Burkas - how do you respond?

EamonnKeane

In some primitive societies women wander around stark naked every minute of their life. Why aren't these women coming over here and "liberating" Western women who are forced to wear clothing?

OfflerCrocGod

EamonnKeane wrote:

In some primitive societies women wander around stark naked every minute of their life. Why aren't these women coming over here and "liberating" Western women who are forced to wear clothing?

Because that would be a regression dumbass Irish women would freeze to death without clothes :rolleyes:

Victor

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

Because that would be a regression dumbass Irish women would freeze to death without clothes :rolleyes:

The slappers seem to survive Saturday night ....

OfflerCrocGod

Victor wrote:

The slappers seem to survive Saturday night ....

In nice warm sweaty clubs

lazydaisy

Burkas make practical sense in the mid east because they protect a woman's skin and hair from the heat of the sun. However they have since taken on other meanings. As a woman, I find it strange and nearly offensive that women choose to wear them,given what previous generations of women had to go through to fight for basic freedoms, but at the same time I can recognise that Muslim women may feel vulnerable and exposed if they are not wearing them.

Snowball

saw a woman wearing one about a month ago. All in black and all I could see was her eyes.
Was very odd (outwardly I just acted normal) but I was very unexpected.

I agree with OfflerCrocGod (although not sure about the insane part) people shold be allowed to wear what they like.

Bucephalus

simu wrote:

So, imagine you are walking down some street in Ireland and you see a woman covered from head to toe in a burka. What are your initial thoughts? How do you respond?

Ought the wearing of these garments be outlawed or subject to public disapproval as the like of Kevin Myers suggests?

Well, I think that people ought to be able to wear them if they wish and I don't see why people should be obliged to show their faces to the world unless in a setting where this is neccessary for communication such as in a courthouse or in a school, or for the taking of passport photos.

I'm with you on the matter. I don't understand the hatred that these items of clothing inspire in people. As an atheist, I'm particularly disturbed by other non-believers going ballistic on the matter.

Dades

Bucephalus wrote:

I'm with you on the matter. I don't understand the hatred that these items of clothing inspire in people. As an atheist, I'm particularly disturbed by other non-believers going ballistic on the matter.

It's not a religious issue to many - it's a human rights issue.

I'm all for religious freedom - doesn't bother me. But I do have an issue with a religion that forces it's women to completely cover their bodies in public at all times. The point is that is just wrong. And it's not just wrong when applying western values - it's just wrong on any plain of reasonable thought. Are burkha's favoured by the wearers? Or are they just used to them? If so that that doesn't stil make it right.

We obviously have no control over the practice in Iran, Afghanistan, etc. but we do here in our own country.
And yet, strangely, I'm still undecided on the matter.

bonkey

But I do have an issue with a religion that forces it's women to completely cover their bodies in public at all times.

Without trying to be smart...which religion, exactly, is that.

I can't think of a single religion where every woman is forced to wear any specific item of clothing.

Not every Muslim woman wears the Burka, so obviously Islam doesn't force them to wear it. You may be correct (about the forcing) when you get to extremist/fundamentalist "flavours" of the religion, but again the question still arises as to how many choose to do this, believing it to be the teachings of their God, and how many are forced to do so.

I agree compeltely that forcing something like this on people is unacceptable, but how much is really forced?

I know many a Catholic who abstains from eating meat on Friday. Why? Because they're told not to by their church. They (generally) don't see rhyme nor reason to it, but its the teachings of their church and they follow it. Is the Catholic Church wrong to make these people not eat meat on Friday? They're not freely choosing to not eat meat....they're doing it because they're told it would be a sin to do otherwise, and they don't wish to be sinners.

Yes, I realise I stop short of saying they Catholics are forced to not eat meat, but its an interesting parallel. If a Muslim woman's faith/belief tells her she should wear a Burka, is she wrong to choose to do so? Is her family/Mullah/husband wrong to encourage her to do so because they believe (like Catholics eating meat on Friday) that it would be a sin to do otherwise?

