OVO

Trevor Blake: Your Clothing Store (after The Prisoner by Patrick McGoohan). The Village. July 2011.

Trevor Blake: Redshirt.

Tricorder.

Tricorder with blinky light.

Sky News: Banned Man Utd Shirts ‘Promote The Devil’

Manchester United shirts have been banned in Malaysia after the red devil crest was labelled “dangerous and un-Islamic”. Thousands of fans have reacted angrily to the decision by Muslim clerics – with some accusing them of supporting Premier League arch-rivals Liverpool. Despite the Old Trafford side having an estimated 81 million followers in Asia, one senior cleric said: “You are only promoting the devil.” “This is very dangerous. As a Muslim we should not worship the symbols of other religions or the devils,” another added. “It will erode our belief in Islam. There is no reason why we as Muslims should wear such jerseys, either for sports or fashion reasons.”

muslimdebate.com: Indonesian Muslim Groups Consider Fatwa on World’s Most Expensive Coffee

Indonesia’s largest Muslim organization is considering whether or not to slap a fatwa on the nation’s famed kopi luwak. Two of Indonesia’s main Muslim organizations are to meet to decide whether or not to issue a fatwa against “kopi luwak,” a famed and highly prized coffee bean that has passed through the digestive tract of a civet cat before it is retrieved and roasted. Ma’aruf Amin, chairman of the Indonesian Council of Ulama (MUI), said it would meet with Nahdlatul Ulama, Indonesia’s largest Muslim organization, on Tuesday night to discuss issuing a ban against the flourishing industry. “A fatwa will hopefully put an end to the growing concerns about kopi luwak,” Ma’aruf said. Kopi Luwak is eaten by a civet cat and expelled in its feces before being roasted. Highly prized for its flavor, kopi luwak is known as the world’s most expensive coffee, commanding more than $600 per kilogram from online shops.

Robert Spencer: Muslim Husband Rapes Wife, Judge Sees No Sexual Assault Because Islam Forbids Wives to Refuse Sex

Muhammad said: “If a husband calls his wife to his bed [i.e. to have sexual relation] and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning” (Bukhari 4.54.460). He also said: “By him in Whose Hand lies my life, a woman can not carry out the right of her Lord, till she carries out the right of her husband. And if he asks her to surrender herself [to him for sexual intercourse] she should not refuse him even if she is on a camel’s saddle” (Ibn Majah 1854).

And now a New Jersey judge sees no evidence that a Muslim committed sexual assault of his wife — not because he didn’t do it, but because he was acting on his Islamic beliefs: “This court does not feel that, under the circumstances, that this defendant had a criminal desire to or intent to sexually assault or to sexually contact the plaintiff when he did. The court believes that he was operating under his belief that it is, as the husband, his desire to have sex when and whether he wanted to, was something that was consistent with his practices and it was something that was not prohibited.” Luckily, the appellate court overturned this decision, and a Sharia ruling by an American court has not been allowed to stand. This time.

Bernie: The Arab Contribution to Civilization? Nothing Lately

When Arabs are asked to recount great periods of Arab scholarship and learning they can only point to a brief and quickly extinguished burst of light; in the book Le Soleil d’Allah brille sur l’Occident : Notre héritage arabe we read (translated):

Might I invite you to have something with me in this café? Take off your jacket and sit down here on this sofa, unless you would rather sit on the divan with the crimson mattress, of course. Would you like a cup of coffee – with one sugar lump or two? Or perhaps a nice cool carafe of lemonade, or even something alcoholic?  But of course! Let me buy you lunch! I think artichokes would be a lovely starter, don’t you? And how about capon with rice and spinach to follow? For dessert, what would you say to a piece of apricot tart, or an orange sorbet? And at the end of the meal we’ll have a cup of mocha.  There is no reason, of course, for any of these things to appear in any way strange or exotic to you – they have been part of our daily life for such a long time. But did you know that they were all borrowed from a foreign culture, namely Arab culture? This café and the demitasses of coffee they serve, the sugar without which any menu would be almost unimaginable, the lemonade and the carafe, the jacket and the mattress, we owe them all to the Arabs. And it doesn’t stop there: in most European countries, these things are known by their Arabic names! And the same goes for candy, bergamot, oranges, sherbet and many other good things besides.

