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.
Me too, but having said that, if women have been living in a society that has conditioned them into making this "free" choice. Is it really a "free" choice?
You could use that argument for the West- is that any more "free" as all societies have cultural norms.
Men hear dont wear skirts as rule but there is no real reason for it. Do you feel oppressed by this or are you conditioned to just not bother and fit in?
Surfer yes the Koran is unlikely to be true but it is till the main reason that the Muslims dress how they dress. Whether it is true or false does not alter this fact.
Yes IMHO other cultural factors within the region did influence the dress code but a muslim dresses like a "muslim" because they are a Muslim.
So you would ignore overt racism would you under the guise of "individual freedom"And you accuse me of double standards.
Straw man as I never said that. It would be better if you could explain how you telling them how to dress is the best response to someone telling them how to dress. Can you do that please whilst explaining how it is not a double standard? Should be entertaining.
Re force - if the veil is banned how are they not forced ? You are so keen on mocking my style [ quite well FWIW] that you have forgotten to make a coherent sensible argument.
That is what they have t as not every Muslim does*. As other notes "most reasonable people" is a poor term as most reasonable Muslims [ and some unreasonable ones to be fair]would not agree with you. The EDl agree with you as well and I would nto call them reasonable eitherWhen 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
For the sake of fueluing an argument I am not suggesting you support the EDL
* I am sure some women [ Muslim and non Muslim] are forced to dress a certain way by others but I dont think us forcing them to dress a certain way is the solution to this problem
Me too, but having said that, if women have been living in a society that has conditioned them into making this "free" choice. Is it really a "free" choice?
That's a different issue altogether.
Just out of interest, when Christian women cover their hair, is that a form of oppression too? Should we ban that as well?
That's a different issue altogether.
That told me!
Quite a few Munters about who should be fforced to wear one IMHO
Kinda sorry I started this now but here goes:
All this talk of oppression is wrong headed in my view.
A portion of muslim women [b]choose[/b] to wear a veil. They do this [i]entirely of their own free will[/i] as an expression of their identity and in keeping with their religious and social beliefs about public modesty.
And they are quite rightly insulted by the notion that they are poor feeble women who must be rescued from their oppressive boorish misogynist husbands by the wise and noble non-muslim westerners.
Now I fully accept that it is possible that a portion of Muslim women in the UK [i]do[/i] feel forced to wear veils and [i]do[/i] feel oppressed by it. But surely that is an entirely different issue?
I'm quite sure there are also women in the UK who feel forced into getting a piercing or a tattoo, whose husbands force them to wear short skirts, or stay at home while he goes to the pub every night. But no one suggests that banning piercings, tattoos, short skirts or pubs is the answer!
I really don't see how introducing a law which says [i]"You need to wear less clothes so we can objectify you properly"[/i] would be a step forward for feminism or freedom.
if women have been living in a society that has conditioned them into making this "free" choice. Is it really a "free" choice?
Without wanting to get too far into the philosophy of free will, the exact same thing could be said for every choice you ever make!
I'm quite sure there are also women in the UK who feel forced into getting a piercing or a tattoo, whose husbands force them to wear short skirts, or stay at home while he goes to the pub every night. But no one suggests that banning piercings, tattoos, short skirts or pubs is the answer!
That's a good point, I guess we're focussing on the symptom, rather than the cause, and also making an assumption that there is a cause that needs to be tackled, when in reality there may not be.
I think it is such an emoptive issue because of the bluntness and obvious segregation of the clothing. Not segregation between genders or cultures, but between the person wearing it and the outside world. The communication barrier the veil creates makes it more emotive than any other kind of clothing and this does more to foster fear/suspicion than anything else.
Without wanting to get too far into the philosophy of free will, the exact same thing could be said for every choice you ever make!
Yeah I realise that. Probably one for another thread eh?!
its a real hot potato innit. personal freedom versus intimidating/offending.
[img] https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/4791746304/hB69DA0BB/ [/img]
I'd personally go with France, that religions should be more like 'a hobby' than an intrinsic part of what you 'are'. trouble is, that doesn't sit well with some religions.
DenDennis - MemberI'd personally go with France, that religions should be more like 'a hobby' than an intrinsic part of what you 'are'. trouble is, that doesn't sit well with [s]some[/s] any religions.
It kind of misses the entire point of religion tbh. I'm not religious but it's nothing at all like a hobby, if you're doing it right, it's a foundation stone of the person you are.
Burkas are an over-zealous interpretation of the Quran anyway, deliberately so in order for the men to continue to subjugate the women in Islamic countries - so I'm all for banning them.