Sure, if she still says no and is subsequently forced to wear it against her will, then I'm all with you in opposing it. But up until that point, I don't see that its anyone's business to intercede and say that she should not / cannot take this action that her religious beliefs tell her is right. To force her against her wishes to not wear it would be no less of a travesty, surely?

jc

Hagar

Suppose I was to wear a Burkha?

Say it was all white instead of black with just two small eye-holes, suppose the headress part was pointy, suppose it had a discrete little red cross on the left breast with the same letter repeated 3 times...

Could I walk the streets in that? Would that be acceptable?

rsynnott

Hagar wrote:

Suppose I was to wear a Burkha?

Say it was all white instead of black with just two small eye-holes, suppose the headress part was pointy, suppose it had a discrete little red cross on the left breast with the same letter repeated 3 times...

Could I walk the streets in that? Would that be acceptable?

A Burkha is not, per se, a symbol of hatred, nor is it the uniform of a terrorist organisation. The KKK uniform is. On a related note, Those wacky white supremacists!

Hagar

I don't think that they are proscribed in Ireland.
They view their choice of clothing as appropriate within their own social circle.
Much like the Muslims do.

Does that mean we have to accept either form of dress in our society?

I'm not saying I support either of them in any way either!

simu

Hagar wrote:

Suppose I was to wear a Burkha?

Say it was all white instead of black with just two small eye-holes, suppose the headress part was pointy, suppose it had a discrete little red cross on the left breast with the same letter repeated 3 times...

Could I walk the streets in that? Would that be acceptable?

Well, you'd get away with it if you left out the KKK symbolism. Same as it's okay to wear a Family Guy t-shirt, say, but considered offensive to wear one with swastikas.

Hagar

Indulge me a little here, I realise you make think I'm stetching a point a bit, maybe I am.

Two well respected people have so far jumped to the conclusion the 3 letters were KKK. I never actually said they were.

Try "CCC" http://www.acbr.com/religion.htm a perfectly harmless organisation.

If you can make assumptions, two in this case, Hagar is white (you can only see my eyes ) and the three letters are KKK, why can Muslim people not understand that their misplaced mode of dress will cause assumptions by other reasonabley minded people.

simu

If it's any other letters, no one will care.

Geez, you could use the same argument to say that Irish people who wear Celtic tops should understand why ignorant people might think they are IRA supporters. Nothing reasonable about it tbh.

Dades

bonkey wrote:

Sure, if she still says no and is subsequently forced to wear it against her will, then I'm all with you in opposing it. But up until that point, I don't see that its anyone's business to intercede and say that she should not / cannot take this action that her religious beliefs tell her is right. To force her against her wishes to not wear it would be no less of a travesty, surely?

Absolutely.

Hence my hesitation to support a ban. I don't really understand the thinking, nor do I know the percentage of willing burkha wearers versus those forced to do so.

Hagar wrote:

why can Muslim people not understand that their misplaced mode of dress will cause assumptions by other reasonabley minded people.

What assumptions??

Hagar

There are many assumptions that could and would be made by many people.

I would be stupid to list them as many of them could be contrued as racist.
So I must decline to answer.

rsynnott

Question: would those supporting a ban on the Burkha also support a ban on the Christian cross, the Jewish skullcap and other religious attire? If not, why?

Hagar

I live in France where all those are already banned in all schools.

Victor

In Ireland they force school girls to wear skirts and pinafores.

EamonnKeane

Doesn't it also amount to men not being permitted to look at women's bodies?

lazydaisy

Yeah right. I just heard a statistic that said Ireland has the highest percapita readership of Playboy in the world.

fly_agaric

bonkey wrote:

I agree compeltely that forcing something like this on people is unacceptable, but how much is really forced?

