BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 May 10 - 12:12 PM

Here's a piece on a BBC religion page putting all this in context - with an illustration that rather ties in with something I wrote two posts back.

As Arnie pointed out, full veiling is relatively uncommon among Muslim women in Britain, and indeed in most Muslim countries. Trying to outlaw it would be a very clumsy, and I strongly suspect, a counterproductive, way of responding to it. I would anticipate that one effect could be that many Muslim women who currently dispense with headscarfs might decide to wear one in future as a gesture of defiance to a government that was seen as hostile.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Paul Burke
Date: 02 May 10 - 11:45 AM

Why this sudden urge amongst Muslim women in the West to wear the burqa or niqab anyway?

In some cases at least, a statement of allegiance to a culture (both religious and secular) that is demonised and threatened.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 May 10 - 11:32 AM

Largely tourists from places like Saudi Arabia, I suspect.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Arnie
Date: 02 May 10 - 10:59 AM

Why this sudden urge amongst Muslim women in the West to wear the burqa or niqab anyway? I lived amongst the Bradford Pakistani community in the '70's and never saw a Moslem woman cover up her face. They wore the shalwar kameez and a headscarf and deemed this sufficient. I think that the burqa originates amongst the Wahabbi sect of Islam in Saudi Arabia so why is it now being adopted by Moslem women in the West? What has changed in the attitude of Western Moslems between the '70's and the present day?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: CarolC
Date: 02 May 10 - 09:26 AM

Carol, the point I've been trying to make is that it's exactly the women who don't wish to wear the 'veil' who are totally overlooked in the current controversy.

It certainly doesn't look like that to me, Emma.



"What makes you think you get to decide for others? Your inherent superiority? "

Or their "inherent superiority"?!!!!

Who is "they" in this context?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 May 10 - 08:34 AM

"For what it's worth" in my comment on Riginslinger's post was intended to carry the implication "not a great deal", Emma.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 02 May 10 - 07:31 AM

CS I wish you hadn't posted that link after a leisurely Sunday breakfast! but maybe someone will find it extremely attractive.


I think I did refer way back somewhere to independent young women taking on the full burka as a political/idealogical statement against the intolerance of Islam in our country (generated and fueled by the more rabid end of the media and political parties) to, as I believe, the detriment of other less independent women who may be subjected to pressure to follow their example.

The question of autonomy has been raised but society does have regulations about what constitutes acceptable 'dress'

Naturism or nudism is a cultural and political movement advocating and defending social nudity in private and in public

Although nudism is often practiced in a person's home or garden, either alone or with members of the family and in restricted venues, public nudity in the UK is a 'dress code' which is very restricted and even subject to judicial penalty.

A naked man walking in the streets to advocate public nudity as a right which should be accepted by the rest of society is indeed a political statement -

"The naked rambler, Stephen Gough, has been told he will spend the rest of his life behind bars if he continues refusing to wear clothes in public." - News report 13 Jan 2010

Mr Gough said he accepted he could "potentially" remain in jail forever and added: "This is about individual freedom."

Banning the full burka would indeed be an attack on some individuals freedom (as indeed the imposition of a smoking ban in public was) but 'freedom' has limits defined by common sense and shared values, which also have the right to be protected.


I don't know how many times it is necessary to point out that wearing the all-enveloping outer garment is
                  NOT A RELIGIOUS REQUIREMENT,
but a cultural tradition from Saudi Arabia.

It cannot be justified in the name of religion because nothing requires it.

According to Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi, the dean of Al-Azhar University, the most famous institution of higher learning in the Muslim world, the burqa and the niqab are not Islamic.
Both are a sign of tribal affiliation.
For this reason, he had the full-face veil banned from hundreds of buildings that come under al-Azhar's jurisdiction.

Gamal al-Banna, brother of Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, wrote a book and signed several articles in which he argued that the Qur'an does not require Muslim women to wear the veil.

Islam advocates 'modest' dress for men AND women If the full-face veil were the best way to practice modesty, WHY ARE MEN NOT WEARING IT?

We must identify what is best in Western AND Islamic civilisations and what is less so.

I agree with Samir Khalil Samir's conclusion that
"Such work of understanding must be done jointly, in a cultural, ethical and spiritual dialogue that includes everyone (agnostics and non-believers as well, since ethics and spirituality are not a preserve of believers alone)."

