My cousin just posted this on facebook:
[img] 
[/img]
Shared from the [i]"Scottish Defence League"[/i] page (I'm not linking to them!) with the caption: [i]"Try to wear a balaclava into a bank or onto a plane you would be arrested buts its ok for Muslims to wear burkas wherever they want. Another example of one law for them and another law for us"[/i]
😯
I know there are a few muslim posters on here, as well as plenty of sensible liberal minded folk.
Can you help me construct a valid counter argument to this nonsense to go with my utter disdain and feeling of disgust?
So far my reply has been:
Firstly that's a niq?b, not a burqa.
Secondly, how many bank robberies have actually involved the robbers wearing ?ij?b?
Thirdly, what "law" exactly is different for "them"?
Fourthly, please stop polluting my facebook with this offensive xenophobic bollocks! I don't want to have to unfriend my own cousin.
(if this is too controversial mods then feel free to delete it - no explanation required)
Can you help me construct a valid counter argument to this nonsense
While I'm sure that constructing a valid, logical argument is possible, I strongly feel that it would be utterly futile given the audience. Listening to reasoned argument isn't what these groups are particularly renowned for.
Good luck though, I applaud your sentiment.
[i]My cousin just posted this on facebook:[/i]
just unfreind/follow or whatever and ignore them.
you will not change their views and it will just wind you up.
treat it like a particularly long 'everyone argues' thread on here and don't join in.
id warn him about the ray guns, he needs to know
seriously just link
and ask him if hes worried
BJ from the one the right wouldn't be great.
Mind you, not convinced about the one on the left either
*BANG* oh banhammer time
Sounds like a good reply
The issue came up in Oz recently
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/bernardi-calls-for-burqa-ban/story-e6frea6u-1225863347406
**WARNING LINK CONTAINS PICTURE OF MIDDLE AGED MAN IN BUDGIE SMUGGLERS
There was a suggestion that if people wanted to ban clothing that offended them they could start with the budgie smugglers favoured by the current leader of the opposition (likely next pm)
It's based on a false premise. There's no law against wearing a balaclava or a niqab - neither will get you arrested. But if you wear either, you might need to remove it to prove your identity. Simple.
Take a different tack. Tell them that the eye holes are bigger in the balaclava, and that alongside the mouth hole they'd probably be identifiable in that and not the other thing. Send them down that path.
A person wouldn't be arrested for wearing a balaclava in a bank or airport, end of topic.
Pic just made me laugh. It's just so damn stupid.
Or: "How come when Batman wears a mask he's a superhero, but when a Muslim woman does it she's destroying our way of life?"
Blimey!
As an ex-motorcyclist I used to be made to remove my helmet and silk balaclava before entering most shops / bank / post offices / etc because they needed to ID me just in case, this is understandable from the perspective of the shopkeeper etc.
How you get narrow minded halfwits to see the subtle difference between that and someone wearing a niq?b or burqa is beyond me. Good luck.
LOL - looks like she may have just pre-emptively unfriended me.
Funny how racists/xenophobes are all for free speech till someone uses it to challenge them. 😀
Eyeliner, your cousin not in touch with his feminine side or is make up not allowed in the circles he frequents. All men together, eh? Funny hand shakes and all.
[i]LOL - looks like she may have just pre-emptively unfriended me.[/i]
Ha! "You're not as racist/stupid/moronic as me so you're not my fwiend anymore!"
So black balaclava and some eyeliner would be ok? What about high heels as well, just to be sure?
While I'm sure that constructing a valid, logical argument is possible, I strongly feel that it would be utterly futile given the audience. Listening to reasoned argument isn't what these groups are particularly renowned for.
I sort of agree with this. I'm still FB friends with an ex-colleague who occasionally posts up stuff a bit like this (probably from 'proud to be british' type groups that are like the EDL-lite).
One of them was "Like if you don't think illegal immigrants should receive any benefits".
I said "they don't" and got replies asking if I paid tax, if I thought it was right that they used fake IDs to fraudulently claim MY money etc etc.
Pointing out that the thing they want is already happening (it's illegal, obviously, for illegal immigrants to claim government benefits. If they're committing fraud to get them then that's illegal too and it can and should be treated as serious crime) didn't lead to them saying "oh great, I don't need to be stupid any more". It just lead to hassle for me because they took my answer to mean I thought illegal immigrants [i]should[/i] be able to turn up and get a free gold plated mansion! 😕
I wouldnt even respond on FB, its his/her opinion, they are entitled to hold it whether you think its right or wrong.
she may have just pre-emptively unfriended me.Funny how racists/xenophobes are all for free speech till someone uses it to challenge them.