So here we learn of great literature and poetry the story of ‘a thousand and one nights’: a thousand years ago.

The contributions to mathematics and physics? A thousand years ago. And even here, we often see Muslims pointing to Arabic numerals as some sort of proof that Arab Muslims made some significant advances in mathematics. Arabic numeral is a misnomer, in actual fact they should be called Hindu numerals.

We learn that Ibn Muqla, Vizir at Baghdad and the “prince of calligraphers”, codified the proportions of letters to be respected in handwriting and calligraphy, a thousand years ago.

We learn of the architectural advances such as The Great Mosque of Cordova where we discover its gabled roofs are Syrian. Byzantium provided the mosaics. The vaults are of Tunisian inspiration and the arches Iranian, while the alternation of stone and brick is a Roman invention. Again, a thousand years ago.

Arab contributions to medical science were legion, encouraged by the construction of hospitals in Baghdad, Cairo, Damascus, Samarkand and elsewhere, over a thousand years ago.

Advances and discoveries in astronomy, chemistry, and philosophy from Bagdad to Cordova, all over a thousand years ago.

These are all wondrous and marvelous, but, under Islam, Arabs have not advanced for the past one thousand years. See my previous articles on the paucity of Nobel Prize winners in a world filled with 1.5 billion Muslims ( of which over 300 million are Arabs).

All articles continue at links. Part of a series that never ends… [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] and etc.  Why might a numerous and varied people such as the Arabic world be held back for one thousand years?  Why, instead of building up their own or anyone else, would a group instead issue death warrants for wearing the wrong kind of shirt or drinking the wrong kind of coffee?  How is it possible to prioritize the trivial and trivialize the highest priorities?  Where does slavery still exist in the year 2010, and why?  What sort of mental poison makes rape part of the multicultural rainbow?  Islam.  It’s holding us all back.  Don’t ban it, and neither should Muslim crimes and atrocities be forgiven.  Don’t force it on others, just keep what is worthy or at least harmless and drop the rest.

Robert Spencer: A Landmarks Commission Hearing, and Much More

Perhaps predictably, the Landmarks Commission hearing today to consider landmark status for 45 Park Place, the proposed site of the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque overlooking Ground Zero, was about much more than just whether the building at 45 Park Place merited landmark status or not. It quickly became a public forum on Islam, Muslims in America, and the appropriateness of a huge mosque at Ground Zero. [...] I spoke. I started by saying that I shared the view that some others had already enunciated, that this was supposed to be a hearing on the landmark status of 45 Park Place, not about what good citizens Muslims were and how much New York needed an Islamic “interfaith” center. But since that discussion had not been stopped and was thus apparently deemed relevant, it was also relevant that the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, leader of the mega-mosque project, was pro-Sharia — a system of law that mandated discrimination against women and non-Muslims, and extinguished the freedom of speech and freedom of conscience. It was also relevant, I said, that he had been dishonest about his funding sources, saying in English that the mosque would be funded by American Muslims, and saying in Arabic that funding would come from Muslim nations. It was further relevant that he had declined to denounce Hamas as a terrorist organization, and that he had helped fund the jihad flotilla that was trying to take arms into Israel. I closed by pointing out that Riddle had said that the building had no unique historical value, but that it did, because it was the only building into which part of a 9/11 plane had crashed, and as such should be a war memorial. A Communist (really! At the Staten Island mosque hearing he actually shouted, “Workers of the world, unite!”) started shouting that I was a bigot, to which I responded that it was not bigotry to point out dishonesty and subversion, and that the Commission should consider carefully whether or not it was being lied to by the mosque proponents.

CNN: Burqa Ban Passes French Lower House Overwhelmingly

France’s lower house of parliament Tuesday overwhelmingly passed a ban on any veils that cover the face – including the burqa, the full-body covering worn by some Muslim women. The vote was 335 to 1. The measure must still go to the French Senate before it becomes law. The Senate is expected to vote on it in the week of September 20.

Abigail Pesta: An American Honor Killing

Around the sprawling, sunbaked campus of Dysart High School in El Mirage, Arizona, not many people knew about the double life of a pretty, dark-haired girl named Noor Almaleki. At school, she was known as a fun-loving student who made friends easily. She played tennis in a T-shirt emblazoned with the school mascot — a baby demon in a diaper. She liked to watch Heroes and eat at Chipotle. Sometimes she talked in a goofy Keanu Reeves voice. She wore dark jeans, jeweled sandals, and flowy tops from Forever 21. She texted constantly and called her friends “dude.” In other words, she was an American girl much like any other.

