Is there a difference between the veil & a balaclava

wilson10

It looks like the french may bring in a total ban in public places on the veil worn by some muslim women.

I've never seen it worn in Ireland but my opinion on the matter would be that no one, while hiding their face, should have the right to pressure someone to interact with them, as in shopping, teaching or even asking directions.

I don't think a guy would get very far down the street wearing a balaclave without being interviewed by the forces of law & order.

I'm rarely in Dublin so I just wondered if it's ever seen on the street & how people feel about it.

I'm not trying to start an anti muslim thread, it's just that I sympathise with the French and the dilemma they find themselves facing and I would have very strong feelings about it if it became commonplace here.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100115/ap_on_re_eu/eu_france_forbidding_the_veil

galwayrush

You probably have started another anti Muslim thread, :rolleyes:

MaybeLogic

There's been no terrorist attacks in France.
What's the dilemma?

El Weirdo

Among other things, they are spelt differently.

Hande hoche!

Balacava is far better for cold weather.

Dartz

Yeah, wear a balaclava in a petrol station and they pay you.

Liam Byrne

There's no real use for a balaclava, unless you're on a snowmobile in Lapland.

A more relevant question would be whether there's a difference between a hoodie and a veil.

brummytom

I see veils everyday here. To be completely honest, it's un-nerving. Not being able to see someone's face as you stand in front of them always makes me feel uneasy.

Also, you never know who's wearing it - like one of those blokes who tried to blow up a tube train the a fortnight after the 7/7/5 attacks, he escaped wearing the full burqa. I'm not really anti-muslim; but it really does, from great experience, create an unneccessary barrier.

Balaclavas serve the same purpose.. to create a barrier and hide what's underneath. Veils are more of a cultural thing than a religious.

Mike 1972

wilson10 wrote: »

the veil worn by some muslim women.

I think you mean the Burqua

MaybeLogic wrote: »

There's been no terrorist attacks in France.

Cough Cough

wilson10 wrote: »

one, while hiding their face, should have the right to pressure someone to interact with them, as in shopping, teaching or even asking directions.

Noone can pressure someone to interact with them veil or no veil

galwayrush wrote: »

You probably have started another anti Muslim thread, :rolleyes:

Actually we had a bun fight thread on this exact subject about a fortnight ago. Standby for all the same well worn arguments, trolling and half-baked drivel all over again............................:rolleyes:

wilson10

MaybeLogic wrote: »

There's been no terrorist attacks in France.
What's the dilemma?

I didn't say anything about terrorism.

If you're stood in a bank & 2 people walk in totally covered from head to toe, you don't even know what gender they are.

Would you have cause to feel a bit uneasy.

MaybeLogic

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Cough Cough

Muslim attacks,then.
Meaning there's no security reason to ban the veil.
They're doing it because they don't like it,
It would be like us banning the Africans from wearing those really bright clothes some of them wear on a Sunday,on some madeup pretext,like they're a traffic hazard or something.

El Weirdo

wilson10 wrote: »

I didn't say anything about terrorism.

If you're stood in a bank & 2 people walk in totally covered from head to toe, you don't even know what gender they are.

Would you have cause to feel a bit uneasy.

Only if you're planning to ride them.

MaybeLogic

wilson10 wrote: »

I didn't say anything about terrorism.

If you're stood in a bank & 2 people walk in totally covered from head to toe, you don't even know what gender they are.

Would you have cause to feel a bit uneasy.

Why?
No. I wouldn't.

brummytom

MaybeLogic wrote: »

Muslim attacks,then.
Meaning there's no security reason to ban the veil.
They're doing it because they don't like it,
It would be like us banning the Africans from wearing those really bright clothes some of them wear on a Sunday,on some madeup pretext,like they're a traffic hazard or something.

They create a barrier, they really do.

It's very hard to communicate with someone when they're completely covered

Liam Byrne

MaybeLogic wrote: »

It would be like us banning the Africans from wearing those really bright clothes some of them wear on a Sunday,on some madeup pretext,like they're a traffic hazard or something.

Brightly coloured clothes don't make you unrecognisable.

And before anyone goes off on a Muslim/terrorist rant, remember that motorcyclists are not allowed to wear their helmets for the the exact same reason.....that doesn't mean that they assume all motorcyclists are calling in for a hold-up, and motorcyclists don't object or demand their "rights".

MaybeLogic

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Brightly coloured clothes don't make you unrecognisable.

And before anyone goes off on a Muslim/terrorist rant, remember that motorcyclists are not allowed to wear their helmets for the the exact same reason.....that doesn't mean that they assume all motorcyclists are calling in for a hold-up, and motorcyclists don't object or demand their "rights".