WIN
as others note it is pointless arguing with idiots, they drag you down to their level then beat you with experience - or fail to get the point as above over benefits and illegality.
I suggested to her that she creates a list so she only shares these posts with people that don't find them horrifically offensive.
She suggested that I just turn off notifications so I don't see her posts.
So I responded: [i]"I like hearing your news and there isn't a box for "Everything, except the hate speech".
You can make a list so that these posts are only shared with people who share your interests tho. I gather the most recent country to ban the niq?b was Syria, so maybe you can add that Bashar al-Assad chap, he seems nice. "[/i]
😆
It now seems to have vanished.
just unfreind/follow or whatever and ignore them.
you will not change their views and it will just wind you up.
treat it like a particularly long 'everyone argues' thread on here and don't join in.
This.
Trying to convince someone they are wrong and you are right, is a huge waste of time and energy.
It makes me laugh the lengths people go to on here to prove their point.
While I'm sure that constructing a valid, logical argument is possible, I strongly feel that it would be utterly futile given the audience. Listening to reasoned argument isn't what these groups are particularly renowned for.
A STW thread succinctly described 🙂
On my FB was an OZ show where the presenter donned a pair of tights over his head to wear in different situations as a 'look'- the results were 😯 and 😆 😆
Kudos you are wrong ane let me list the reasons why 😉
LOLZ at the muslamic ray gun clip from the EDL. You should definitely send that to your cousin Graham, she might re-friend you.
Trying to convince someone they are wrong and you are right, is a huge waste of time and energy.
You say this like I'm new here 😀
Secondly, how many bank robberies have actually involved the robbers wearing ?ij?b?
[url= http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/archive/2012/04/03/9627918.Robbery_gang_is_jailed/ ]Robbery Gang Jailed[/url]
[url= http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/archive/2013/07/09/10535534.Man_dressed_in_burkha_robs_bank/ ]Man Dressed in Burkha Robs Bank[/url]
[url= http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/archive/2013/06/08/10472761.Praise_for_public_who_tackled_burka_clad_raiders/ ]Praise for Public who Tackled Burkha-Clad Raiders[/url]
Want any more? I can give you plenty. There have been 11 armed raids in East Lancashire alone in the last four years where the prime suspects have been disguised in burkhas/niqabs.
If I walk into a shop, bank, petrol station or any other public premises where it might be deemed a reasonable need to establish my identity, wearing a head covering that only showed my eyes, I would not think it unreasonable to be asked to remove it.
Can you help me construct a valid counter argument to this nonsense to go with my utter disdain and feeling of disgust?
/Devil's advocate.
Doesn't the fact that you are struggling to construct a valid argument say something though?
[img] 
[/img]
I mean this hoodie wearer would in theory (were they not dead) be banned from Bluewater shopping centre, but I imagine wouldn't be. Which I guess is ageist / sexist / religionist or some other -ist. Or just profiling, which all good liberals are in theory against 🙂
But yes, I would have just de-friended the idiot.
If I walk into a shop, bank, petrol station or any other public premises where it might be deemed a reasonable need to establish my identity, wearing a head covering that only showed my eyes, I would not think it unreasonable to be asked to remove it.
No, it's not unreasonable to ask someone wearing a face covering (religious or otherwise) to remove it for security reasons. My understanding is that at banks and airports the niqabi can be sensitively handled by asking them to show their face privately to another female, without the need to offend their beliefs.
Doesn't the fact that you are struggling to construct a valid argument say something though?
No I have plenty of valid points, the main issues are my utter disgust and the inability to form an argument on terms she would understand.
OP, in principle there's nothing wrong with that poster, from a security perspective there is no difference. It's just a shame so many people are conditioned to automatically pick up on the ethnic / racial / cultural differences of the two people and use that as your primary filter for assessing what you see rather than being colour blind and seeing two people who have covered their faces. You've just fallen straight into the trap the SDL set for you and exposed your own inability to see people as people.
As for posting it on you've just helped spread the SDL drivel a little further, well done.
I would not think it unreasonable to be asked to remove it.
Me neither but I am not a devout female follower of Islam being asked to do something against my religious beliefs.
I'd say that the point made is a reasonable one
You do realise that Jim Morrison, Elvis, Lord Lucan and Michael Jackson (he's not really dead you know) regularly stroll about Asda and Macdonalds through the simple use of female Muslamic garb. Though they had to stop nipping into Bargain Booze to stock up on Stella, as that was starting to raise a few eyebrows
I think the face covering should be banned.
Integration is what's it all about. You can't integrate when you can't smile at someone in the morning.
How many bike friends have you made by a nod or an "alright"?