@northwind- exactly,
but who's doing it right?
i know many jews who eat bacon, muslims who drink alcohol and dont always pray 5 times a day.
as an arbiter I think perhaps the most devout should decide-
here's osama aged 15.
[img] 
[/img]
I think I've got that album somewhere.
Just musing
and maybe got my facts all wrong but....
In the 60s weren't bras identified by feminists as implements of sexism for repressing women everywhere? hence bra burning and more than usual jiggling went on for a while until women decided "actually you know what they're not a bad idea"?
kind of is tho isn't it. As junkyard said we've all (mostly, ignoring that kilt stuff) been indoctrinated that skirts are not acceptable leg/bottom wear for blokes. We're all conditioned. Apparently you can't objectively critique other cultures, your own bias will always skew it.That's a different issue altogether.That told me!
first rule of anthropology that DONK or else you end up saying things like this about cultures you know little about.
Burkas are an over-zealous interpretation of the Quran anyway, deliberately so in order for the men to continue to subjugate the women in Islamic countries - so I'm all for banning them.
Re bra burning at a Miss World pageant where they threw female products [ false eyelashes. hair curlers etc- stuff associated with beauty] into a trash can including bras to burn - mimicking vietnam draft dodgers burning their draft cards. The police stopped them actually having a fire. I dont know if it ever happened but it must have somewhere.
kind of is tho isn't it. As junkyard said we've all (mostly, ignoring that kilt stuff) been indoctrinated that skirts are not acceptable leg/bottom wear for blokes. We're all conditioned. Apparently you can't objectively critique other cultures, your own bias will always skew it.
All true DONK. I think though that you can objectively critique other cultures if you're aware of your own bias and if you're willing to have your views challenged by those who have a different perspective. Much like this thread really.
Don't flame me for the source, but a quick Google on braburning:
http://womenshistory.about.com/od/mythsofwomenshistory/a/bra_burning.htm
Not techsavvy enough to make proper links. 🙄
Edit - Oh, it does it automatically! How clever.
Straw man as I never said that
When I gave you a hypothetical example of a ****stani being called a "****" by his mates and then claiming he was fine with it you responded with something along the lines that you would have no problem etc as it was his choice. I on the other hand would find that unacceptable in spite of the fact that he doesnt.
This is an important point and I went on to add later hypothetical examples of victims of forced marriage who thought arranged marriages were a good thing.
The question is if these were real examples (and I could find actual ones) would you think that both practices were acceptable? I for one would not.
Would we find female genital mutilation acceptable if we found victims of it who did?
It would be better if you could explain how you telling them how to dress is the best response to someone telling them how to dress. Can you do that please whilst explaining how it is not a double standard? Should be entertaining.
Well at least you are removing the force/compulsion aspect of your previous argument which you accused me of (but found no evidence of!) but you are creating another straw man. Are you saying that me wanting to remove the compulsion and pressure that women feel to wear a body/face covering is on a equal par with those wanting to force it upon them? Are you saying they are equal evils?
if the veil is banned how are they not forced
I didnt say ban it.
And in the interest of not fueling the argument that you werent creating 🙄 alligning me with the EDL is a really cheap trick but if thats the way you debate.
This term is usually a cover for 'my opinion which I've decided should be shared by everyone else'.
I agree, I take it back 😳
Would we find female genital mutilation acceptable if we found victims of it who did?
Well... it's pretty easy to find victims of [i]male[/i] genital mutilation who seem quite happy about it.
I didnt say ban it.
Okay. Many others have mentioned banning though. If you don't think a ban is the answer (and I don't) then how [i]do[/i] you want [i]"to remove the compulsion and pressure that women feel to wear a body/face covering"[/i]? And what about those women that don't feel forced and wear it through free choice?
alligning me with the EDL is a really cheap trick but if thats the way you debate.
How exactly would you have liked me to make it clearer that I was not doing that 🙄
Face palm
How exactly would you have liked me to make it clearer that I was not doing that
Maybe by not mentioning it? Face palm indeed
Ok next time I will not mention that i am not comparing you to the EDL when I point out they agree with you.
You really are sinking quite low aren't you
I think we both are tbh [ though it was what you said]. It was made explicitly clear I was not comparing you to the EDL so it was quite low and somewhat pointless to bring it up.
Junkers: have you ever attended mosque?
My opinion (and I'm aware it's only an opinion, and mine alone) is that I find the full face covering offensive. It seems totally at odds with equal rights to me.
It seems totally at odds with equal rights to me.
Surely equal rights suggest that it's entirely their choice to cover their face?
