Burka ban

Mark Hamill

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

Dades wrote: »

Or, the burka is the symbolic "face" of Islam and it sends a message that western society has grave reservations about it's practices. Maybe.

To some uninformed people maybe, but I have said multiple times that the burka isn't islamic, its middle eastern. Its the symbolic face of oppression by middle eastern men who use relgion to dominate their people.

Mark Hamill

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

Wicknight wrote: »

Break them to do what? Allowing their wife out without a burka, or never oppressing them in any of the other million ways an abusive man can oppress a woman?

Irish men were oppressing Irish women for centuries without the need for a burka. The idea that Muslim men will stop oppressing their daughters or wives simply because they cannot wear a burka anymore is, frankly, stupid.

Banning the burka is an attempt to stop oppression via use of a burka. Noone has ever said that it will magically stop all oppression. But just because we cant magically stop all oppression with one foul swoop, doesn't mean we shouldn't stop any.

Wicknight wrote: »

It isn't useless, it is the only thing you can do. You can't force a woman to realize she is being oppressed and needs help.

I didn't say shelters were useless, I said they aren't effective enough. We need to do something else (aswell). We have to convince women that they are being abused, and by showing that the culture they live in doesn't accept what is happening to them will go a ways to doing that.

sink

I'm religious and support the ban

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

You may as well be asking me do I know any women who are kept locked up in their house and did I ask them what they thought of it.

Any women who wears a burqa would not either wish or be permitted to socialise with me sufficiently for me to ask such a question, but you already knew that didn't you.

I'm pretty sure the women who held up placards protesting the ban would be more that willing to discuss the issue with you. Pleading ignorance is not much of a defence. Especially when it's backed up by a presumption informed by said ignorance.

Zombrex

robindch wrote: »

So, given that, do you think that the women in societies which produce such dreadful conformity are -- in the same sense as we use the word -- "free"?

Yes, if they can freely choose to conform or not.

Your question is like asking if 200 million people all go and see Avatar do you think that is truly a "free" society

magicbastarder

I'm religious and support the ban

Mickeroo wrote: »

Whatever happened to "I do not agree with a word you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

because it appears that these women cannot be trusted to exercise free speech.

worth a read; i've pulled out a quote which kinda removes the argument about brainwashing:

Her choice to become so identifiably Muslim even rattled her parents, immigrants from Egypt.
“I was more surprised than anything,” said her father, Mohamed Ahmed, who lives in Houston with her mother, Mervat Ahmed. He said he raised his daughters with a deep sense of pride about their Muslim background, but nevertheless did not expect them to wear a hijab, a head scarf, let alone a niqab.

Raised in what she described as a “minimally religious” household by parents who wore typical American clothes, Hebah used to think that women who wore a niqab were crazy, she said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/13/fashion/13veil.html?_r=1&scp=22&sq=burqa%20-%22veiled%20threats%22&st=cse

MrPudding

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

Mickeroo wrote: »

Whatever happened to "I do not agree with a word you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

The more I read about religion the less value I think that particular phrase has.

MrP

strobe

I'm religious and support the ban

bluewolf wrote: »

I think the closest I've ever come to that was here. It was a little odd
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054850341&page=15

Jesus......odd isn't the word. If that isn't brainwashing I don't know what is.

IC, do you think the opinions expressed in that link by the burqa wearer are in any way healthy or based in reality?

Paraphrasing here but it can be summed up roughly as "I need to cover my face because if I didn't men would be lusting after me everywhere I went."

Sorry but if that is a common belief of burqa wearing women they are delusional and unless they have a mental illness the delusion has been planted there through coercion. That's roughly the definition of brainwashing.

Mark Hamill

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

Wicknight wrote: »

Interestingly one of the most common arguments made by women wearing the burka is that they don't want to get into the rat race of fashion that they see western "liberated" women involved in.

The need to wear makeup or hear comments that you aren't bothering. The need to wear fashionable cloths or people think there is something wrong with you.

We are quite a judgmental society, particularly to women (look at the thousands of women's magazines that rip apart the fashion or weight of celebs).

It shouldn't really be that hard to understand why a Muslim woman would actually be quite happy to remove herself from this, completely by her own free choice.

You think that the women who wear burkas aren't plowing on buckets of make-up like every other woman?

magicbastarder

I'm religious and support the ban

MrPudding wrote: »

The more I read about religion the less value I think that particular phrase has.

MrP

oh dear.
oh dear oh dear.

sink

I'm religious and support the ban

robindch wrote: »

I'm suggesting pretty much the opposite -- that there's little or nothing "free" about the choice to wear the burqa in the first place.

We've been around this block a few times. I'll mention plenty of women convert to Islam and choose to wear the burka and no doubt you'll bring up being brainwashed as lack of a free choice. Answer me this. How come we don't ban nun's habits when they're just as brainwashed? They could easily be argued to be a symbol of female oppression.

