going back to the OP, if the implication from the image is that one might be 'scary' or a 'terrorist', as a resident of the good old united kingdom of great britain and northern ireland, I know which I'd think would be more likely to be bombing innocent civilians
So you think one of those in the OP is more likely than the other to bomb innocents...How come?
It's quite right that we should tolerate religious beliefs and customs in the interests of integration, even when they contradict established laws, customs, security or social norms. After all, a western woman would be perfectly fine walking around an Islamic country wearing a bikini.
... Oh.
My view is that it is pointless to question their religion/view as you have no rights to do so and you can't change their rules or way of life.
It is for their women to fight back or to stand up to them rather than letting outsiders intervene in their way of life/community/world.
Utter Piffle; we should rightly question any abuse of power or influence, regardless of how that power or influence is gained e.g. a husband over his wife or a priest over his flock.
However, I will concede that it is correct that people should be able to dress how they want and it is also true as alluded to that some women say they choose to wear a face veil. My argument is that whilst I can choose to wear an orange jumpsuit and handcuffs, why would I dress in a way that usually signifies some of my rights have been taken away from me - there really is nothing in the Koran that says they [i]have to[/i] cover their faces.
With regards to your second point that if the women are oppressed they should be left to fight back themselves without support, I strongly disagree. You only need to do a bit of reading on forced marriages, acid attacks, and FGM to realise that there are severe problems with women's rights in several UK communities that do need outside help and support to banish. Whilst perhaps on its own the full face veil isn't quite the same as those examples it is a form of misogynistic oppression/control all the same.
You claimed the reason for the dress code and I gave you the quotes from the Koran
Pray explain how that is a straw man
Well as you well know I was referring to this "explanation"
Its not this at all anymore than me lockingmmy door when I go in my house says that every person outside is a scary robber.
The clue was actually in the paragraph that you then quoted, you know the bit about a nonsensical statement about locking your door.(I guess you didn't bother reading it).
Well your poor arguments annoyed me - does this mean you have enraged me with lust ?
And now a straw man and an ad hominem in one sentence.
Cougar - ModeratorAfter all, a western woman would be perfectly fine walking around an Islamic country wearing a bikini.
... Oh.
Are bikinis banned in Turkey then ? Or is that the wrong sort of Islamic country - did you perhaps mean Saudi Arabia ?
Do you think our attitudes should reflect Saudi attitudes ? It would be remarkable if you did imo.
Don't be obtuse.
The point I was getting at in what I thought was a mildly humorous manner was that there should be balance. Either when one is in a given country one abides by its established customs, or one is free to ignore them and practice their own beliefs. Superficially I don't overly care which one we pick so long as we all pick the same one and agree to it.
When as a nation we're expected to both allow people to do what they like irrespective of established social norms [i]and[/i] also throw away our own personal belief systems when we visit other countries, we have an imbalance. Pick one, you can't have it both ways. Is it correct for a country to allow people freedom of choice even if that choice is a symbol of oppression generally incompatible with established conventions, or is it correct for a country to expect all citizens and visitors there to abide by the rules of that country?
I don't have the answer to that question, there's pros and cons to both (though I'd like to think that we've mostly got it right here). But whilst that disparity exists, then racist horseshit fiction like the image in the OP will flourish.
Which is a shame.
And now a straw man and an ad hominem in one sentence.
Well you claimed
it's a religious instruction to cover up so that men don't become enraged with lust.
you used "annoyed" as your evidence. I agree its a straw man - then again its your argument so its not my problem.
PS It would be hard to do an ad hom on you when I only mention myself.
It was a reductio ad absurdum.
Anyway its clear the koran does not say dress like that to stop men being enraged with lust and you can, rather ironically, fallaciously throw around fallacies or just conceed that point. I think we have established which you are going to do.
That claim is wrong however much you wish to do this to death.
When as a nation we're expected to both allow people to do what they like irrespective of established social norms and also throw away our own personal belief systems when we visit other countries, we have an imbalance. Pick one, you can't have it both way
It depends on how important the particular custom is. For a woman to voluntary wear a veil here is not a big deal. Not many people care either way what strangers are wearing - we don't abide by religious rules or social norms that prevent it. However in Middle Eastern countries it IS a big deal, by their standards, to go around uncovered.