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 02 May 10 - 03:30 AM

For people who don't know: What's being talked about here.

The western equivalent

Either Em or a commentator she quoted compared extreme Western "ideals" and the burka as representing two extreme ends of the same spectrum, I'd say they occupy exactly the *same* end of that spectrum, with extreme conformity to a rigid cultural ideal of how a woman 'aught' to look and why, and genuine non-conformity and individualistic self-expression on the other. The Western equivalent of the burka would be the prevailing trend for young Western women to coerce their flesh into lookeelikee blow up plastic sex dolls.
Though none of this discussion has so-far touched on the burka as a *political symbol* rather than a religious one - which is where the similarity ends.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 01 May 10 - 08:18 PM

Kevin - I don't often resort to 'language' on this forum but really

For fuck's sake am I totally wasting my time?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 May 10 - 08:13 PM

For what it's worth, being veiled need not in any way stop a woman from looking extremely attractive. In fact it can work the other way.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 May 10 - 08:03 PM

"What makes you think you get to decide for others? Your inherent superiority? "

Or their "inherent superiority"?!!!!

(cough, cough)...

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:59 PM

Carol, the point I've been trying to make is that it's exactly the women who don't wish to wear the 'veil' who are totally overlooked in the current controversy.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Riginslinger
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:54 PM

Well, I say women are supposed to look sexy. How can they look sexy if they're running aroud zipped up in a sleeping bag?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: CarolC
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:53 PM

I'm not dismissing the women you've been listening to, Emma. I'm offering a perspective coming from other women who have just as much right to be heard, and to deny them that right, to dismiss what they have to say, is no more right than dismissing what the women you've been listening to have to say. You don't have all of the moral high ground on your side. Only some of it.


So you really believe people should do anything they feel is good for them? Unlimited cigarettes, booze, heroin, open slather. The takers of such material will happily tell you (cough, cough) that they feel it doing them good...

Foolestroupe, your argument cuts both ways. A person who has a different idea of what is good for you might argue that you shouldn't be allowed to decide for yourself what is good for you, and they might think they should be able force you to wear saffron colored robes and eat nothing but tofu, for instance. What makes you think you get to decide for others? Your inherent superiority?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:26 PM

Carol, I agree with you on many issues but not your easy dismissal of the views of the Muslim women I have quoted and those I know personally and whose views 'I' respect too.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:16 PM

Daily Mail article on the Muslim cocktail waitress. The Daily Mail tends to put as "spin" on things, so I'm not sure I'd trust them. The timesonline story was a little less sensationalistic. Note that the court award was relatively small, much less than the plaintiff demanded.

When I arrived in London, there were two women in Muslim dress among the immigration inspectors, and that gave me a favorable impression of the diversity of culture in the UK. In the US, the inspectors would have been in uniform, and Muslim dress would have been inappropriate.

The Reuters article the first post referred to, indicates that Muslim headscarves are being banned or restricted in many countries in Europe - not just veils. There seems to be a valid security reason for banning veils that obscure the face, but if the ban refers to headscarves or anything that does not cover the face, I think that's going too far.

There are high schools in the US that ban colors that are associated with certain gangs - that kind of ban makes me nervous, too. I think I look sexy in red plaid, and I hate to give up my last claim to sex appeal.

Yes, Arab countries and certain others may be very restrictive about the dress people can wear - but I don't think we can use their practices to justify our own. I don't want to adopt their system of punishment for crime, either.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:12 PM

"The idea that it is an essential part of Western culture for a woman to keep the face uncovered, and that it is disrespectful to be veiled is a pretty new one. The Victorians would have found it very peculiar."

Haha! Which was a new & pretentious idea at the Victorian time, promoted by the rich as a form of conspicuous consumption to make all the poor feel the superior/worthless divide.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:09 PM

"I think the attitude that (people) don't know what's good for them is profoundly patronizing. "

So you really believe people should do anything they feel is good for them? Unlimited cigarettes, booze, heroin, open slather. The takers of such material will happily tell you (cough, cough) that they feel it doing them good...

