Should Dublin ban Burqas and Hijabs?

Lux23

Why has anyone got a problem with a hijab? It's just a scarf covering a person's head/hair.

Roger Hassenforder

Captain Obvious wrote: »

But sure carry on. A presumably liberal white male, deciding what's best for all such Muslim women, and how best to encourage their integration into a non Salafist environment. [/QUOTE]

I presume you are talking about yourself there.

You want to dictate to women what they wear. You want to stop foreigners coming in. You think poorly of people from a particular part of the world and a particular religion. You want to restrict a different religion to yours. Do you really consider yourself that different to strict Islamists?[/quote]

Na, I reckon im very slightly right of centre.
Not too far though.

You might link where I want to stop foreigners.
And where I think poorly of Muslims...

I can wait

Roger Hassenforder

Dannyriver wrote: »

Another person that hasn t traveled and think s he knows what he s talking about...Not a ****ing clue...

https://www.whileimyoung.com/things-female-expats-love-dubai/

Are you referring to me?

That link has to be the most vacuous and self centred article ive read. I reckon they really got an eye on what life is like in UAE for nonEmerati.

jaykay74

Lux23 wrote: »

Why has anyone got a problem with a hijab? It's just a scarf covering a person's head/hair.

Maybe its just a bad habit ?

Dannyriver

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Are you referring to me?

That link has to be the most vacuous and self centred article ive read. I reckon they really got an eye on what life is like in UAE for nonEmerati.

Fake news?

Roger Hassenforder

Shenshen wrote: »

Do you honestly think that banning burqas and niqabs is going to give women living in Dublin more choices?

If they already live here, then either they've decided to wear those clothes, in which case I'd be against telling them they can't.
Or else, someone else is making that decision for them (a violent father, brother, husband, mother, mother in law, who knows?), in which case I can't honestly imagine that person going "Ah well, since that's illegal now, I guess I have to respect your choices now". Rather, I would imagine that in such a disfunctional situation the woman in question would not be allowed out in public at all any more.

Let's face it - a ban of this kind would not help a single woman. If you want to change the law, introduce something that will actually allow women to make choice. Something to ensure it's not someone else deciding for them, be that family member or government.

Maybe not, but it might improve integration.
I cant see it having long term adverse consequences.
There's no stats on what percentage are forced to wear one, but based on worldwide events, one can assume some are forced to wear it. How would a ban not be of benifet to these?
Maybe their menfolk would not allow them out. True. Could this go on forever?
Doing shopping themselves or Tesco delivery...
School runs...
Gardening...
Sports days...
Leisure activities...

Might last a few months I reckon. They have to accept their ideology isnt compatible with where they are. Maybe girls might grow up seeing society sees them as women, not identity less "post boxes".

Do you seriously think a woman in a burka is fully engaged and contributing to society?

Hijabs are fine if you want to wear it.

Roger Hassenforder

Grayson wrote: »

as far as I'm concerned the people who try to ban it are up there with the people in saudi forcing women to wear it. Neither gives a flying fcuk what the woman actually want.

Really?
What are you basing that nice little soundbite on?

Do flesh it out.
One could accuse anyone really of the same in any circumstances where one expresses a view on a women's issue:

"Oh, you voted to repeal the 8th? Sure you don't give a flying fcuk what women want, you're only sticking it in the eye of the Catholic church" etc.

No no, must try harder.

Grayson

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Really?
What are you basing that nice little soundbite on?

Do flesh it out.
One could accuse anyone really of the same in any circumstances where one expresses a view on a women's issue:

"Oh, you voted to repeal the 8th? Sure you don't give a flying fcuk what women want, you're only sticking it in the eye of the Catholic church" etc.

No no, must try harder.

What is wrong with you?

People who want to force a woman to wear a burka or force her not to wear it don't care what that woman actually wants. We shouldn't police fashion.

The difference between that and the 8th is that on one side there were people who wanted to force a woman to continue a pregnancy. there was no-one on the other side forcing her to terminate. If there were I'd say they were assholes too.

Roger Hassenforder

cfuserkildare wrote: »

" Do you really consider yourself that different to strict Islamists? "

This statement says it all really.

Do we really want to lower our standards to their level?

Do we really want to permit the instigation of Sharia Law here?

Because permitting cultural traditions such as Burkha, Hajib, FGM etc this is Exactly what you are doing!!!

That moment when your opponent in am online discourse has jumped the proverbial shark.