The veil is keeping women locked up and subservient to their " male masters".
If it was illegal it might go a bit of the way to letting these ladies mix with someone of their own choice.
I will add that I have never been a Muslim woman so not speaking from experience.
Lets give that woman in the veil a name and a face.
You've just fallen straight into the trap the SDL set for you and exposed your own inability to see people as people.
Their caption used "them" and "us", not mine!
As for posting it on you've just helped spread the SDL drivel a little further, well done.
Sometimes light exposes darkness. This is no bad thing.
zippykona: these British Muslim women seem happy enough to wear it:
http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/beyond-the-veil-londons-burka-wearers-go-on-the-defensive-6532864.html
Who are you to tell them not to?
I think the face covering should be banned.
I refer you to the point i made earlier about the irony of your solution to them being forced to wear clothes is to make them wear clothes of your choice.
Integration is what's it all about. You can't integrate when you can't smile at someone in the morning.
I am not sure it is as critical to integration as you think. I though it was respect and tolerance for those with different ideals from your own.
How many bike friends have you made by a nod or an "alright"?
None but thats roadies for you 😉
Its odd that many think men folk force them. Personally I would imagine a number of non religious non muslims also have an expectation of how their wife /partner should dress. IME this is rarely actually the case
The veil is keeping women locked up and subservient to their " male masters".
As an aside the Berber tribe have a way of wearing it that allows them to publicly criticise their husbands for a variety of reasons so it can also be empowering.
the only woman I know who wears one like that fact that blokes dont oggle her but she says they stare even more
The face veil/covering to me is a symbol of oppression and I don't believe there isn't really a place for it in a modern secular country.
I have seen plenty of Muslim ladies (and a few from other religions)wearing just a head scarf. This I don't see as a problem; it is merely a symbolic gesture in a similar sense that wearing a cross or a turban is.
Whilst we can show our distaste for items of clothing (like the face veil) banning it would achieve little and probably prompt some people to wear it that wouldn't have done so. In a modern country it should just be reduced to occasions - like dressing for a wedding or a judges regalia and maybe one day it will; I'd like to think that British born girls would strongly object to such demeaning treatment.
Having said all that comparing it to a balaclava is just moronic.
The face veil/covering to me is a symbol of oppression and I don't believe there isn't really a place for it in a modern secular country.
Yet many women in a "modern secular country" CHOOSE to wear it.
Isn't it equally oppressive for women to be forced to wear revealing clothes and be judged solely on their looks?
My understanding is that at banks and airports the niqabi can be sensitively handled by asking them to show their face privately to another female, without the need to offend their beliefs.
I think this is true. They have a separate room for it. It's not like the billions of muslim women in the world don't travel by air anywhere.
I would not think it unreasonable to be asked to remove it.Me neither but I am not a devout female follower of Islam being asked to do something against my religious beliefs.
Thing is, if you require a positive identification of the person then what do you do? Fingerprints I suppose.
Seems that the "choice" or otherwise relating to wearing a Niqab generates plenty of debate in the Muslim community especially in relatively secular societies. Does it help/hinder, is it oppression/protection etc...Happy to leave that debate to those concerned personally.
The SDL argument falls over very quickly - where relevant/appropriate means to check identify of niqab wearers are in place, so the argument that they pretend to make is non-existent. Its the beauty of free speech - it allows the stupid to condemn themselves.
In your position Graham, I would simply ignore it.
GrahamS - Member
Isn't it equally oppressive for women to be forced to wear revealing clothes and be judged solely on their looks?
Looking forward to Strictly then Graham!!!
Yet many women in a "modern secular country" CHOOSE to wear it.
Of course lot's of women choose to wear skimpy clothes, starve themselves and have body altering surgery to obtain an ideal western body image.
It's choice, but it choice based on peer pressure. Just like covering up.
I'm not sure either's particular healthy. But without out peer pressure you have no society. All too complicated for me really.
Isn't it equally oppressive for women to be forced to wear revealing clothes and be judged solely on their looks?
Sorry Graham!!! Didn't read the rest of your post! 🙂
In your position Graham, I would simply ignore it.
Too late - I'm now one cousin down. 🙁
Looking forward to Strictly then Graham!!!
I enjoy looking a shapely lass in a revealing outfit as much as the next man - but that's because I'm a modern secular oppressive pig 😀
It's choice, but it choice based on peer pressure. Just like covering up.
I'm not sure either's particular healthy.
I'd agree with that, but I don't think the solution is to make laws than ban women from covering up!
Do we really want laws to say: [i]"If you want to live in the UK then you can't cover yourself up. You'll be sexually objectified like everyone else. It's the British way."[/i]
😕