I know many a Catholic who abstains from eating meat on Friday. Why? Because they're told not to by their church. They (generally) don't see rhyme nor reason to it, but its the teachings of their church and they follow it. Is the Catholic Church wrong to make these people not eat meat on Friday? They're not freely choosing to not eat meat....they're doing it because they're told it would be a sin to do otherwise, and they don't wish to be sinners.

Yes, I realise I stop short of saying they Catholics are forced to not eat meat, but its an interesting parallel. If a Muslim woman's faith/belief tells her she should wear a Burka, is she wrong to choose to do so? Is her family/Mullah/husband wrong to encourage her to do so because they believe (like Catholics eating meat on Friday) that it would be a sin to do otherwise?

Is it a free choice or is it forced - that's the question isn't it?
Imagine this little scenario of a young muslim woman in Ireland - unlikely seeing as I've never actually seen anyone in a burka in Ireland:

Say her whole family expects her to wear the burka. She's not forced but still, you don't want to píss off your family too much now do you? Her imam tells her she should wear it or she is succumbing to "Western corruption" and setting out on the wrong path. People back home (the country her paents are from) wear it, and if she goes there she will have to wear it too - or risk her personal safety. All this pressure and you say she is making some kind of free choice?

If you want to go with the Catholics and meat on Fridays (Vatican II got rid of this I thought?) or, to take another example, mass on Sunday - well, it's a basically a free choice now becuase no one in Ireland gives a crap if you eat meat on Fridays or not or go to church on Sunday. There is no social pressure, no negative consequences. At one point, you would face disapproval for not sticking to the Catholic "rules" so the choice wasn't as free. Now the pressure is almost in the other direction as regards going to mass on Sundays (Sunday is the holy shopping day:) and you are a bit of an oddball wasting an hour in church instead of contributing to the economy).

These women have been conditioned to ways of thinking which results in them wearing the burka. They are under external pressure from their society. What kind of choice is that anyway?

Dades

rsynnott wrote:

Question: would those supporting a ban on the Burkha also support a ban on the Christian cross, the Jewish skullcap and other religious attire? If not, why?

Why do posters, in EVERY thread continue to make analogies that are irrelevant. (See the abortion thread for more ridiculous comparisons). It's not a religious issue.

That fact that Burkhas are a symbol of religion has nothing to do with this thread. They could be a national custom and the issue would still be the same. The intent is not to deny freedom of religion. The point that is being argued is that they are repressive, and a restriction on the human rights of those forced to wear them.

fly_agaric wrote:

These women have been conditioned to ways of thinking which results in them wearing the burka. They are under external pressure from their society. What kind of choice is that anyway?

Good post, fly.

bonkey

The Atheist wrote:

]The point that is being argued is that they are repressive, and a restriction on the human rights of those forced to wear them.

Thats two points, and I'm not just being pedantic.

Of course they are a restriction on the human rights of those forced to wear them, but that doesn't address how many women are forced to wear them, how many choose to, and how we can distinguish between the two.

fly_agaric wrote:

These women have been conditioned to ways of thinking which results in them wearing the burka.

Ah, I see. Thats how we're supposed to do distinguish between the two. We argue that even those who claim to have made a free choice haven't actually done so, because its really some sort of cultural indoctrination. In short, we deny that free choice exists for anyone who claims to have freely made this choice. How enlightened of us. Why address the question of whether or not a choice was freely made when you can just pretend it doesn't exist.

Tell me, if an Irish woman (or woman of another "Western" nation) were to convert to Islam and choose to wear the Burka, what then? Should we decide she was forced into it even if she says otherwise, should we decide that its her Western culture which has conned her into believing she made a free choice, or should we just come up with another "this scenario doesn't exist" denial-based-refutation.

All this pressure and you say she is making some kind of free choice?

Yes, I do.

Nowhere where the freedom to choose is enshrined as a right does it suggest that this freedom prevents others from trying to convince you to do otherwise.