OK.
But I don't think the women ,who live a very traditional lifestyle,actually do the banking. But I see your point.
AFAIK provisions are made when Muslim women ave to deal with bureaucracy ,they go in to an office ,where they must unveil themselves for recognition.

jenga-jen

Balaclava's a bit more unisex. Any lad in a veil is gonna be in trouble...

They're a pain in the arse those veils/burqas though, working in Dublin Airport we'd have to bring the wives into the bathroom to check their passports cos they can't show their faces in public

Mike 1972

Liam Byrne wrote: »

motorcyclists are not allowed to wear their helmets for the the exact same reason......

There is no law that says a motorcyclist cannot weat their helmet in the street should they choose to do so.

Some business premises require motorists to remove their hemets before entering but this is an entirely private matter.

humberklog

It's impossible to avoid the terrorist angle. Could you imagine the IRA giving a 6 volley burial salute wearing veils?


Balaclavas FTW.

brianthebard

MaybeLogic wrote: »

Muslim attacks,then.
Meaning there's no security reason to ban the veil.
They're doing it because they don't like it,
It would be like us banning the Africans from wearing those really bright clothes some of them wear on a Sunday,on some madeup pretext,like they're a traffic hazard or something.

They're being banned under France's ultra-secularist laws, if said brightly coloured clothes were also religious items they would probably also be banned. Imo France's idea of secularism goes too far, subjugating everyone to an idealised concept of french citizenship first ahead of their personal identity. At the same time burqas and similar traditional garb from the middle east are needlessly repressive, compared to a simple head scarf which is permissible in some Muslim societies.

Liam Byrne

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Some business premises require motorists to remove their hemets before entering but this is an entirely private matter.

That's what I was getting at; it's required, and it doesn't infringe on their "rights", but they can be barred if they don't comply.

The same rule should apply.

I will say that if Muslim women are singled out in public then it should apply across the board - including teens wearing hoodies up when it's not cold or raining.

El Weirdo

Liam Byrne wrote: »

That's what I was getting at; it's required, and it doesn't infringe on their "rights", but they can be barred if they don't comply.

The same rule should apply.

I will say that if Muslim women are singled out in public then it should apply across the board - including teens wearing hoodies up when it's not cold or raining.

What temperature would it have to be before you were allowed to put your hood up?

Liam Byrne

El Weirdo wrote: »

What temperature would it have to be before you were allowed to put your hood up?

That I can't say; I only added those as an acknowledgement that hoods aren't always inappropriate.

MaybeLogic

brianthebard wrote: »

They're being banned under France's ultra-secularist laws, if said brightly coloured clothes were also religious items they would probably also be banned. Imo France's idea of secularism goes too far, subjugating everyone to an idealised concept of french citizenship first ahead of their personal identity. At the same time burqas and similar traditional garb from the middle east are needlessly repressive, compared to a simple head scarf which is permissible in some Muslim societies.

Well why are they banning them only now?

donkey balls

slightly off topic i remember a couple of years ago my mates kids were in blanchardstown centre doing there shoping when this muslim couple got into the lift my mates youngest kid asked out loud mammy are they dressing up for halloween.

PCPhoto

Liam Byrne wrote: »

There's no real use for a balaclava, unless you're on a snowmobile in Lapland.

A more relevant question would be whether there's a difference between a hoodie and a veil.

I'm sure most bikers would disagree ..... bally and neck gator are pretty much essential for cold mornings.

brianthebard

MaybeLogic wrote: »

Well why are they banning them only now?

Because a rising immigrant population has brought a knee jerk reaction from the French government?
Maybe Sarkozy's car was egged by teens.

Odysseus

PCPhoto wrote: »

I'm sure most bikers would disagree ..... bally and neck gator are pretty much essential for cold mornings.

Yep I wear two, a wollen one and a thermal one over that.

MaybeLogic

brummytom wrote: »

They create a barrier, they really do.

It's very hard to communicate with someone when they're completely covered

Why not?
You're communicating with me now. You can't see me.
You communicate with people on the phone as well when you can't see them.
At least with a burka you get a pair of eyes, so there's a little more information and you get a sense of hand gestures and posture.
That should make communication easier.

brummytom

MaybeLogic wrote: »

Why not?
You're communicating with me now. You can't see me.
You communicate with people on the phone as well when you can't see them.
At least with a burka you get a pair of eyes, so there's a little more information and you get a sense of hand gestures and posture.
That should make communication easier.

Yeah, I completely understand where you're coming from.