I think it better to take each situation as it comes, rather than make blanket rules.
Don't be obtuse.
Oh I'm sorry, please accept my apologies. As for your waffle after that and your "I don't have the answer to that question" dilemma, my position is very clear - I believe in both religious freedom and the right of people to choose their own life style choices without interference from me or anyone else. And I couldn't give a toss what they do in other countries with respect to what we should do here in the UK.
Junkyard - lazarusThe dispute exists mainly for the non Muslim IME though I am far from an expert on it
Nah, it's been a hot topic in islam for centuries.- different sects have different takes on it, some place it in different context than others too (I had to go and look it up but Maliki sunni don't consider the face and hands to be intimate parts, frinstance.)
When as a nation we're expected to both allow people to do what they like irrespective of established social norms and also throw away our own personal belief systems when we visit other countries, we have an imbalance. Pick one, you can't have it both ways.
They are religious of course they want it both ways just like the chirch wants to be free from discrimination from the rest of society but still able to discriminate against gays.
Personally I would rather be above these regimes I dislike than act like them. Two wrongs dont make a right
I dont think dressing like that really offends us - its not that dissimilar from a nuns habit for example. the victorians would have loved it as well 😉
The reality is that western liberal tolerance means, much like freedom of speech, we need to defend it most when folk do things we disapprove of. Its their choice not ours.
You cannot say you cannot force women to dress like this you can only force them to dress like the way we approve of and think it makes sense as a position and it is freedom.
Not many people care either way what strangers are wearing
I suspect that given a choice, more people than "not many" would choose to have face-to-face interactions with people actually face to face. But like you I'm speculating.
As for your waffle
You really are unable to have a discussion without resorting to insults, aren't you.
couldn't give a toss what they do in other countries
Good for you. I on the other hand am quite concerned about systematic oppression in other countries.
@ Northwind
It amounts to the same as "dirty slag, dressing like that, she's asking for it". But it can equally be translated to mean more or less "If you dress respectably and as a woman of faith you will be recognised and treated as such". It's a matter of much dispute
Its a matter of dispute as I have accepted. It is not a matter of dispute for [ quite] the reason you state though.
I dont think Islamic scholars are using your first "" bit as they are mainly discussing what bits should be covered and by whom.
Cougar - ModeratorAfter all, a western woman would be perfectly fine walking around an Islamic country wearing a bikini.
... Oh.
How about men wearing mankini or tiny budgie smuggler? 😆
couldn't give a toss what they do in other countriesGood for you. I on the other hand am quite concerned about oppression in other countries.
Oh nice one ..... you deliberately edit my comment to create the impression that I am making a completely different point.
Shall we have the unedited version ?
"[i]And I couldn't give a toss what they do in other countries [b]with respect to what we should do here in the UK.[/i][/b]"
You really are unable to have a discussion without resorting to insults, aren't you.
Because of course you calling me obtuse was designed as a compliment ?
So you accusing me of being obtuse is fine, but me accusing you of waffling is an insult 🙄
People can wear what they want it has nothing to do with me or my tastes or preferences.
it's not a fashion statement, it's a religious instruction to cover up so that men don't become enraged with lust. There is just no escaping that it is an example of misogyny in religion
Rather ot (but there's a lack of liberalism here at the moment)
But you want to see a misogynistic culture? Go and have a look at the everyday sexism project. I'm amazed more women don't dress like that with the rabid animals that there are on our streets.
Oh, I can't be bothered. I'm going to bed, I'll pick this up on page 12 in the morning.
There is an issue, and I'm not sure how to explain it without bringing the PC tribe down on my head, with the way that people emigrate into a liberal, hopefully less overtly sexist culture (although see the above...) yet persist in maintaining cultural traditions which are less liberal and more overtly sexist.
It probably centres around the idea of integration, although I don't think any ethnic or cultural group integrates fully without losing their identity.