Freedom of choice has never equated with freedom from reprecussion.

Now if she was to be cast out of her home for making the choice, or something to that effect, I would completely agree there was an attempt at unacceptable coercion....but freedom of choice has never protected people from others voicing displeasure at a decision and/or attempting to convince you to do otherwise.

At one point, you would face disapproval for not sticking to the Catholic "rules" so the choice wasn't as free

And we dealt with this issue (as you see it) how?

We didn't ban anything.
We didn't prevent the Catholic church from attempting to sway people. We didn't tell people that it was wrong to choose to do what their religious leaders tell them is the right thing for the faithful to do.

We didn't do any of those things.

We let them instead choose whether or not to do what they were told. We left people their freedom of choice, rather than attempt to take it away leaving only the choices we want them to have.

Why is the wearing of a Burka any different?

jc

Dades

bonkey wrote:

Why is the wearing of a Burka any different?

Because not eating meat on a Friday shades into insignificance when compared to wearing a Burkha.

Leave religion out of the equation for just one minute and look at the practice. It's a travesty that in the 21st Century that people should have to live their public lives covered head to toe in black, for fear of whatever.

Unfortunately it is a religious tradition, which only means we can't interfere. Doesn't mean we can't empathise however.

Bucephalus

The Atheist wrote:

It's not a religious issue to many - it's a human rights issue.

I'm all for religious freedom - doesn't bother me. But I do have an issue with a religion that forces it's women to completely cover their bodies in public at all times. The point is that is just wrong. And it's not just wrong when applying western values - it's just wrong on any plain of reasonable thought. Are burkha's favoured by the wearers? Or are they just used to them? If so that that doesn't stil make it right.

I've seen a variety of clothes worn by Muslim women, so I'd say while it may be a matter of compulsion in some sects, I'd say no in general.

After all, if you start banning that, where do you stop? Soccer jerseys can be controversial (I'm thinking of Rangers or Celtic tops here).

We obviously have no control over the practice in Iran, Afghanistan, etc. but we do here in our own country.
And yet, strangely, I'm still undecided on the matter.

I'm also thinking of human rights too - what right do I have to tell a woman to wear?

Imagine if some group tried to prevent Irish people wearing jeans.

Snickers Man

I've never seen anybody wear a burkha (which I understand to be a shroud like garment that covers the entire body including the face except the eyes) in Ireland.

Has anybody else?

Dades

Bucephalus wrote:

After all, if you start banning that, where do you stop? Soccer jerseys can be controversial (I'm thinking of Rangers or Celtic tops here).

Round and round and round we go.

The proposal isn't to ban Burkhas because they cause controversy. It's because to force someone to wear one is fundamentally wrong. The question now is whether wearers are forced or not, and/or whether we can infringe on religious freedom no matter how ridiculous the practice is.

Zombrex

The Atheist wrote:

It's because to force someone to wear one is fundamentally wrong.

Then surely to force someone not to wear one is equally wrong?

I don't think it is really been shown that the majority of muslim women are forced to wear them, and I would imagine that the minority that are "forced" aren't forced any more than any other women are forced to wear what their parents/husband/society feels is approprate dress. Do we ban parents/husbands from saying "you are not going out dressed like that"?

How many times have you seen a group of Irish people tut-tut a group of young Irish girls dressed up like Britney Spears, cause they are giving out the "wrong message" (or as one of my female friends said "if you dress like a slut the world will treat you like a slut").

The reality is the dress seems to reflect more our own stereotypes than what the woman underneath the dress is actually like. Just as a 14 year old has very little concept of the sexual overtones we adults think of when we see her wearing a pink top and short skirt (or sex in general for that matter), we have no idea if the muslim woman under the burkas is actually being forced or abused into wearing the vail.

I think it is unfair to project our own stereotypes, of what they or their life must be like, on to someone because of the way they dress. And dictating by law the way women should dress, in an effort to protect them, is doing just that.