But at home, Noor inhabited a darker world. She lived a life of subservience, often left to care for her six younger siblings. Noor’s father, 49-year-old Faleh Almaleki, was strict and domineering, deeming it inappropriate for her to socialize with guys, wear jeans, or post snapshots of herself on MySpace. Her responsibility was to follow orders, or to risk a beating. From her father’s perspective, the only time Noor’s life would ever change would be when she married a man he selected for her — back in his homeland of Iraq. Noor, however, had a different vision for herself. Having lived in the U.S. for 16 years, she held dreams of becoming a teacher, of marrying a man she loved, and, most importantly, of making her own choices.

On a cloudless, breezy afternoon in late October 2009, her father set out to end those dreams. As Noor walked across a suburban parking lot to a Mexican restaurant with a friend – a 43-year-old woman named Amal Khalaf – Faleh Almaleki gunned the engine of his Jeep Grand Cherokee and bore down on his 20-year-old daughter and her companion. The women took off running but were no match for the SUV, already traveling close to 30 miles per hour. Suddenly Amal turned, held up her hands in a futile attempt to stop the Jeep, and froze. Moments later, the vehicle struck the women, tossing them into the air. Amal hit the pavement; Noor landed on a raised median, in a patch of pebbly landscaping. Faleh wasn’t done, though. Swerving onto the median, he ran over his daughter as she lay bleeding, fracturing her face and spine. Then, he reversed and sped away.

Passersby heard the roar of the engine, screams, the impact of the bodies as they hit the Jeep’s grill. They saw the women lying on the ground, their sandals scattered across the lot. A witness called 911, and emergency vehicles converged. Amal’s condition was stable; Noor was comatose. Local police characterized the incident as an attempted “honor killing” — the murder of a woman for behaving in a way that “shames” her family. It’s a practice with deep, tenacious roots in the tribal traditions of the Middle East and Asia. (The United Nations estimates that 5,000 women die annually from such crimes.) Women are stoned, stabbed, and, in the recent case of a teenage girl in Turkey, tied up and buried alive. But honor killings in America are a chilling new trend. In Texas, teen sisters Amina and Sarah Said were shot dead in 2008, allegedly by their father, because they had boyfriends. That same year in Georgia, 25-year-old Sandeela Kanwal was allegedly strangled by her father for wanting to leave an arranged marriage. Last year in New York, Aasiya Hassan, 37, was murdered in perhaps the most gruesome way imaginable: She was beheaded, allegedly by her husband, for reportedly seeking a divorce. And this past spring, 19-year-old Tawana Thompson’s husband gunned her down in Illinois, reportedly following arguments about her American-style clothing.

Amazingly, honor killings in the U.S. have been largely ignored by the national media. That’s because these incidents are typically dismissed as “domestic” in nature — a class of crime that rarely makes the headlines. Since the murderer is a member of the woman’s family, there’s no extended investigation to capture the public’s attention. Also, the family of the perpetrator rarely advocates for the victim, due to either fear or a belief that the woman got what she deserved. “From the family’s point of view, if the goal is to end rumors about their female relative, the last thing they want is to have the press talk about the case,” says Rana Husseini, a human-rights activist and author of Murder in the Name of Honor. Still, the lack of media coverage or public outcry cannot erase the evidence: Honor killings have washed up on our shores.

Amie Ferris-Rotman: Russia’s Muslim South Triples Sharia Bride Price

Against the backdrop of a bubbling Islamist insurgency, the revival of Islam in the North Caucasus following the break-up of the Soviet Union almost 20 years ago has brought sharia law to the region, revered by both rebels and ordinary citizens alike. The issue of the ‘kalym’, a price paid by a groom to the family of the woman he chooses to marry, is the latest example of a broader trend that has troubled the Kremlin. [...] Polygamy, illegal under Russian law, is encouraged by local authorities in the region. Last month rights workers blamed police for paintball attacks on Chechen women for not wearing headscarves, and Islamist fighters in Ingushetia have gunned down kiosk workers for selling vodka.