Imagine having an inability to see any difference in advocating against a repressive, mysoginistic and backward ideology and advocating for a
repressive, mysoginistic and backward ideology.
It's quiet tragic.

cfuserkildare

Grayson wrote: »

What is wrong with you?

People who want to force a woman to wear a burka or force her not to wear it don't care what that woman actually wants. We shouldn't police fashion.

The difference between that and the 8th is that on one side there were people who wanted to force a woman to continue a pregnancy. there was no-one on the other side forcing her to terminate. If there were I'd say they were assholes too.

Unfortunately the Burkha issue is Not about Policing Fashion,


It is about the oppression of women, and the Conditioning of many many generations regarding how they should dress in public IN A MUSLIM COUNTRY.


Correct me if I am wrong here, But SINCE When was Ireland a Muslim Country???

Roger Hassenforder

Grayson wrote: »

What is wrong with you?

People who want to force a woman to wear a burka or force her not to wear it don't care what that woman actually wants. We shouldn't police fashion.

The difference between that and the 8th is that on one side there were people who wanted to force a woman to continue a pregnancy. there was no-one on the other side forcing her to terminate. If there were I'd say they were assholes too.

You're at it again. You're not elaborating your point , merely repeating it.


"La la la la, you don't care whether women should have an option to abort, you just are anti church, you dont give a fcuk about womens rights"

That's your rationale. See how poor it is. It's abject. If you continue to reason thus, you really need to expand your argument.
Expressing an opinion on an issue does not necessarily mean you're piggybacking on another, or have a motive. It can but it can't be assumed.

gozunda

Dannyriver wrote: »

I'm glad I ve enthused you to do some reading, the law and how it's adhered to are 2 very different things , the changes that the UAE are going through are going to take time. The same way that this country moved from being a religious theocracy [where women were treated as second class citizens] in all but name 40 years ago to one now in which the pope is seen as a deviant and women no longer take **** . Double standards have to exist in systems where religion has a say. So I repeat apply for your passport and travel. Parochialism causes fear of others. It's a big big world my friend full of differing perceptions and opinions , and we have more in common as humans than differences. If you want any advice on the best places to stay or eat in Dubai or Abu dhabi just DM me I'd be happy to assist in broadening your horizons ...

Ah the resident sage who assumes no one else on the planet has any first hand knowledge. :rolleyes:

Again this discussion is not based on your opinions how any specific countries law is applied or otherwise. Though I'll give it to you - the above exhibits a most remarkable skill of reducing a discussion to the most irrelevant details.

Shenshen

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Maybe not, but it might improve integration.
I cant see it having long term adverse consequences.
There's no stats on what percentage are forced to wear one, but based on worldwide events, one can assume some are forced to wear it. How would a ban not be of benifet to these?
Maybe their menfolk would not allow them out. True. Could this go on forever?
Doing shopping themselves or Tesco delivery...
School runs...
Gardening...
Sports days...
Leisure activities...

Might last a few months I reckon. They have to accept their ideology isnt compatible with where they are. Maybe girls might grow up seeing society sees them as women, not identity less "post boxes".

Do you seriously think a woman in a burka is fully engaged and contributing to society?

Hijabs are fine if you want to wear it.

How would it help integration if you tell the ones who wear it out of choice that you feel their choice is wrong and therefore will make it illegal? While at the same time harping on about personal freedoms? Just because they're Muslim women doesn't mean they're all daft enough not to see the hypocrisy there.

And for those whose families wouldn't allow them out - yes, this could easily go on forever.
As you said, get stuff delivered or send the children shopping.
Male family members dropping the kids to school, or opting for home schooling.
And I'm not really sure why you'd assume that they get to do a lot of sports or leisure activities even now...

I agree that people who would force women to wear certain items of clothing need to face up to the fact that this is unacceptable here. However, you're not going to achieve that by punishing those women that are already oppressed even further.

Grayson

cfuserkildare wrote: »

Unfortunately the Burkha issue is Not about Policing Fashion,


It is about the oppression of women, and the Conditioning of many many generations regarding how they should dress in public IN A MUSLIM COUNTRY.


Correct me if I am wrong here, But SINCE When was Ireland a Muslim Country???

It's not a muslim country and we don't force women to wear particular clothes. There have been strains of feminism which think that sexualising women through clothing is bad.
If they were to try and ban miniskirts because they say it oppresses women I'd be against it too. Neither you, nor I, should be allowed say what a woman wants to wear. It doesn't matter if it's a mormons magic underwear, a burqa, a hijab, a habit or a miniskirt.
And yers, some of the ideas in islam are bat**** crazy. But so are they in every other religion.