I can't think how to say what I mean. Talking via the internet is a completely different form of communication altogether. We can't gage emotion, expression or sarcasm in the way we can face-to-face. Say you go to a bank, or post-office, or train station. You're talking to a person face to face, but through either a microphone or a small slot in the plastic aren't you? It's a very strange sort of communication, it's not quite natural.

Heh, maybe it's just me. I find talking to women in burqas very disconcerting, but that's just my opinion.

starbelgrade

France have, in my opinion, every right to ban the wearing of the veil. Islamic Law does not require women to wear a veil and cover their faces in public.

The Quran enjoins both men and women to dress modestly & expects both men & women to cover their bodies from the ankles to the neck and the arms above the elbow.

Many Islamic fundamentalist movements believe their religion prescribes the covering of women's faces - and they are in the headlines in one country or another almost very week for punishing women who fail to wear what they consider to be proper Islamic dress. But that is largely a political statement.

Islam itself merely prescribes modesty rather than actually forcing the wearing of a particular garment.

A woman wearing baggy jeans, a jumper and an unobtrusive scarf in a Western country could be more in accordance with the spirit of Islamic law than another woman who wore the full costume of an alien culture.

mrDerek

im totally for this ban and i commend the french for it.
when i was over in asia most notably maylasia muslims were wearing them everywhere.
i felt it was so demeaning
it was near 40 degree weather and these poor women had to wear these stupid things :mad:
also i was in TGI fridays over there and there was a family and the poor woman had to angle the fork awkwardly to fit undernear the veil type thing.
they are just pure unnerving them things.

MaybeLogic

brummytom wrote: »

Yeah, I completely understand where you're coming from.

I can't think how to say what I mean. Talking via the internet is a completely different form of communication altogether. We can't gage emotion, expression or sarcasm in the way we can face-to-face. Say you go to a bank, or post-office, or train station. You're talking to a person face to face, but through either a microphone or a small slot in the plastic aren't you? It's a very strange sort of communication, it's not quite natural.

Heh, maybe it's just me. I find talking to women in burqas very disconcerting, but that's just my opinion.

It's just your conditioned response to how you feel about Muslims.
Why stress it?
I think something like 250 people have died in terrorist terrorist attacks in Europe since 2007,is it?
More people die every year just in Ireland from car crashes to pick just one example.

brummytom

MaybeLogic wrote: »

It's just your conditioned response to how you feel about Muslims.

To be quite frank, it is.

I'm told it's now racist to seek assimilation; something I find ridiculous. Birmingham is an incredibly multi-cultural city; which, yes, has it's positive and negatives points.

Hindus and Sikhs, in general, have assimilated. They've settled into areas and became part of the community along with their white and black neighbours. Muslims haven't. Muslims have created ghettos in the city (two places in particular, Shard End and Small Heath). These places aren't safe, believe me. Central Government Laws are ignored and more Sharia Law favoured. There is no feeling of they being part of a community, they are their own community. There's "them and us". That's honestly not racist, that's the truth.

These veils are just one more way to further perpetuate this "them and us" feeling. It's not helpful, and it will certainly lead to trouble.

MaybeLogic

brummytom wrote: »

To be quite frank, it is.

I'm told it's now racist to seek assimilation; something I find ridiculous. Birmingham is an incredibly multi-cultural city; which, yes, has it's positive and negatives points.

Hindus and Sikhs, in general, have assimilated. They've settled into areas and became part of the community along with their white and black neighbours. Muslims haven't. Muslims have created ghettos in the city (two places in particular, Shard End and Small Heath). These places aren't safe, believe me. Central Government Laws are ignored and more Sharia Law favoured. There is no feeling of they being part of a community, they are their own community. There's "them and us". That's honestly not racist, that's the truth.

These veils are just one more way to further perpetuate this "them and us" feeling. It's not helpful, and it will certainly lead to trouble.

We have ghettoes here as well. Also not safe.
The natives from there wear bizarre clothing too. Tracksuits and stripey t-shirts. Sometimes with hoods.
I find it disconcerting to be in their presence and I find it hard to communicate with them.

humberklog

A picture of their face printed on the material would be handy. That way you could consider whether she's hot and worth being polite to.

starbelgrade

humberklog wrote: »

A picture of their face printed on the material would be handy. That way you could consider whether she's hot and worth being polite to.

As ugly people don't deserve commom courtesy?

humberklog

MaybeLogic wrote: »

We have ghettoes here as well. Also not safe.
The natives from there wear bizarre clothing too. Tracksuits and stripey t-shirts. Sometimes with hoods.
I find it disconcerting to be in their presence and I find it hard to communicate with them.