Zombrex

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Banning the burka is an attempt to stop oppression via use of a burka.

If a man is oppressing a woman's life this doesn't stop because you remove one aspect that he is using to oppress her.

It is like banning frying pans because some women are locked in the kitchen. The woman is still locked in the kitchen.

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Noone has ever said that it will magically stop all oppression.

It is not going to stop any oppression.

Oppression is something people do to other people. If a man is oppressing a woman that isn't going to stop or even get better just because you have removed an option.

Mark Hamill wrote: »

We have to convince women that they are being abused, and by showing that the culture they live in doesn't accept what is happening to them will go a ways to doing that.

Ok, so a woman has spent her whole life being dictated to by her father, then her husband or what she can wear, see, do, think.

So the way to show them that they need to break free from this oppression is by enacting a law that will throw fine them or throw them in jail if they don't wear what we tell them too?

Can you really not see the problem with the message that sends?

If you want to free women from oppression the way you do it is by showing them that they are the masters of their own destiny, not their father, not their husband, and not the State.

You are simply replacing one source of oppression for another.

Zombrex

Mark Hamill wrote: »

You think that the women who wear burkas aren't plowing on buckets of make-up like every other woman?

They could be. I know some aren't.

magicbastarder

I'm religious and support the ban

from the article above i posted:

“No matter how smart I was, I wasn’t getting the respect I wanted,” she said. “They still hit on me, made crude remarks and even smacked me on the butt a couple times.”

Wearing the niqab is “liberating,” she said. “They have to deal with my brain because I don’t give them any other choice.”

so that particular woman found wearing the niqab empowering; granted, she may be striving for justification, but it's a point well made.

sink

I'm religious and support the ban

MrPudding wrote: »

The more I read about religion the less value I think that particular phrase has.

MrP

So you're against freedom of speech now?

Rev Hellfire

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

sink wrote: »

So you're against freedom of speech now?

No he just recognises that religions rarely provide the same curtsey back.

Zombrex

The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.
Louis D. Brandeis

magicbastarder

I'm religious and support the ban

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

No he just recognises that religions rarely provide the same curtsey back.

so he's willing to place himself on the same level as them?
this is taking a scary turn.

robindch

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

irishconvert wrote: »

Do you persoanally know any Muslim women who wear the burqa? If so have you asked them why they wear it and what was their response? Do you believe the reasons they gave you? If you don't persoanally know any Muslim women who wear the burqa, have you ever had a conversation with one? Did you ask her why she wore it?

I've answered this in passing several times already, but to answer your direct questions:

I have met women who wear the burqa, but -- as you are well aware -- it is unsafe for me and extremely dangerous for the woman to speak with a white westerner. If she's seen, and she almost certainly will be since she's not permitted to go out without a "guardian", then at best, she'll be shouted at, and at worst, something significantly worse could happen. I've seen burqa-clad women being screamed at by the religious police in Saudi and I wouldn't dream of putting a woman in danger by daring to speak with her.

In Tehran, some colleagues talked about the politics of the burqa and universally despised it as a tool of oppression, not only of the women who had to wear it, but of the men who disagreed with it too, but had no choice but to enforce it, lest the female members of their families be assaulted by the "morality police" that roam Iranian streets. In no less a place than the Shah's palace and while with a veil-clad western female colleague, we got speaking with a few iranian teenage girls, one of whom supported the burqa, and the rest didn't. That conversation ended up rather memorably in a blazing row between my colleague and the teenage burqa girl.

And I know western women who have worked and travelled in these countries, all of whom again hate the burqa and are subject to the same "freedom" to choose to wear it, lest they be assaulted (as one was).

Of course, it would be possible to speak with women in these countries if there were, say, bars there where it was socially acceptable to drop in for a beer and a chat. However, that's not possible in countries which adhere to sharia law.

And even in places like Jakarta where sharia, thankfully, does not apply, it's still dangerous -- two of the last three times I was out there, hotels and bars were bombed by islamic militants, so you'll forgive me if I avoid open socializing there.

I could go on about other countries and other experiences -- all of them unpleasant -- but I trust you get the point.

irishconvert

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

You may as well be asking me do I know any women who are kept locked up in their house and did I ask them what they thought of it.

Any women who wears a burqa would not either wish or be permitted to socialise with me sufficiently for me to ask such a question, but you already knew that didn't you.

So in other words, you want to pass legislation which will have a dramatic negative effect the lives of these women purely a hunch you have that they might be opressed. The truth is you have absolutely no clue whatsoever. You are the opressor and you are blind to this fact.

Dades

Mark Hamill wrote: »

To some uninformed people maybe, but I have said multiple times that the burka isn't islamic, its middle eastern. Its the symbolic face of oppression by middle eastern men who use relgion to dominate their people.