I know 2 women who refused the idea of an arranged marriage and have had to involve the police at various times to protect them from their families. I think if you choose to move to live in a country, you have to accept that traditions will change over time and over generations.
Ernie most threads I see you on someone makes that same point to you.
Its a shame you , mainly, just do this these days
crikey it is difficult for any person to integrate and how we accommodate this [ both sides] is a difficult balancing act. There will be give and take on both sides though the extremes of either side dont want to budge.
Perhaps we accept the veil and they stop arranged/forced* marriage and so called honour killings???? It may take more than one generation though.
* i know they are not the same thing and should not be interchanged
It's quite right that we should tolerate religious beliefs and customs in the interests of integration, even when they contradict established laws, customs, security or social norms. After all, a western woman would be perfectly fine walking around an Islamic country wearing a bikini.
... Oh.
This is a very troll-ish/borderline bigoted thing for a moderator to be posting...
Mind you, one of the other moderators has decided he will carry on using the term 'chinky' despite having had it pointed out that it might be offensive/racist.
But you can see why they banned TJ. 😕
Just leave Muslin women alone. It's absolutely normal that they want to be covered from head to toe in black blankets to prevent men from being tempted into adultery or rape (that is then blamed on the women regardless).
You want to refuse them a choice to liberate them.
But only an idiot (or a painfully liberal "progressive" one) would see this as anything other than oppression and misogyny at work. You should look at the real reasons behind this and not half arsed examples of women who "choose" to cover their faces. After all if I gave you an example of a ****stani who thinks its funny and acceptable to be called a "****" by his mates then you would be rightly horrified.
You should extend the same indignation to women here and abroad.
is it correct for a country to expect all citizens and visitors there to abide by the rules of that country?
Sure - and one of the great rules of the UK, which has taken several hundred years to develop, for which many have died and been imprisoned, and the reasons for which have been written in blood, is that the state should not interfere in the personal choices of sane individuals. Or, to put it more bluntly, mind yer own farking business.
But the veil [b]is [/b]state interference. It's applied by theocratic states abroad and has been brought here by people from those countries. The veil has no place in British society it's completely counter to what we believe about the rights of women and so forth. Just because the thing is the accepted norm in some societies doesn't mean we should accept it here. The veil is not about personal choice it's an insidious device for the oppression of some muslim women.
But the veil is state interference. It's applied by theocratic states abroad and has been brought here by people from those countries. The veil has no place in British society it's completely counter to what we believe about the rights of women and so forth. Just because the thing is the accepted norm in some societies doesn't mean we should accept it here. The veil is not about personal choice it's an insidious device for the oppression of some muslim women.
On the flip side, our tolerance and acceptance of other cultures is what allows us to rise above those theocratic, oppressive states and cultures???
Or, to put it more bluntly, mind yer own farking business.
Well I think the UK has developed by doing the exact opposite. Confronting oppression and brutality where it sees fit. Not by burying its head in the sand and ignoring the ill treatment of others.
Interesting interpretation of history yo have there.
As a group we need to decide what we find acceptable and legislate accordingly. For example FGM is a societal norm in many places yet we do not allow it here. The veil is certainly less emotive and clear cut than FGM but I believe is equally deserving of attention. What would the outcome of a ban actually be I wonder? What happened in France after their ban? Being accepting doesn't mean accepting things we know to be crap.
Well I think the UK has developed by doing the exact opposite. Confronting oppression and brutality where it sees fit. Not by burying its head in the sand and ignoring the ill treatment of others. Interesting interpretation of history yo have there.
Blimey, said without a trace of irony! 😯
This is a very troll-ish/borderline bigoted thing for a moderator to be posting...
I've made this clear in other threads, but generally I'm posting in my capacity as a forum user, not a moderator. I don't really see how that's relevant (other than as a tool to throw stones at me); unless you're suggesting that in my position as moderator I waive the right to have an opinion or take part in debates.
Arguably I should be setting an example but, meh. (-:
So, after 4 pages have any Muslim folk chipped in to defeat this xenophobic nonsense?