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: CarolC
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:00 PM

Emma, I know women who were born and raised in the US, who are of European ancestry, and who have converted to Islam; single women, who don't have any men telling them what to do, who are extremely upset with laws like the one in Belgium. I know women who are from Muslim countries, who are themselves Muslim, who are very upset by laws like the one in Belgium. I think your understanding of Islam is very limited by your Western way of looking at things. I think the attitude that such women don't know what's good for them is profoundly patronizing.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 May 10 - 06:43 PM

The idea that it is an essential part of Western culture for a woman to keep the face uncovered, and that it is disrespectful to be veiled is a pretty new one. The Victorians would have found it very peculiar.

There are always ways round this kind of law anyway. Ban veils and an even more effective way of hiding the face could be something like these visor sunglasses

How long before someone decides that full beards shouldn't be allowed? (Already they seem to be a surefire way of ensuring you get searched at airports etc...)

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Paul Burke
Date: 01 May 10 - 06:38 PM

Most probably do. You don't have any data about how many women would like to cover up, but don't.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 May 10 - 06:16 PM

"If you force a woman to wear a burka when she doesn't want to, you are violating her autonomy.

If you force a woman NOT to wear a burka when she DOESN't want to, you are violating her autonomy."

QUOTE
So when Western women visit an area where wearing such visually blocking costume is the norm, they mostly comply out of respect for that culture - it puts people there at their ease.

So why, when in the West, .... is it so wrong to ask for a little cultural respect in return?
UNQUOTE

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in BelgiumLondon club
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 May 10 - 04:46 PM

These things vary with time and place.

The Duke of Wellington (the Battle of Waterloo victor) was barred from a London club for having the nerve to turn up wearing trousers.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 01 May 10 - 03:33 PM

I think in the US most of us are descended from immigrants, many of whom wore long heavy outfits, embarassed their children etc. Some old world parents were very restrictive in what their children could wear etc. But we in the US at least should ask ourselves what rules should have been made that our grandparents would have had to follow -- should they have had to give up their national dress, forgo what they considered modest dress in their daughters? How much authority in a patriarchal immigrant culture should men have to immediately give up? We have seen in PNW family tragedies where men could not discipline their children and the children turned to gangs etc. It is complex. Who is to say you can't be a Dukabor or whatever and dress what we would consider funny? Should we legislate their clothing? THe Amish? They might get hot in those dresses? Or the men might get hot in their outfits too. At some point we have to let people decide..the point is where it interferes with public safety, not the point at which it interferes with public desire to stomp on religious looking attire. I do think that really specific symbols, like crucifixes, etc. should be worn under the clothing, but the clothing itself, free of other symbols, should be a person's choice, or a culture's choice, and it probably won't last long but will tend to the majority fashion etc. quite quickly. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 May 10 - 02:43 PM

It's a pretty safe bet that any kind of ban like this against a custom of a minority will in practice be felt as oppressive, and those most strongly in favour of it will include those who intend it that way.

It's true enough that some of the women who follow this custom will not be doing so as a matter of free choice, but because of pressure by others.   The same is also true of the more extreme examples of attire at the opposite extreme. The underlying sickness is a social pattrern of coercion.

You don't get rid of a disease by legislating against its symptoms.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: mg
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:33 PM

Reasons I buy:
1. National security -- too easy to conceal weapons, can disguise men, known terrorists etc.
2. Safety -- especially not safe around machinery, flames, cooking. Harder for drivers to see at night.
3. Health -- if out too much, not enough sun, fresh air. Eye problems if eyes covered.
4. Too hot, restrictive etc.
5. If women are truly abused by it, go after abusers.

Reasons I do not buy.
1. Well, it is not in the Quoran. Oh well, wearing big flowerly hats is not in the Bible, but they wear them to some Baptist churches. Lavendar dresses are not in the Book of Mormon but they wear them. It is hard to separate a monoculture from its religion. THey get very entertwined.
2. It is sexist. Probably, but some are choosing to do this and some are probably forced.
3. We know best in all these situations. No, not really. And who will be next and what symbol will be next?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Paul Burke
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:32 PM

There's no "objective truth" about dress, and the only science involved is that of insulation, protection from (solar) radiation and weather, and sexual selection. As for "a barrier between women and the wider world", why shouldn't women (or anyone else) set up such a barrier if they want to?