Really? Where? Now in fairness Tom named the effected areas as he sees it. If your making a comparison then name some areas as I'm srtruggling to make the same comparison as you have.
(I've been through one of the areas Tom mentioned).

humberklog

starbelgrade wrote: »

As ugly people don't deserve commom courtesy?

Yes.

Dudess

I tend to play devil's advocate when it comes to this issue: on the one hand, I understand to a degree the perspective that it's not unreasonable to expect a person to abide somewhat by the local culture (e.g. if I was living in Dubai, I wouldn't be wearing a short skirt etc - although that's more due to coercion rather than respect), on the other: I think it's a bit ironic of France to be so preoccupied with "freedom" that it clamps down on the freedom of others to wear their traditional dress (sure, it symbolises repression of women, but that's very easy for us in the West to say - look at it from the perspective of those women who have been indoctrinated into that culture for millennia... not something that can just be brushed aside, even if it is repressing them).

Generally speaking, I'd only be in favour of a banning of those customs which cause physical harm - e.g. genital mutilation (there is male GM as well as female).

anniehoo

MaybeLogic wrote: »

The natives from there wear bizarre clothing too. Tracksuits and stripey t-shirts. Sometimes with hoods.

Christ sometimes AH annoys me with responses like yours. A 16 year old lad responds with a highly intelligent and informative post and you respond with ....that.

dvpower

brummytom wrote: »

I can't think how to say what I mean. Talking via the internet is a completely different form of communication altogether. We can't gage emotion, expression or sarcasm in the way we can face-to-face.

We should just make them all carry a comprehensive range of emoticons. Problem solved.

humberklog

dvpower wrote: »

We should just make them all carry a comprehensive range of emoticons. Problem solved.

Smiley lollipops. They can hold them up each time they want to express an emotion:rolleyes::o:eek:P:pac::cool::):D:p;)

MaybeLogic

anniehoo wrote: »

Christ sometimes AH annoys me with responses like yours. A 16 year old lad responds with a highly intelligent and informative post and you respond with ....that.

I'm making the point that some people feel the way he does about Muslims from a ghetto the way some people feel when they encounter people here ,dressed in a certain way, from our ghettoes. Making the point that it mightn't really be anything to do with any particular religion or culture.
What exactly is your issue with the post?

starbelgrade

Dudess wrote: »

I think it's a bit ironic of France to be so preoccupied with "freedom" that it clamps down on the freedom of others to wear their traditional dress

As I pointed out in a previous post, the wearing of the veil is neither part of the traditional dress nor Islamic Law, but has only been enforced by fundamentalist Islamics.

humberklog

starbelgrade wrote: »

As I pointed out in a previous post, the wearing of the veil is neither part of the traditional dress nor Islamic Law, but has only been enforced by fundamentalist Islamics.

That's a bit over-simplified though isn't it? It has for some muslims evolved into a strong tradition.

Like celebacy for catholic priests.

Dudess

starbelgrade wrote: »

As I pointed out in a previous post, the wearing of the veil is neither part of the traditional dress nor Islamic Law, but has only been enforced by fundamentalist Islamics.

I'm not disputing that, but when it's all you've ever known, it's not easy to just switch it off like a light - even if it is sh1t and doing away with it would (subjectively) be in your interests. To us, of course it's a good thing to do away with it, but that's a bit hegemonic.
For some Muslim women, it may feel like some sort of "protection" and they may even be quite dependent on it - not saying they should be though, but if they are, they are.

Thinkingaboutit

I know it's probably been pointed out, but if I walk into a shop wearing my bike balaclava, I'd never leave the helmet on as it gets too warm, they would rightly get a bit shirty about it. I could say I believe in biking, fair's fair.:pac:

brianthebard

Dudess wrote: »

Generally speaking, I'd only be in favour of a banning of those customs which cause physical harm - e.g. genital mutilation (there is male GM as well as female).

I take it you're not a fan of the jews so?

starbelgrade

humberklog wrote: »

That's a bit over-simplified though isn't it? It has for some muslims evolved into a strong tradition.

The Quran does not suggest that women should be veiled or they should be kept apart from the world of men. On the contrary, the Quran is insistent on the full participation of women in society and in the religious practices.

It is part of the growing feeling on the part of some Muslim men and women that they no longer wish to identify with the West, and that reaffirmation of their identity as Muslims requires the kind of visible sign that adoption of conservative clothing implies, hence the wearing of the veil.

For these women the issue is not that they have to dress conservatively, but that they choose to.

Dudess

brianthebard wrote: »

I take it you're not a fan of the jews so?

I'm a zionist conspiracist theorist dontcha know... :pac:

Well I'm referring more to unsupervised circumcision.