Elaborating a little on what I said before (now I'm awake),
Ernie used examples of Turkey and Saudi to pick apart what I said. This is a straw man; far as I know, the people I see daily wearing traditional muslim garb aren't from either of these countries. Would a woman be free to wear a bikini in ****stan without fear of comment (or worse); or would they be expected to conform?
It's the double standards I was questioning. We don't demand that women of whatever foreign descents conform to western ideals, but we take it as read that we'll have to compromise without question when roles are reversed. If we're being accommodating, is it too much to ask to be accommodated back in return?
xenophobic nonsense?
Excellent point, questioning antisocial symbols of oppression favoured by a single demographic of people is exactly the same situation as a fear and hatred of all things foreign.
I initially read the thread title as Mulsim Forks and wondered if religious bike parts were the new niche of choice
That said..... If someone can give me a valid reason, religious or otherwise for wearing a balaclava into a bank, I'd be interested to hear it.
It's the double standards I was questioning. We don't demand that women of whatever foreign descents conform to western ideals, but we take it as read that we'll have to compromise without question when roles are reversed. If we're being accommodating, is it too much to ask to be accommodated back in return?
Yup, there is a double standard in that in this country we are more tolerant and accepting of other cultures than a brutal theocracy or a near-failed state where religious extremists hold great sway.
I don't really see how that has any relevance to people here who choose to wear a niqab or burka. Seems a bit like holding them responsible for the actions of other people in the country they used to live in (or their parents did).
That said..... If someone can give me a valid reason, religious or otherwise for wearing a balaclava into a bank, I'd be interested to hear it.
Hmmm, it's January, the heating isn't working (in the bank) and you're cold!
If someone can give me a valid reason, religious or otherwise for wearing a balaclava into a bank, I'd be interested to hear it.
You may be indescribably ugly and scare small children with your fearsome countenance. There are people around here for whom that alone should be reason enough for them to wear a balaclava in public. 😀
But only an idiot (or a painfully liberal "progressive" one) would see this as anything other than oppression and misogyny at work.
Well we have cited the Koran and the reasons it gives – oddly it does not mention the things you say. I guess all the people who do it are idiots and painfully progressive Liberals – that will come as a shock to the Taliban but hey thanks for the info 🙄
People keep having ludicrous positions then saying anyone who disagrees is an idiot – odd.
You should look at the real reasons behind this and not half arsed examples of women who "choose" to cover their faces.
The Koran has been cited- oh the westerner non Muslim knows the real reason- why not force it on women to liberate them 🙄
After all if I gave you an example of a ****stani who thinks its funny and acceptable to be called a "****" by his mates then you would be rightly horrified.
Someone can do as they please – I would let them choose whether I approved or not. The same as the veil its not my choice to make.
You should extend the same indignation to women here and abroad.
I have, I let them choose
You are the one with the contradictory position of telling me its bad to oppress women and force them to wear clothes of your choosing and then choosing to force them to wear clothes of your choosing. If its bad dont do it. Oh I forgeot your way of forcing them liberates them but the other lots way is oppressive.
The veil has no place in British society it's completely counter to what we believe about the rights of women and so forth
As far as I am aware we don’t have a view that says a lady cannot cover her face if she so chooses.*
I ride with someone who wears a buff over her face in winter – shall I liberate herself from herself because her actions run counter to what we believe?
The veil is not about personal choice it's an insidious device for the oppression of some muslim women.
Your right what they need is a western male non muslim with no understanding of their reasons to free them by insidiously oppressing them to wear the clothes you choose for them instead. Its a ridiculous position to have - both sides tell women what to do in order to "protect" them. Let the women choose what they want to wear.
If we're being accommodating, is it too much to ask to be accommodated back in return?
Well a meat eater had a veggie meal at your house – are you going to accommodate them and eat meat at theirs?
A meat eater has no rules about eating a veggie meal just like we have no rules about veils.
* FWIW lets not kid ourselves here that society is somehow free here. Much of the liberation of women is relatively recent. For example we had to enforce equal pay a mere 40 years ago and still the disparity in pay exists. Lets get our own house in order whilst we present ourselves as paragon to the world.