If you force a woman to wear a burka when she doesn't want to, you are violating her autonomy.

If you force a woman NOT to wear a burka when she DOESt want to, you are violating her autonomy.

I'm against violating people's autonomy as far as possible.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:32 PM

Women Like You

THREAD DRIFT:

Anyone in the Manchester area interested in the history of women's lives aught to check this exhibit. I found the photographic mosaic of Emmeline Pankhurst both visually impressive and strongly emotionally affecting.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Stringsinger
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:31 PM

What is the British way of life? What story is Tory?

Women need to be freed from the chains of religion. Quite true.

Not religious beliefs? Cultural as opposed to religious practices. I don't think so.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:15 PM

The Quran does NOT specifically mention the Burka or tell women to wear such extremely confining clothes.

Instead, it instructs men AND women to dress and behave modestly in society.

The word Burka is not to be found anywhere in the Quran
The Arabic word Hijab 'can' be translated into veil or yashmak but other meanings for the word include screen, barrier, cover(ing), mantle, curtain, drapes, partition, division, divider etc.

The word "Hijab" appears in the Qur'an seven times, five of them as "Hijab" and twice as "Hijaban".

None of these "Hijab" words are used in the Qur'an in reference to what the traditional Muslims call today "the dress code for Muslim woman".
Hijab in the Qur'an has nothing to do with a woman's dress code!


Chris Khalil Moore is a convert to Islam who began a spiritual journey of discovery of his faith which took him to Saudi Arabia and other countries.

He writes in "The Burqa – Islamic or Cultural?"

"It is a crime that so many men who have coaxed, or pressured, or demanded that their women wear the burqa, or that their daughters wear a hijab prematurely, are most probably unable or unwilling to read The Quran and uphold its tenants, being totally dependent on the interpretations incorrectly preached to them by immoderate clerics and cultural exhortations not based in pure religion."


And so we have a conflict between two principles – respect for a cultural minority - NOT religious beliefs - and respect for women's equality.

Polly Toynbee, a British journalist and writer, observed on a visit to Kabul

"The veil turns women into things.
It was shocking to find on the streets of Kabul that invisible women behind burkas are not treated with special respect.
On the contrary, they are pushed and shoved off pavements by men, jostled aside as if almost subhuman without the face-to-face contact that recognises common humanity."

She argues that you can't have the concealment without the reification – the concealment is reification, 'erasure of every recognizable attribute of the human, leaving only anonymous amorphous colourless interchangeable blocks of fabric'

Ophelia Benson, whose books and website deal with the necessity of defending objective and scientific truth against the threats to rational thinking allegedly posed by religious fundamentalism, pseudoscience, wishful thinking etc concludes

"It's not just a neutral religious symbol, it's not just a sign of devoutness, it's not just a 'choice,' it's a barrier between women and the wider world.
That's why sensitive liberals need to give up pretending otherwise."

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: bobad
Date: 01 May 10 - 12:34 PM

Afghan feminists fighting from under the burqa

Feminists in Afghanistan are forced to operate as underground movement, often using the burqa as a convenient disguise


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/30/afghanistan-women-feminists-burqa

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Stringsinger
Date: 01 May 10 - 12:32 PM

As an American, I am a proponent of the Separation of Church and State. For this reason,
I see no reason for a religious expression to be completely banned. At the same time, I deplore the suppression of women for which it represents. The problem is when someone wears an article of clothing that represents a religious point of view in a public forum such as in a government function, this impinges on the Separation. I am opposed to this.

Still, we live in a country that ostensibly recognizes the right of anyone to believe whatever they like in a religious context as long as that belief doesn't affect the rights of others who don't. The burqua in the U.S. is and should remain an issue of choice as long as elected representatives in office don't wear it at official governmental public functions. I feel the same way about the ostentatious Christian crosses or yamulkes. Religion is and should be a private matter. Elected public officials are supposed to represent all of the people and not the few in a religious order. There is a place that is appropriate for such attire. Perhaps on the street or in markets but not at political or governmental functions.

The burqua to me represents a reprehensible imprisonment of women by religious edicts.

Still, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." If people want to wear a replica of an electric chair or a hangman's noose around their neck, it's their prerogative as long as it is not endorsed
by government in any way.