So you think the people who wear the burka don't do so out of religious deference?

How come everyone, including Muslims, are shouting "Islamaphobia" then? Are they uninformed too, or would it be safe to say a cultural garb become a religious one?

sink

I'm religious and support the ban

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

No he just recognises that religions rarely provide the same curtsey back.

Frankly I don't think there is a huge difference between religious and non-religious when it comes freedom of speech. There are plenty of religious people who are passionate defenders of free speech, and plenty of non-religious who would restrict free speech. I would consider the banning of the burka as such.

robindch

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

religions rarely provide the same courtesy back.

Rev Hellfire

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

irishconvert wrote: »

So in other words, you want to pass legislation which will have a dramatic negative effect the lives of these women purely a hunch you have that they might be opressed. The truth is you have absolutely no clue whatsoever. You are the opressor and you are blind to this fact.

Just as I don't need to get beaten with a stick, nor talk to man was also beaten by a stick to know that it is wrong the same is true here. Thanks for playing.

Mark Hamill

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

irishconvert wrote: »

I have some questions for the posters here who most strongly support the ban (I'm looking at you robindch, Mark Hamill, Rev Hellfire):

Do you persoanally know any Muslim women who wear the burqa? If so have you asked them why they wear it and what was their response? Do you believe the reasons they gave you?

If you don't persoanally know any Muslim women who wear the burqa, have you ever had a conversation with one? Did you ask her why she wore it?

I know muslims, none who wear the burka (just versions of the niqab) and have never had a conversation with one who wears one. Its irrelevent though. I have never had a conversation with a manic depressive contemplating suicide to know that suicide would be wrong for them, regardless of how much they want it. They both are working on demonstratable misconceptions of the world. The burka cannot free someone. It is physically restricting (try eating with one on) and mentally restricting (you develop an oddly shameful pride in your own appearance, you think yourself so beautiful that men around you will uncontrollably lust after you, and that its your fault not theirs*). Whats worse is that, while taken individually these women are only restricting their own lifes, taken as a whole, they are feeding support to the men who bastardise islam in order to breed a mass of unquestioningly loyal subjects.

* This is an aspect that is played down way too much imo. The notion that every woman needs to be completely covered and asexualised, as men would otherwise be unsationably attracted to them, is incredibly insulting and demonstratably wrong. Its an arrogant pre-emptive strike against something that you cant know will happen, and by over reacting, these women simply emphasis the possibility that there is something there for men to take (if you think about it). Imagine if these women felt the need to start tazering or pepperspraying every man who they felt was looking at them? Its the same over reaction.

Rev Hellfire

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

robindch wrote: »

I truly love that cartoon, says it all really.

irishconvert

robindch wrote: »

I've answered this in passing several times already, but to answer your direct questions:

I have met women who wear the burqa, but -- as you are well aware -- it is unsafe for me and extremely dangerous for the woman to speak with a white westerner. If she's seen, and she almost certainly will be since she's not permitted to go out without a "guardian", then at best, she'll be shouted at, and at worst, something significantly worse could happen. I've seen burqa-clad women being screamed at by the religious police in Saudi and I wouldn't dream of putting a woman in danger by daring to speak with her.

In Tehran, some colleagues talked about the politics of the burqa and universally despised it as a tool of oppression, not only of the women who had to wear it, but of the men who disagreed with it too, but had no choice but to enforce it, lest the female members of their families be assaulted by the "morality police" that roam Iranian streets. In no less a place than the Shah's palace and while with a veil-clad western female colleague, we got speaking with a few iranian teenage girls, one of whom supported the burqa, and the rest didn't. That conversation ended up rather memorably in a blazing row between my colleague and the teenage burqa girl.

And I know western women who have worked and travelled in these countries, all of whom again hate the burqa and are subject to the same "freedom" to choose to wear it, lest they be assaulted (as one was).

Of course, it would be possible to speak with women in these countries if there were, say, bars there where it was socially acceptable to drop in for a beer and a chat. However, that's not possible in countries which adhere to sharia law.

And even in places like Jakarta where sharia, thankfully, does not apply, it's still dangerous -- two of the last three times I was out there, hotels and bars were bombed by islamic militants, so you'll forgive me if I avoid open socializing there.

I could go on about other countries and other experiences -- all of them unpleasant -- but I trust you get the point.