God said so is no longer a reasonable defence.
edit,that applies to that **** Blair as well.
It's the double standards I was questioning.
Cougar, you can't apply the same reasoning to both things, because they don't each carry the same weight.
It's the double standards I was questioning. We don't demand that women of whatever foreign descents conform to western ideals, but we take it as read that we'll have to compromise
1) it's not a double standard at all. The western ideal is that people choose what they wear when they get up in the morning. It's open to everyone in the UK (well, apart from kids, prisoners, soldiers and nudists, I suppose). If you choose to wear a mankini, that's up to you. If you're a wee free that wears a long skirt and headscarf, that's up to you too. If you don't like burkas, don't wear one.
2) it's not a double standard at all because what happens in the UK isn't some sort of reciprocal deal with everywhere else in the world. WGAF what happens in Saudi or Iran? Their lawmakers are a bunch of tossers for legislating women what they can wear. Why fall into the same trap in the UK?
Your "point" is just knuckle-dragging lounge-bar toss.
Well we have cited the Koran and the reasons it gives – oddly it does not mention the things you say. I guess all the people who do it are idiots and painfully progressive Liberals – that will come as a shock to the Taliban but hey thanks for the info
So work of fiction in not being accurate shocker 🙄
The Koran has been cited
So you agree that this is the reason? or do you think that there maybe other reasons at play?
Someone can do as they please – I would let them choose whether I approved or not
So you would ignore overt racism would you under the guise of "individual freedom"
And you accuse me of double standards.
You are the one with the contradictory position of telling me its bad to oppress women and force them to wear clothes of your choosing and then choosing to force them to wear clothes of your choosing.
Who mentioned force? your copy and paste skills are unrivaled so you should easily be able to find the quote?
Oh I forgeot your way of forcing them liberates them but the other lots way is oppressive.
Again this "force" thing. In fact a lot of your argument hinges on it, doesnt it?
I ride with someone who wears a buff over her face in winter – shall I liberate herself from herself because her actions run counter to what we believe?
Whose the "we" here? I like Buffs, is her Buff a sign of oppression in this instance?
When I use the term "liberate" I mean a persons freedom to choose without any pressures. Most reasonable people would accept that face covering in this instance is not a "free" choice in the same way that most people would agree that forced marriage is a bad thing despite the fact that we could all find examples of women who apparently claim it is a good thing and have long relationships afterwards.
That is my position and trying to add your veneer of "liberation" is a cop out.
konabunny - Member1) it's not a double standard at all. The western ideal is that people choose what they wear when they get up in the morning. It's open to everyone in the UK (well, apart from kids, prisoners, soldiers and nudists, I suppose). If you choose to wear a mankini, that's up to you. If you're a wee free that wears a long skirt and headscarf, that's up to you too. If you don't like burkas, don't wear one.
Critical hit!
2) it's not a double standard at all because what happens in the UK isn't some sort of reciprocal deal with everywhere else in the world. WGAF what happens in Saudi or Iran? Their lawmakers are a bunch of tossers for legislating women what they can wear. Why fall into the same trap in the UK?
Indeed. It's like the weird logic when people are talking about 'well you'd get your head chopped off for saying something similar back in Saudi Arabia, so why do we put up with it here?'
What are they advocating there exactly? That we should demonstrate the wonders of our superior civilised society by becoming more like the one that we are slagging off for being backward. Eh? 😕
(probably haven't explained that very well)
Most reasonable people would accept that face covering in this instance is not a "free" choice...
I think that might be an assumption too far for me.
Most reasonable people
This term is usually a cover for 'my opinion which I've decided should be shared by everyone else'.
FWIW I don't feel at all comfortable with the idea of the burqa/niqab and certainly not if people are being pressured into wearing them - but I feel far, far more uncomfortable with the idea of banning them.
I think it's entirely plausible, for instance, that some women might find it a bit of a relief to not be ogled by blokes while wearing one.
Should this be banned too btw? Or is it just the Muslims that shouldn't be allowed to wear stuff like that?
[img] 
[/img]