I

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 01 May 10 - 12:23 PM

"the impact of the ban on ALL women - including the Muslim women who want to resist cultural or 'moral' compulsion to wear the 'coffin-like' burka"

Apart from my personal reaction to it - which is as previously stated, essentially a gut reaction in the same way I might respond to other cultural practices as say FGM or foot binding - I think this is very much the key issue for me. I recall some time ago discussions concerning banning the burka or veil on some University campuses, in order to protect Muslim women from the ABUSE that they were receiving for failing to don "modest" Islamic dress from their male Muslim peers.

As far as an outright ban in the general street, I couldn't personally support that any more than I could a ban on women getting breast implants to do titty pics. I'm not well read on feminist lit. at all, but I do find many of these issues quite troubling - which is basically all I said in response to the thread in my last post.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 01 May 10 - 12:01 PM

Carol, I have heard a great deal about the importance of preserving the choice of women who want to wear the burka from a number of perspectives, 'feminist' 'liberal' etc

However, in any community, the choices of some people have a definite impact on the lives of others for example the 'freedom' to smoke in public places

Many Muslim woman do not wear the burka or even the ḥijâb but have voiced their concern that the constant reference in liberal media to those women who choose to wear it has made it increasingly difficult for countless Muslim women to express their discomfort with it as outright criticism of the garment has been portrayed as an intolerant attack on Islam as well as the Muslim women who do wear it.

In some societies the burka is a part of a range of laws and policies designed to suppress women and they are punished severely for not wearing it

The argument is that for those in the west who choose to wear the veil, the garment is a choice, not a tool of suppression.

This argument obscures the fact that there is pervasive, sexist propaganda in many communities, even in the West, and many women are vulnerable to this propaganda and their so-called 'choice' to wear a burka may not be the result of independent, informed decision-making.

Even this independent informed decision making choice however is not carried out in a social vacumn; many women, who are seldom considered in these kind of discussions, may be trying to resist pressures from their relatives, religious extremists in their community or governments and this is undermined when the burka becomes increasingly common in public places

In any discussion of a ban, an important consideration IMO must be the impact of the ban on ALL women - including the Muslim women who want to resist cultural or 'moral' compulsion to wear the 'coffin-like' burka

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: CarolC
Date: 01 May 10 - 11:28 AM

Telling women they can't wear a burka if they want to is paternalistic in the extreme. That's not feminism. It's the opposite of feminism.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 01 May 10 - 10:09 AM

Thank you Backwoodsman but far more authoritatively expressed than mine are the views of the Egyptian-born columnist and lecturer Mona Eltahawy who is a Muslim

"I am appalled to hear the defence of the niqab or burka in Europe.

A bizarre political correctness has tied the tongues of those who would normally rally to defend women's rights but who are now instead sacrificing those very rights in the name of fighting an increasingly powerful right wing.

What is lost in those arguments is that the ideology that promotes the niqab (the total body covering that leaves just the eyes exposed) and the burka (the garment which covers the eyes with a mesh) does not believe in the concept of women's rights to begin with.

It is an ideology that describes women alternately as candy, a diamond ring or a precious stone that needs to be hidden to prove her "worth".
That is not a message Muslims learn in our holy book, the Qur'an, nor is the face veil prescribed by the majority of Muslim scholars.

It is instead a pillar of the ultra-conservative interpretation of Islam known as Salafism.
It is associated with Saudi Arabia, where I spent most of my adolescence and where it is clear that women are effectively perpetual children, forbidden as they are from driving, from travelling alone and from even the simplest of surgical procedures without the permission of a male "guardian".

The racism and discrimination that Muslim minorities face in many countries — such as France, which has the largest Muslim community in Europe, and Britain, where two members of the xenophobic British National party were shamefully elected to the European parliament — are very real.

But the silence of the left wing and liberals isn't the way to fight it.

The best way to support Muslim women would be to say we oppose both the racist right wing and the niqabs and burkas which are products of what I call the Muslim right wing.
Women should not be sacrificed to either"


In the same article
Stephanie Street, a non muslim British actor and playwright opposes any ban but nevertheless concedes that -

'There is no denying that in certain countries the burqa is a manifestation of the oppression of women, but in the west it is nearly always worn out of choice.'

