nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Should Dublin ban Burqas and Hijabs?

Skinhead Kane

Greetings guys and girls,

I have been thinking about this topic for quite some time now and have yet to make a real judgement on what truly would be a correct answer. If were to go to a country populated by the Muslim community we would be asked to cover up and follow their religious procedure.

Therefore in Britain and Ireland I believe we are within our rights to ban something that isolates woman and was made by men to oppress them. If I were to show my hair/head in their countries, I would be seen as obscene.

Recently came back from a trip and had some female friends been told by locals to cover their arms and legs as well as hair before entering out of the city centre areas. It was a very aggressive approach to and almost demanded 'or we leave the country' type of attitude. Now not using this as a reason or motive to make this topic, but it has however got me thinking.

If I could vote on it, I would ban burqas and possibly hijab.

What's your take on this guys?

Regards,

Sk

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Odhinn

Wanderer78 wrote: »

again, those scary foreigners, and their scary foreign ideas, moving on...

I've no idea what you're trying to say there, tbh.

Wanderer78

Odhinn wrote: »

Star prizes for being obtuse. The fact is that state repression caused people to "double down" in relation to their religion. Theres no reason to believe the same would not be true of Islamic traditions.

again, those scary foreigners, and their scary foreign ideas, moving on...

Odhinn

Wanderer78 wrote: »

im agnostic, and i think we re doing grand

timthumbni wrote: »

Rampant child abuse? You are a winner sir...

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Its starting to work out ok, small steps. We're getting there. We've abortion, divorce, a gay Taoiseach, nondemonination schools...

You'd imagine though, with such expressions, of the negative impact of the more virtuous, you'd be anxious we dont take a step backwards, by tolerating a manifestation of a most fundamentalist intolerance.

Star prizes for being obtuse. The fact is that state repression caused people to "double down" in relation to their religion. Theres no reason to believe the same would not be true of Islamic traditions.

[Deleted User]

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Feminists and women in general on this thread should realise that these guys are not your allies.

It's the general movement of various leftist groups, like Feminists... short term feelings of righteousness to show everyone that their opinions are more sympathetic, more liberal, more free, more... whatever.

And it sacrifices the future for that short term feeling... and they won't be responsible for what happens later, because victims are never responsible.. They'll blame Muslims for not conforming to their perception of how things should have been... and complain about how others try to clean up their mess... (without providing any workable solutions showing they haven't learned a thing) Yay! more righteous indignation and posturing. :rolleyes:

[Deleted User]

timthumbni wrote: »

Rampant child abuse? You are a winner sir...

Except that child abuse isn't/wasn't rampant. To suggest it was rampant, would mean that the majority of those within the Church engaged in such behavior. Which I have seen no to evidence to support such an idea. That child abuse occurred is definitely true, and but this need to paint the whole religion as being involved or responsible is ridiculous. (although it's interesting the way people bend over backwards to excuse Islamic behavior as individualistic or as a minority... but are quick to lambaste the C Church and those connected with it. I'm not Catholic btw)

And TBF the negatives of the Church in Ireland affected the majority general population through censorship, blocking birth control, forcing pregnancies, interference in government, women's rights, gay rights etc. Child abuse wouldn't be the biggest limitation that the Church previously reinforced in Ireland.

Pretzill

The Crowman wrote: »

Whats with the Islamic obsession with "modesty" in women? Its a word you keep coming across in these discussions.

I don't think it's modesty (though I used the word myself) in extreme terms it's covering up so no other men feel inclined to be attracted to them sexually - which makes the wearing of the nijab in minors even more disgusting imo.

I would be of the opinion organised religion should be banned too but I can't see that happening.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Wibbs wrote: »

I've read some daft things in my time and that's right near the top of the pops of daft things. The last time I saw perspective that slanted was in a Georges Braque painting. Cultural relativism; a social ideology masquerading as a fact.

It’s the ideology of the slow suicide of the West alright.

At this stage we have a certain type of left winger telling us the Islamic world is fine, as good if not better than the west. A burka is no big deal. Sure let all the women wear one.

Feminists and women in general on this thread should realise that these guys are not your allies.

(All of this is separate from “us” - mostly the US - imposing values on them by invasions and bombing. That’s nonsense too).

Roger Hassenforder

Odhinn wrote: »

For a few hundred years being a catholic was a great disadvantage in this country. Look how that worked out.

Its starting to work out ok, small steps. We're getting there. We've abortion, divorce, a gay Taoiseach, nondemonination schools...

You'd imagine though, with such expressions, of the negative impact of the more virtuous, you'd be anxious we dont take a step backwards, by tolerating a manifestation of a most fundamentalist intolerance.

suicide_circus

Wibbs wrote: »

I've read some daft things in my time and that's right near the top of the pops of daft things. The last time I saw perspective that slanted was in a Georges Braque painting. Cultural relativism; a social ideology masquerading as a fact.

you're assuming there that everyone wants liberty. some slaves are glad of their chains

The Crowman

FTA69 wrote: »

Have you ever spoken to a woman in a hijab or niqab? The idea that you’re going to help a woman by forcing her to tog off at the pool is loopy mate.

Muslim women aren’t dopes. They also happen to believe in Islam and often have deep concepts of modesty. They don’t want or need you to insist they wear a bikini for their own good.

Whats with the Islamic obsession with "modesty" in women? Its a word you keep coming across in these discussions.

Wibbs

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Like I said - it’s a matter of perspective, and we’re no better or worse in the West as a society than they are in the Middle East.

I've read some daft things in my time and that's right near the top of the pops of daft things. The last time I saw perspective that slanted was in a Georges Braque painting. Cultural relativism; a social ideology masquerading as a fact.