Since when was Ireland a country that policed women for what they wore? And this thread is about IRELAND (I put in in caps because you like caps). It's about the laws we write and the laws we enforce. We are not saudi and we do not police what women wear. Enforcing laws like saudi which decree what a woman can and cannot wear is going in entirely the wrong direction.

Shenshen

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

You're at it again. You're not elaborating your point , merely repeating it.


"La la la la, you don't care whether women should have an option to abort, you just are anti church, you dont give a fcuk about womens rights"

That's your rationale. See how poor it is. It's abject. If you continue to reason thus, you really need to expand your argument.
Expressing an opinion on an issue does not necessarily mean you're piggybacking on another, or have a motive. It can but it can't be assumed.

Are you really struggling with the concept that forcing a woman to wear a certain item of clothing she doesn't want to wear, and forcing a woman not to wear an item of clothing she does want to wear are two sides of the same coin?

The only person who should decide on what to wear is the woman herself. Not her possibly backwards family, and not the government. That's what choice is.

Dannyriver

Shenshen wrote: »

How would it help integration if you tell the ones who wear it out of choice that you feel their choice is wrong and therefore will make it illegal? While at the same time harping on about personal freedoms? Just because they're Muslim women doesn't mean they're all daft enough not to see the hypocrisy there.

And for those whose families wouldn't allow them out - yes, this could easily go on forever.
As you said, get stuff delivered or send the children shopping.
Male family members dropping the kids to school, or opting for home schooling.
And I'm not really sure why you'd assume that they get to do a lot of sports or leisure activities even now...

I agree that people who would force women to wear certain items of clothing need to face up to the fact that this is unacceptable here. However, you're not going to achieve that by punishing those women that are already oppressed even further.

This is not about women this is about leaving Muslims know that they are not welcome , it always has been. Those who aren t obsessed with the Burqa tend to look at Muslims as any other citizen who we withhold judgement of until they give us reason not to.

Dannyriver

Dannyriver wrote: »

This is not about women this is about leaving Muslims know that they are not welcome , it always has been.

Woah now.

I'm opposed to the niqaab, and i've changed my view on that from having a brother in law from Kuwait, and listening to his experience living in a culture where some women are subject to pretty outrageous discrimination (and his country of birth is comparatively liberal!)

This isn't an issue with Muslims, the Qura'n doesn't even mention a need to cover the face. It's a cultural issue.

I have no problem with the Hijab, but covering the face is a genuine problem when it comes to integration. I'm opposed to that, not anti-muslim by a long shot.

Shenshen

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Woah now.

I'm opposed to the niqaab, and i've changed my view on that from having a brother in law from Kuwait, and listening to his experience living in a culture where some women are subject to pretty outrageous discrimination (and his country of birth is comparatively liberal!)

This isn't an issue with Muslims, the Qura'n doesn't even mention a need to cover the face. It's a cultural issue.

I have no problem with the Hijab, but covering the face is a genuine problem when it comes to integration. I'm opposed to that, not anti-muslim by a long shot.

I have a very strong dislike for both niqabs and burqas, for 2 reasons. Humans do communicate a lot via facial expression, far more than they do verbally. To cut yourself off from that is neither very healthy nor is it going to help in any, way, shape or form in any social interaction between yo u and the rest of the world.
The other reason is that I see such garments as deeply, deeply, misandric. By wearing this, you tell any male you might come across that you consider them little more than animals, complete slaves to their sex drive. Not to be trusted not to try and take advantage of you, should you show so much as a fingernail.

However, no matter how objectionable I may find it, it's still an item of clothing. And even if it does express the worldview of the wearer, it's simply not my business to tell anyone that they are not allowed to wear something just because I don't like its message.

Shenshen

Shenshen wrote: »

it's simply not my business to tell anyone that they are not allowed to wear something just because I don't like its message.

Not you alone, no; but surely it is within the gift of society as a whole to make that judgment?

After all, we do this with public nudity. If I walk down O'Connell Street in the nip, I'll be promptly arrested, because there are limits placed on human behaviours that are in line with our cultural norms, and these limits arise because the majority of people probably desire them.

Shenshen

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Not you alone, no; but surely it is within the gift of society as a whole to make that judgment?

After all, we do this with public nudity. If I walk down O'Connell Street in the nip, I'll be promptly arrested, because there are limits placed on human behaviours that are in line with our cultural norms, and these limits arise because the majority of people probably desire them.

And I'm equally against that law. I firmly believe that if people want to walk around naked, they should be allowed to do so.