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 May 10 - 08:57 AM

Thankyou Emma. Eloquently and elegantly put.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 01 May 10 - 08:23 AM

People, male and female, other than myself have pointed out that Bikini or Burka – both are symbols of societies obsessed with a woman's body as the sole indicator of her worth, and are both opposing sides of the same coin of female stereotyping

Amongst the number of depressing studies that show many of our children's aspiration is to become a 'celebrity' are those showing that more young girls want to be glamour models than anything more vaguely worthwhile
(At least padded Bikini tops aimed at 7 year olds have recently been removed from a major clothing store following long overdue public condemnation)

Well of course taking your kit off and posing topless on page three is, as I have heard the arguments many times, a woman's 'choice'
But, if you are conditioned from a young age with sexualising merchandize and clothing maybe any 'choice' is tailored to fit and reflect the prevailing 'culture' and the women who follow this 'aspiration' maybe really are unaware of the demeaning objectification of women it bestows on others of their sex or simply don't care about the wider implications of their 'choice' in pursuing their own agenda

As Paul has commented we have had many heated discussions about the subject of the full burka and he has pointed out that an insensitive approach to another culture (lets get this right the burka is a cultural expectation and not a religious one) has, in some instances, produced a polarization one effect of which is that full veils have become a means of protesting against intolerance in our communities for some independent young women.

Similarly to the barbaric practice of female genital mutilation (now illegal in the UK), although fortunately not so permanently, the burka does however represent the exercise of control over most women.
It renders them 'invisibale' and restricts their opportunity for almost any social activity or occupation outside of the home

The 'West' construes the exhibition of the female body as a sign of 'liberation', with an equally stubborn blindness to how such sexualisation debases women.

Both versions are replete with perpetuated untruths .

'Just as a woman in a burka is complicit in the lie that the female form is the source of discord, so is the woman who displays her body complicit in demeaning it to a mere sexual object.'

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:59 AM

"I addressed the dark glasses - and my post is now missing. "

Oops! going blind...

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:56 AM

I addressed the dark glasses - and my post is now missing.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:34 AM

Where did bearded bruce get the notion that Saudi Arabia is not generally regarded, even by people who would defend the right of women to wear what they choose, as a sexist and racist country?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 May 10 - 05:39 AM

And STILL no one's addressed the dark glasses.

I did! I think there are certain circumstances in which facial recognotion is a must and they should therefore be banned in those circumstances. They should be allowed, like the burka and any other sort of fasion item, in day to day life.

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: goatfell
Date: 01 May 10 - 02:37 AM

according to the koran the wearing of the burka or veil is not mentioned so these women are obaying man's code of dress instead of God.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 01 May 10 - 02:21 AM

I still have no problem with the covering of the face. I would hope it would force me to attend to what the woman was saying to me more keenly and not be distracted by what she looks like.

There is one possible problem in a face to face conversation. The importance of facial expression to help one understand the speaker's intent, especially if lingual differences on inflections might cause misunderstanding.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:40 AM

Oh Carol, you are such a fo-o-ol!
Oh Carol, why you treat me cruel!

:-0

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: CarolC
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:37 AM

I'm sober enough now to remember that I've never had a police ID shot.

Are you trying to say, Foolestroup, that what is being discussed here is only making Muslim women who are covered up reveal themselves for ID photoes, rather than banning the wearing such coverings entirely?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:09 AM

"being incredibly dishonest for the reason already stated involving sunglasses."

For various reasons, people ARE asked to remove them for various identification purposes - or weren't you sober enough to remember your last police id photo shot? :-P

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: CarolC
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 11:03 PM

I saw a video recently of a solution some Muslim women have found to the problem of being asked to remove the part of their clothing that covers the bottom half of their faces. They wear a surgical mask under it, and when they take off the cloth that covers the lower part of their face, the surgical mask is there to protect their modesty. Wearing a surgical mask has not yet been made illegal. And I agree that anyone who pretends that we in the West have a cultural need to see everyone's eyes, they're being incredibly dishonest for the reason already stated involving sunglasses.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Sorcha
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 10:25 PM

Well, I'm agin it, but I'm agin going buck nekkid on the High Street to. However, I'm too tired to argue about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 10:07 PM

I addressed the issue of those wrap around sunglasses.

:)

biLL