Saeed Kamali Dehghan: Campaign for Iranian Woman Facing Death by Stoning

A 43-year-old Iranian woman is facing death by stoning unless an international campaign launched by her children forces the authorities to quash what her lawyer calls a bogus conviction. In a case that highlights the growing use of the death penalty in a country that has already executed more than 100 people this year, Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani was convicted in May 2006 of conducting an “illicit relationship outside marriage.” Sakineh already endured a sentence of 99 lashes, but her case was re-opened when a court in Tabriz suspected her of murdering her husband. She was acquitted, but the adultery charge was reviewed and a death penalty handed down on the basis of “judge’s knowledge” – a loophole that allows for subjective judicial rulings where no conclusive evidence is present. Speaking to the Guardian, her son Sajad, 22, and daughter Farideh, 17, say their mother has been unjustly accused and already punished for something she did not do. “She’s innocent, she’s been there for five years for doing nothing”, Sajad said. He described the imminent execution as barbaric. “Imagining her, bound inside a deep hole in the ground, stoned to death, has been a nightmare for me and my sister for all these years.” Under Iranian sharia law, the sentenced individual is buried up to the neck (or to the waist in the case of men), and those attending the public execution are called upon to throw stones. If the convicted person manages to free themselves from the hole, the death sentence is commuted.

James Gordon Meek and Katie Nelson: Cleric Anwar al-Awlaki Puts ‘Everybody Draw Mohammed’ Cartoonist Molly Norris on Execution Hitlist

A charismatic terror leader linked to the botched Times Square car bomb has placed the Seattle cartoonist who launched “Everybody Draw Muhammed Day” on an execution hit list. Yemeni-American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki – the radical who has also been cited as inspiring the Fort Hood, Tex., massacre and the plot by two New Jersey men to kill U.S. soldiers – singled out artist Molly Norris as a “prime target,” saying her “proper abode is hellfire.” FBI officials have notified Norris and warned her they consider it a “very serious threat.” In an English-language Al Qaeda magazine that calls itself “Inspire,” Awlaki damns Norris and eight others for “blasphemous caricatures” of the Prophet Muhammed. The other cartoonists, authors and journalists in Awlaki’s cross hairs are Swedish, Dutch and British citizens.

Dutch News: Van Gogh Killer Has No Regrets

Six years after murdering film maker Theo van Gogh, his killer Mohammed Bouyeri has no regrets about his action, the AD reports on Friday. The paper has got hold of a letter written by Bouyeri to a Muslim group which turned up in Belgium. In the letter Bouyeri writes that he has ‘no regrets’ about the choices he has made and the road he has traveled, the paper says. ‘Not one second in all these years.’

Persian2English: 26 Year Old Woman Raped and Murdered by Basij Members for “Bad Hijab”

Elnaz Babazadeh, a 26 year old woman was raped and murdered by Basij forces in the city of Tabriz (northwestern Iran) last week. According to the reports, Basij forces stopped Babazadeh in her car for not following the Iranian regime’s dress code. Elnaz resisted and ignored orders given by the Basij forces. Then the Basij forces who had initially stopped her jumped into her car and threatened her with a gun. Two other Basij members joined in and all together they beat and raped her. They murdered Babazadeh and dumped her body close to Emamiyeh cemetery. After local investigation was conducted by HRANA members in Tabriz, it was confirmed at Babazadeh’s funeral that the person who killed her was the son of a high-ranking Revolutionary Guards member.

All articles continue at links. Part of a series that never ends… [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] and etc.  It is not the proper role of the State to moderate clothing, but it might be the proper role of the State to make crime and violence more difficult.  A legal ban on the burqa in all circumstances is inappropriate, but a legal compulsion to reveal oneself in some circumstances (banks, airports, during arrests, getting a photo license) might be appropriate.  Hospitals (State and private) should have policies mandating hygienic behavior as a condition for continued employment no matter the religion of the employee.  If washing one’s hands includes revealing one’s hands and is thus against Islam, so much the worse for any would-be Muslim health care worker.  Private businesses are best left to private policies regarding required or forbidden clothing. And having said all that, it is better of courts in France to fine women who wear the burqa than it is for courts in Iran to rape and murder women who no not wear the burqa. These legal and cultural systems are not only different from one another, but one is better than the other. How can I tell? One rapes and murders women who no not wear the burqa, and one does not. The one that doesn’t is better. One culture threatens cartoonists and murders film makers, and one does not. The one that doesn’t is better. One culture has neighborhood stonings of half-buried women as a trial by survival, and one doesn’t.  The one that doesn’t is better.  When individuals from the culture that is worse identify themselves plainly, such as with the burqa, the State of the culture that is better can be tempted to use that easy identifier as a means to preserve itself. But liberty is not easy. Do not ban the burqa. Do not ban Islam.  Existing laws in the West protect freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and protection from violence and intimidation.  Islam is against these laws, but no new anti-Islam laws are needed to keep it at bay.