Shenshen

Shenshen wrote: »

And I'm equally against that law. I firmly believe that if people want to walk around naked, they should be allowed to do so.

that's fair enough, but despite your opposition to the law, I assume you don't think there is anything particularly outrageous about society enforcing a cultural norm like requiring clothing?

Similarly, I can see why a lot of people might oppose a ban on the niqaab, but that's a decision that society ought to be capable of making.

Shenshen

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

that's fair enough, but despite your opposition to the law, I assume you don't think there is anything particularly outrageous about society enforcing a cultural norm like requiring clothing?

I wouldn't call it outrageous. I think I'd call it sad.

Graces7

Shenshen wrote: »

I have a very strong dislike for both niqabs and burqas, for 2 reasons. Humans do communicate a lot via facial expression, far more than they do verbally. To cut yourself off from that is neither very healthy nor is it going to help in any, way, shape or form in any social interaction between yo u and the rest of the world.
The other reason is that I see such garments as deeply, deeply, misandric. By wearing this, you tell any male you might come across that you consider them little more than animals, complete slaves to their sex drive. Not to be trusted not to try and take advantage of you, should you show so much as a fingernail.

However, no matter how objectionable I may find it, it's still an item of clothing. And even if it does express the worldview of the wearer, it's simply not my business to tell anyone that they are not allowed to wear something just because I don't like its message.

Amen to this. I feel like saying also mind your own business. Very simply we have choice of our clothing.

Dannyriver

Shenshen wrote: »

I have a very strong dislike for both niqabs and burqas, for 2 reasons. Humans do communicate a lot via facial expression, far more than they do verbally. To cut yourself off from that is neither very healthy nor is it going to help in any, way, shape or form in any social interaction between yo u and the rest of the world.
The other reason is that I see such garments as deeply, deeply, misandric. By wearing this, you tell any male you might come across that you consider them little more than animals, complete slaves to their sex drive. Not to be trusted not to try and take advantage of you, should you show so much as a fingernail.

However, no matter how objectionable I may find it, it's still an item of clothing. And even if it does express the worldview of the wearer, it's simply not my business to tell anyone that they are not allowed to wear something just because I don't like its message.

I agree per se but really it's closer to the truth to say that it's just another horse **** bull **** way that religions use to control women and control sex ...all religions do/have done it. Surprise surprise that all the main originators and protagonists of religion are male. That said like I ve said earlier here telling women what they can and cannot wear would be a retrograde step for a liberal democracy to take in my opinion.

Roger Hassenforder

Shenshen wrote: »

Are you really struggling with the concept that forcing a woman to wear a certain item of clothing she doesn't want to wear, and forcing a woman not to wear an item of clothing she does want to wear are two sides of the same coin?

The only person who should decide on what to wear is the woman herself. Not her possibly backwards family, and not the government. That's what choice is.

I agree in so far as the woman genuinely has choice. Unfortunately, burka is a symbol and a requirement of an ideology that treats women as second class citizens. Deprived of basic rights we take for granted.

So yes I'm struggling all right, to see how you can't see that a woman might be forced to wear one.

We already (to a certain extent) prescribe sartorial standards, certainly there's a minimum requirement to avoid indecent exposure

Condoning a woman wearing a burka, is tacitly condoning any man who has forced "his" woman/women to wear one, and allows the continuing subjugation of women trying to live under such sexist totalitarianism.

If you can point out examples of women hithertofore "unburka'd", celebrating and excercising their right to "burka up" once an authority prescribes their wearing, there would be merit in considering maybe they're not that bad.
However, the opposite seems to be the case usually.

Roger Hassenforder

Dannyriver wrote: »

This is not about women this is about leaving Muslims know that they are not welcome , it always has been. Those who aren t obsessed with the Burqa tend to look at Muslims as any other citizen who we withhold judgement of until they give us reason not to.

Will you cop yourself on with this nonsense. You keep repeating it.It's contributing nothing to the discourse. You're verging on trolling.

I employ Muslims. I'm friends with Muslims. I'm frequently in Muslims houses, and they in mine.
This isnt about Muslims. It's about certain Muslims who subscribe to a certain ideology and what it represents.

gozunda

Dannyriver wrote: »

I agree per se but really it's closer to the truth to say that it's just another horse **** bull **** way that religions use to control women and control sex ...all religions do/have done it. Surprise surprise that all the main originators and protagonists of religion are male. That said like I ve said earlier here telling women what they can and cannot wear would be a retrograde step for a liberal democracy to take in my opinion.

