer to Fears about Public Safety, The Conversation, 22 September 2014.
-----, Rebutting the ban the burqa rhetoric: A critical analysis of the arguments for a ban on the Islamic face veil in Australia, Presentation to the Centre for Muslim States and Societies, University of Western Australia, October 2014, 28p.
Burqa bans worldwide, Universal Life Church Ministry, 10 November 2016.
Elsammak, M.Y., et al., Vitamin D deficiency in Saudi Arabs, Hormone and Metabolic Research, 42(5), 2010, 364-368.
Faruqi, Mehreen, Parliament 'drips now in racism': Faruqi slams Pauline Hanson's 'pathetic' burqa stunt, Guardian Australia and Guardian News, 25 November 2025, YouTube, duration: 2.22 minutes.
Hussein, Shakira, The myth of the Lying Muslim: 'Taqiyya' and the racialisation of religious identity, ABC Australia - Religion and Ethics, 30 November 2015.
May, Caroline May, The burqa may be making Muslim women fatter by discouraging exercise, The Daily Caller, 1 July 2010.
Mishal, A.A., Effects of Different Dress Styles on Vitamin D Levels in Healthy Young Jordanian Women, Osteoporosis International, 12(11), 2001, 931-935.
Mohammed, Yasmine, Unveiled: How the West empowers radical Muslims, The Author, 2019, 294.
Rayez, Aiman, Burqa and health implications for women: Two aspects, New Age Islam, 8 July 2012.
The tweet that landed Pauline Hanson in the Federal Court, The Briefing, 20 November 2025, YouTube, duration: 112.31 minutes.
Tobin, Jonathan, The threat from the death cult of Islam, ThinkTwice / Jewish News Syndicate TV, YouTube, 22 August 2025, duration: 62.43 minutes.
Why don't feminists fight for Muslim women?, PragerU, 27 June 2016, YouTube, duration: 5,35 minutes.
Wikipedia, Mehreen Faruqi, Wikipedia, accessed 14 January 2026.
-----, Pauline Hanson's burqa incidents, Wikipedia, accessed 14 January 2026.
-----, Sharia, Wikipedia, accessed 14 January 2026.
-----, The Satanic Verses, Wikipedia, accessed 14 January 2026.
-------------------
Islam | Alaa & Randa Abd El Fattah | Ashin Wirathu - warrior Buddhist monk | Battle of Broken Hill 1915 | Charles III and Islam | Ilhan Omar - Somalia & the US | Life of Muhammad | Muslim Brotherhood in Australia | Pauline & the burqa | Politics | Qur'an quotes | Rational fear of Islam | References |
Last updated: 17 January 2026.
Michael Organ, Australia
Comments
Post a Comment