The Telegraph:

Miss [Dalia] Mogahed, appointed to the President’s Council on Faith-Based and Neighbourhood Partnerships, said the Western view of Sharia was “oversimplified” and the majority of women around the world associate it with “gender justice”. The White House adviser made the remarks on a London-based TV discussion programme hosted by Ibtihal Bsis, a member of the extremist Hizb ut Tahrir party. The group believes in the non-violent destruction of Western democracy and the creation of an Islamic state under Sharia Law across the world. Miss Mogahed appeared alongside Hizb ut Tahrir’s national women’s officer, Nazreen Nawaz.

During the 45-minute discussion, on the Islam Channel programme Muslimah Dilemma earlier this week, the two members of the group made repeated attacks on secular “man-made law” and the West’s “lethal cocktail of liberty and capitalism”. They called for Sharia Law to be “the source of legislation” and said that women should not be “permitted to hold a position of leadership in government”. Miss Mogahed made no challenge to these demands and said that “promiscuity” and the “breakdown of traditional values” were what Muslims admired least about the West. She said: “I think the reason so many women support Sharia is because they have a very different understanding of sharia than the common perception in Western media. The majority of women around the world associate gender justice, or justice for women, with sharia compliance. The portrayal of Sharia has been oversimplified in many cases.” [...]

Miss Mogahed admitted that even many Muslims associated Sharia with “maximum criminal punishments” and “laws that… to many people seem unequal to women,” but added: “Part of the reason that there is this perception of Sharia is because Sharia is not well understood and Islam as a faith is not well understood.” The video of the broadcast has now been prominently posted on the front page of Hizb ut Tahrir’s website.

Miss Mogahed, who was born in Egypt and moved to America at the age of five, is the first veiled Muslim woman to serve in the White House. Her appointment was seen as a sign of the Obama administration’s determination to reach out to the Muslim world. She is also the executive director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies, a project which aims to scientifically sample public opinion in the Muslim world. During this week’s broadcast, she described her White House role as “to convey… to the President and other public officials what it is Muslims want.”

Article continues at link.  Wikipedia confirms Miss Mogahed’s role in President Obama’s Council.  Miss Mogahed was on this television program due to her leadership role in the United States government.  There are a limited number of ways to interpret the simultaneous nature of Miss Mogahed’s leadership in government and her faith which prohibits women having leadership in government.  She could consider Islam to be a two-tiered superstition, with one rule for other women and another rule for herself.  Or she could consider it acceptable to tell a lie to non-Muslims as long as Islam is advanced through that lie.  In the West these acts are called hypocrisy, lying, propaganda, manipulation, treason, betrayal, machiavellian, etc.  In the Muslim world, these are called Taqiyya [neutral] [pro] [con].

“You just don’t understand” is sometimes presented as a way of saying “you just don’t agree” by people who consider themselves to have a direct line to immutable and obvious truth.  Because they hold the immutable truth, and because truth is obvious, anyone who disagrees must not understand.  If they understood, they would agree.  But no one has a line to immutable truth, and truth is not obvious.  “You just don’t understand” is the mistaken notion that exposure to a claim will magically cause the observer to adopt it.  We all can err.  There is no ultimate foundation of truth claims to build on, but we can build on the practice of identifying our errors and not repeating them.  No particular group has a monopoly on the “you just don’t understand” ruse.  Feminists use it and so do fundamentalists.  It’s used on the left and the right.  Believers use it and atheists use it.  No matter how many people use it (and I admit I have in the past), this ruse is not a proof of the claim in question.  It is an attempt to evade criticism and introspection.  When lives are at stake, it is contemptible.