And there in lies the issue. It is not liberal democracies telling women what they an or cannot wear - rather it is recognising that the modern Islamist practice of enforcing the veil on women is neither always voluntary nor done without oppression.

In an article in the Spectator a muslim woman, Qanta Ahmed describes indetail why she supports banning the veil and what it means for her and other women.

It’s a sign, I think, not of assertive Islam, but of what happens when Islamists are tolerated by a western culture that’s absurdly anxious to avoid offence. This strange, unwitting collaboration between liberals and extremists has been going on for years. But at last there are signs that it is ending... The Islamists wish to say: we Muslims are different from the West. Increasingly, we don’t look like you, or act like you.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/03/the-right-to-ban-the-veil-is-good-news-for-everybody-including-muslims/

What is interestingis that the more moderate of the Muslim head coverings the Hijāb (of which the Niqab is a variant)  refers not to women's clothing, but rather a spatial partition or curtain. The term can refer to any head, face, or body covering worn by Muslim women. However of note the term Hijab is also used to refer to the seclusion of women from men in the public sphere.

In the face of calls from fundamentalist Muslims to allow the practice of seclusion or separation of the sexes in public withinn secular western countries - should we also permit such beliefs dictate that men and women to be seperated so as to not to offend those self same religous sentiments or to facilitate this who 'choose' or are forced to do so?

I don't think so.

Dannyriver

gozunda wrote: »

And there in lies the issue. It is not liberal democracies telling women what they an or cannot wear - rather it recognising that the modern Islamist practice of enforcing the veil on women is neither always voluntary nor done without oppression.

In an article in the Spectator a muslim woman, Qanta Ahmed describes indetail why she supports banning the veil and what it means for her and other women.



What is interestingis that the most moderate of the Muslim head coverings the Hijāb (of which the niqab is a variant)  refers not to women's clothing, but rather a spatial partition or curtain. The term can refer to any head, face, or body covering worn by Muslim women. However of note the term Hijab is also used to refer to the seclusion of women from men in the public sphere.

In the face of calls from fundamentalist Muslims to allow the practice of seclusion or separation of the sexes in public withinn secular western countries - should we also permit such beliefs dictate that men and women to be seperated so as to not to offend those self same religous sentiments or to facilitate this who 'chose' or are forced to do so?

I don't think so.

Well it would be if there was an outright ban as those that did want to wear them would be denied as has happened everywhere this has been tried. I'm done with the thread at this stage it really is just people repeating themselves [me included by the way] ...all the best

Roger Hassenforder

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

If you can point out examples of women hithertofore "unburka'd", celebrating and excercising their right to "burka up" once an authority prescribes their wearing, there would be merit in considering maybe they're not that bad.

In fairness, there is fairly undisputed evidence of a worsening of the quality of lives of religious women in Iran during the reign of Reza Shah Pavlavi, when he banned the veil, and also prior to the 1979 Revolution, when the veil was publicly eschewed. Women were locked up at home, and avoided going into the street at all. I don't know if that would replicate itself in Ireland however, i'd doubt it.

The autobiographical novel, Reading Lolita in Tehran, covers the latter pretty well, and the joy of a great many women on the new conservative obligations after the 1979 Revolution.

I oppose the niqaab, but not on the basis that I can somehow get into the heads of women, and determine them to be in the subjugation of men. I'd oppose it even if it was entirely their free choice. It is simply a barrier to integration.

Shenshen

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

I agree in so far as the woman genuinely has choice. Unfortunately, burka is a symbol and a requirement of an ideology that treats women as second class citizens. Deprived of basic rights we take for granted.

So yes I'm struggling all right, to see how you can't see that a woman might be forced to wear one.

We already (to a certain extent) prescribe sartorial standards, certainly there's a minimum requirement to avoid indecent exposure

Condoning a woman wearing a burka, is tacitly condoning any man who has forced "his" woman/women to wear one, and allows the continuing subjugation of women trying to live under such sexist totalitarianism.

If you can point out examples of women hithertofore "unburka'd", celebrating and excercising their right to "burka up" once an authority prescribes their wearing, there would be merit in considering maybe they're not that bad.
However, the opposite seems to be the case usually.

I do believe you've said that before, and I asked before how you think a ban on burqas would do anything at all to help women who are currently forced by their families to wear them?
If the aim of her family members is to keep her out of sight of strangers, they are not simply going to change their minds on that because there's now a law against the one piece of clothing the woman was allowed to go out in.

I while I can't imagine why any women would choose to wear a niqab or a burqa, but if they do it's their choice.

If it's not their choice to wear it, banning it is not going to make life better for them.