Everyone should be naked the way God intended - problem solved (now if someone can only prove the existence of God I win 😀
Anyone want a biscuit? I've got chocolate hob nobs and some ginger oat cookies.
I'm going to have a lot of fun with this thread when I get round to having the time to do so.
DenDennis - Member@northwind- exactly,
but who's doing it right?
i know many jews who eat bacon, muslims who drink alcohol and dont always pray 5 times a day.
And there are lots of christians who borrow or lend, covet their neighbour's wives, etc etc. But what's your point exactly? Some people who claim to be religious suck at it, therefore...
And there are lots of christians who borrow or lend, covet their neighbour's wives, etc etc. But what's your point exactly? Some people who claim to be religious suck at it, therefore...
Pah, that's Old Testament stuff. Christians don't really have to worry about it, that's why we can eat pork, seafood, and arguably play backdoor games without worrying about not getting into heaven. The only real sin is denying the Trinity which is why Jehovah's Witnesses will all burn for eternity.
The poor Muslims and Jews take the OT rules a lot more seriously; The Jews just denied the NT and the Muslims re-wrote the whole lot.
😀
#waves a triclore#
(normally good enough for a xenophobic reaction and more than good enough in this case)
It's not xenophobia to dislike the French, it's just common sense and experience 😉
There is no religious requirement to wear the Burqa. The majority of women in Muslim countries don't wear the Burqa. Covering the face is a mere interpretation of the Koran in the same way that all Christians don't lead a life of celibacy like Nuns and Priests do. So should they choose to wear the Burqa then they should be allowed to, BUT if they do then they shouldn't complain when asked to remove it for the purposes of law and security. Though this should be done respectfully and discretely as a mark of basic respect for a fellow persons belief's. simple.
airport security/ID purposes etc as has been mentioned this is already done, just wondering, I seem to recall on certain demonstrations people with scarves/balaclavas/hoodies obscuring their face police were getting the people to remove them. Do I remember right and if so on what grounds did they request/enforce this? Actually thinking about it it may have been during the riots, when police saw a gang of people walking passed they asked them to uncover their face for the cameras they had setup.BUT if they do then they shouldn't complain when asked to remove it for the purposes of law and security
Also has anyone tried getting through passport control with a none cultural/quasi-religious face covering? (whilst obviously agreeing to remove for purposes of identification)
I hope I'm wrong but I kinda get the feeling that me walking around an airport with a balaclava on might cause a bit of bother. Airport security IME aren't blessed with much of a sense of humour. If we've agreed it's not religious or necessary and it is a muslim woman's [i]choice[/i] to wear a niqab - and is allowed to - then surely anyone else can cover their face if they so choose for whatever reason.
Whilst morally it's more complex I think legally "for shits and giggles" is probably about as good a reason as "it's part of my culture/religion"
I hope I'm wrong but I kinda get the feeling that me walking around an airport with a balaclava on might cause a bit of bother.
The difference is that you have no good reason to wear a balaclava in a bank or airport, unless you skied there and it is below zero inside!
And of course a balaclava has certain cultural connotations of its own, namely terrorism or robbery.
Sorry, a bit late to this party, but I had to pick up on this gem:
Are bikinis banned in Turkey then ? Or is that the wrong sort of Islamic country - did you perhaps mean Saudi Arabia ?
Well it's rather unlikely for anybody to refer to Turkey when they mention an Islamic country, given that it is officially secular. So much so that unlike here they do actually ban the wearing of religious headcover in government buildings, schools and universities.
Which I think makes that argument one of these - well done, ernie:
[img] 
[/img]
And of course a balaclava has certain cultural connotations of its own, namely terrorism or robbery.
The difference being that you're allowed to insult a balaclava wearer (me) by saying that but I'd get flamed for writing the same about a burka wearer.
Are you wearing a balaclava right now Edukator?
The difference being that you're allowed to insult a balaclava wearer (me) by saying that but I'd get flamed for writing the same about a burka wearer.
Do you consider wearing a balaclava an intrinsic part of your cultural identity? Do you wear it all the time?
I would consider the same of someone covering their face for "religious reasons" and as I said cultural reasons should be on the same level legally as "just coz I want to". If you want to do something illegal that is in your culture you'll get short shrift from the law. so presumably if one culture allowed to do something legally in this country another culture can also do the same if they choose.The difference is that you have no good reason to wear a balaclava in a bank or airport,
OK drop the balaclava what if a bloke in jeans and T shirt wore a niqab wandering around the airport.And of course a balaclava has certain cultural connotations of its own