Why are you bring up places like Saudi? There is no doubt women are opressed there. We are talking about European countries here and many Muslim women in European countries CHOOSE to wear the burqa. I should know, there are some in my wife's extended family. There is one particular family where two of the sisters wear burqa while the third sister wears standard western clothes with no hijab. You wouldn't even know she was a Muslim to look at her. Where is the opression there? Three sisters from the same family all exercising there freedom of choice which we are entitled to in this part of the world. People like you want to remove this freedom and bring us closer to the regimes you claim to oppose, such as Saudi Arabia.

sink

I'm religious and support the ban

robindch wrote: »

I've answered this in passing several times already, but to answer your direct questions:

I have met women who wear the burqa, but -- as you are well aware -- it is unsafe for me and extremely dangerous for the woman to speak with a white westerner. If she's seen, and she almost certainly will be since she's not permitted to go out without a "guardian", then at best, she'll be shouted at, and at worst, something significantly worse could happen. I've seen burqa-clad women being screamed at by the religious police in Saudi and I wouldn't dream of putting a woman in danger by daring to speak with her.

In Tehran, some colleagues talked about the politics of the burqa and universally despised it as a tool of oppression, not only of the women who had to wear it, but of the men who disagreed with it too, but had no choice but to enforce it, lest the female members of their families be assaulted by the "morality police" that roam Iranian streets. In no less a place than the Shah's palace and while with a veil-clad western female colleague, we got speaking with a few iranian teenage girls, one of whom supported the burqa, and the rest didn't. That conversation ended up rather memorably in a blazing row between my colleague and the teenage burqa girl.

And I know western women who have worked and travelled in these countries, all of whom again hate the burqa and are subject to the same "freedom" to choose to wear it, lest they be assaulted (as one was).

Of course, it would be possible to speak with women in these countries if there were, say, bars there where it was socially acceptable to drop in for a beer and a chat. However, that's not possible in countries which adhere to sharia law.

And even in places like Jakarta where sharia, thankfully, does not apply, it's still dangerous -- two of the last three times I was out there, hotels and bars were bombed by islamic militants, so you'll forgive me if I avoid open socializing there.

I could go on about other countries and other experiences -- all of them unpleasant -- but I trust you get the point.

Once again you're talking about what happens in countries with religious police or a state of open hostility towards women. I would be dead against such practices. No one should be forced to wear anything there will and any intimidation and mistreatment of women should be immediately prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law.

In a free society where such oppressive behaviour is not allowed any woman who is wearing Islamic face veil, should be assumed to be doing so freely unless proven otherwise. By banning women from doing so you are taking the place of the religious police. You placing restrictions on what women can and can't do, and you are no more justified than the Islamic police themselves.

magicbastarder

I'm religious and support the ban

Mark Hamill wrote: »

The burka cannot free someone.

no-one here is arguing that the burka is not a stupid idea.

strobe

I'm religious and support the ban

magicbastarder wrote: »

because it appears that these women cannot be trusted to exercise free speech.

worth a read; i've pulled out a quote which kinda removes the argument about brainwashing:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/13/fashion/13veil.html?_r=1&scp=22&sq=burqa%20-%22veiled%20threats%22&st=cse

It removes the argument about brainwashing how exactly MB?

She says in the article she started attending regular Islamic meetings, are you suggesting people can't be brainwashed as adults? Divid Koresh would have a thing or two to say about that. As would your local Scientology rep. The 7/7 bombers in England also only "embraced" Islam fully as young adults. She goes on to say that after first wearing a hijab into work in the lab within three months she was wearing the full burka and had quit her job. No chance of brainwashing there? Someone attending religious meetings and then in a short space of time changing their whole lives, including giving up the employment they had attended college for years to gain?

The quote you highlight later doesn't seem to make any sense whatsoever:

“No matter how smart I was, I wasn’t getting the respect I wanted,” she said. “They still hit on me, made crude remarks and even smacked me on the butt a couple times.”

Wearing the niqab is “liberating,” she said. “They have to deal with my brain because I don’t give them any other choice.”

How does she know they had to "deal with her brain", they "had no choice." She had quit the job already. It sounds like she's just repeating rhetoric to me.

irishconvert

Mark Hamill wrote: »

I know muslims, none who wear the burka (just versions of the niqab) and have never had a conversation with one who wears one. Its irrelevent though. I have never had a conversation with a manic depressive contemplating suicide to know that suicide would be wrong for them, regardless of how much they want it.

Come on, you can't compare the two.

Mark Hamill wrote: »

They both are working on demonstratable misconceptions of the world. The burka cannot free someone. It is physically restricting (try eating with one on) and mentally restricting (you develop an oddly shameful pride in your own appearance, you think yourself so beautiful that men around you will uncontrollably lust after you, and that its your fault not theirs*). Whats worse is that, while taken individually these women are only restricting their own lifes, taken as a whole, they are feeding support to the men who bastardise islam in order to breed a mass of unquestioningly loyal subjects.

While all of that may or may not be true, it is their choice if they want to wear it. Look, as a Muslim I hate the burqa also, but I also believe in freedom of choice and I don't believe the state should have the right to tell someone how do dress. It is a very slippery slope if you allow that to happen.