Regarding Sharia law as gender justice or justice for women, I will defer to the experts.  Experts like Tulay Goren and Yasmine Larbi-Cherif and Ayman Udas and Sabina Akhtar and Aasiya Hassan and Sahar Daftary and Lidia Motylska and Sandeela Kanwal and Morsal Obeidi and Hatin Surucu and Banaz Mahmood and Aqsa Parvez and Caneze Riaz and Uzma Rahan and Samaira Nazir and Hina Salem and Methal Dayem and Sazan Bajez-Abdullah and Rudayena Jemael and Hesha Yones and Ibtihaz Hasoun and Fadime Sahindal and Zahida Peeveen and Ghazala Khan and Dua Khalil and Rim Abu Ghanem and Sabia Rani and other experts and these experts as well and another group of experts and more experts.  If you’re not at work and have a strong stomach, you can even see images and videos of experts as they earn their expertise.

The Wikipedia entry on Hiz ut-Tahrir appears even handed.  Unlike the Telegraph, it does not identify Hiz ut-Tahrir as extremist.  It confirms the group “wants combine all Muslim countries in a unitary Islamic state or caliphate, ruled by Islamic law and with a caliph head of state elected by Muslims.”  Wikipedia claims Hiz ut-Tahrir is opposed to violence and has a focus “on ‘ideological struggle’ to establish its vision of the caliphate in the minds of Muslims.”  This is the democracy that Hiz ut-Tahrir claims to be dead-set against, and so what they are opposing when they oppose democracy is unclear.  Perhaps they intend to use democracy to get in power, then destroy democracy?  It’s happened before.  Perhaps they oppose violence until they get into power, then… ?  That’s happened before too.

Miss Mogahed is the first veiled Muslim woman to serve in the White House.  In the United States is is neither forbidden nor compulsory for a woman to veil herself in most (not all) situations.  Miss Mogahed may be projecting her own liberties (oh, those lethal liberties) on women in the Muslim world.  Hiz ut-Tahrir is less confused on the issue: Article 116 of their draft constitution makes the veil obligatory for women.  Debating the veil is a low-hanging fruit in the West.  It’s easy to fight for the right to wear a veil when it’s an option and you can pretend your options are shared elsewhere.  It’s also a good distraction from more pressing concerns for women in Islam.  Issues like Muslim girls being able to go to school without being blown up, poisoned or burned with acid.

I prefer the lethal cocktail of liberty and capitalism to anything the Muslim world is offering up in the 21st Century.

Tank top. Trevor Blake, Portland Oregon USA. Based on OGRE by Steve Jackson. 27 July 2009.

Clothes made of ceramic shards from the Ming, Yuan, Qing and Song Dynasties by Li Xiaofeng, a 43-year-old Beijing artist who has found a way to link his contemporary work with traditional Chinese 10th Century art.

ancient fragments become an emperor’s new clothing | MetaFilter

the graduation collection of Irina Shaposhnikova called ‘Crystallographica’

Irina Shaposhnikova ‘Crystallographica’ – today and tomorrow

Some totalitarian governments are forgiven, others are not.

The Rise of Communist Chic ~ Trend de la Creme

historic boys clothing

Popina (Poppi) Swimwear is a woman owned, designer swimwear line based in Portland, Oregon.

Retro Swimsuits | Portland Swimwear Boutique | Designer Vintage Bathing Suits for Women

I’m Learning To Share!: Search term: “Jughead’s hat”

Bare Skin Safe Conductive Ink

My Rules for the year: • Make something new everyday. • Don’t buy anything you can make yourself, especially clothes.

p r i m e – n u m b e r . c o m — everything is temporary

Here is a 1972 photo of industrial music pioneer Genesis P-Orridge wearing “Copyright Breeches,” made for him by Cosey Fanni Tutti.

Genesis P-Orridge’s copyright pants – Boing Boing

An index of my alienation from one variety of youth culture.

Look at this fucking hipster

cult clothes

In Which Pure Materialism Is Not Yet Hypocritical « This Recording

# No minimum order # $18 per yard # Printed on quality quilting-weight cotton from Moda™

Spoonflower: Print custom fabric on-demand

After terming love as “un-Islamic”, the Darul Uloom Islamic seminary in Deoband has said that Muslilms wearing jeans is a gunah (sin).

Deccan Herald – ‘Wearing jeans un-Islamic’