Franz Von Peppercorn

FTA69 wrote: »

Have you ever spoken to a woman in a hijab or niqab? The idea that you’re going to help a woman by forcing her to tog off at the pool is loopy mate.

Muslim women aren’t dopes. They also happen to believe in Islam and often have deep concepts of modesty. They don’t want or need you to insist they wear a bikini for their own good.

Where does this extreme modesty come from? Are they born with it, or does a religion impose itself on them as they are reared?

Choice is a dubious term here, and many in fact wouldn’t choose it if it were up to them, even after the conditioning.

timthumbni

Odhinn wrote: »

For a few hundred years being a catholic was a great disadvantage in this country. Look how that worked out.

Rampant child abuse? You are a winner sir...

Wanderer78

Odhinn wrote: »

For a few hundred years being a catholic was a great disadvantage in this country. Look how that worked out.

im agnostic, and i think we re doing grand

CinemaGuy45

Don't care about religion but this is a safety issue.

Odhinn

For a few hundred years being a catholic was a great disadvantage in this country. Look how that worked out.

timthumbni

It’s amusing reading Irish people (from mostly a catholic background) defending Islamic bonkers practices..

The story of Nero playing the fiddle whilst Rome burned springs to mind.

bfa1509

Deleted User wrote: »

And I was recently at a pool resort in Spain, where there was a group of M.Eastern men (ethnicity) living in the area (learned through conversation), who insulted or made obviously inappropriate gestures towards the women in their bikinis or more modest swimsuits.

Women wearing Burqa's, Hijabs, and all-covering swimwear doesn't solely affect the women themselves. It affects those around them. Allowing such habits, encourages Muslim men (and women) to retain their attitudes (learned/developed in their original country/culture) while living in the West. It reinforces the difference, and encourages a dual attitude towards perception regarding behavior.

Wearing a bikini on a beach, a short skirt on a street, or a sexy outfit while out for dinner, is all part of western culture. Most people would see such, and ignore it beyond their own appreciation (internalized or vocalized)... but we have laws to reduce the harassment that women receive... because it's wrong. It shouldn't be happening.

However, allowing a subculture to dress differently due to their religious beliefs encourages that belief to be pushed on to others. After all the reasons why the Burqa or Hijab are worn is not to do with the garment itself... it is what is to be hidden. To show modesty. To show respect.

There was a Pakistani guy in my class in college. Any girl who wore a skirt or dress higher than the knee was a either a slut or a whore. I never once heard any of my irish classmates hold a view this backward. Now, it's perfectly fair to argue that he is not representative of the wider muslim community but if 1/100 or even 1/1000 held the same view, that is too much for me.

It is bizarre how liberals think we should tolerate an inherent intolerance.

[Deleted User]

FTA69 wrote: »

Have you ever spoken to a woman in a hijab or niqab? The idea that you’re going to help a woman by forcing her to tog off at the pool is loopy mate.

Agreed. In many cases, Muslim women are the biggest defenders of such garments, and not the men... but women talking on the subject aren't going to want to promote that fact.

It's not about helping the Muslim women. The vast majority anyway. Sure, there will be a minority who want to be "freed", but I think many here don't understand the power of cultural conditioning. Perhaps because Ireland has moved away from it so much within the last 20-30 years.

Nope. The argument shouldn't be that we are helping the Muslim women. The argument should be that we are helping western societies...

Muslim women aren’t dopes. They also happen to believe in Islam and often have deep concepts of modesty. They don’t want or need you to insist they wear a bikini for their own good.

Completely agree. I know Muslim women, and have dated a few of them. They know their own minds, and are fully capable of achieving what they wish. Admittedly, the options are rather limited in poor areas or in Muslim countries themselves, but any Muslim woman has full choice when they're in a Western country, and the majority are not shrugging off their religious habits.

Malayalam

(Finding it hard to write this post...so its a bit jumbled.)

The Burqa isn't just a piece of cloth. It is saying quite a few things very loudly. It is very much a moralistic and theological symbol. Often what it supposedly means is couched in very soft scriptural terms like female modesty and the desire to be close to Allah like the pure wives of Allah who took the veil.

But in a modern context, the burqa is actually saying women have to cover up or otherwise they are in essence lacking virtue. Just because of their embodiment. That's mad. It separates women into the virtuous and the unvirtuous. It divides a supposedly greater state from a lesser. For a woman to display their natural forms, clothed normally, is to be of lesser virtue. It is wanton. Deserving of disrespect. Or at the very least it is to be in an unprotected state that may casually invite disrespect, that may thus be excused.

The burqa is saying that it is up to women to avoiding invoking the lust inherent in men, by covering themselves. It is saying that a unveiled woman is fair game for the uncontrolled lustful attention of men who will not discipline themselves where there is no veiling. It is saying women have the responsibility not to provoke lust. That otherwise they bring violation upon themselves.

Inherent implications such as these are fundamentally against the culture we have built up in the west. Which took time and effort, so to cede it seems idiotic. We see men and women as equal before the law, as equally deserving of protection, we see women as not being responsible for any sexual violence enacted against them by virtue of their appearance.

It is fine for people to be religious - I get it. But the burqa is not inherent in Islam at all. It is in many ways a political instrument, or rather a symbol of theocracy.

I cannot understand people supporting burqa being permitted if they also value the human equalities and rights we have accrued over the past few hundred years in our culture. I really cannot understand it.

[Deleted User]

emo72 wrote: »

I remember a holiday in Spain sharing a communal pool. There was a woman head to toe in some black plastic suit swimming. Yeah it's none of my business but I had a strong reaction thinking this is so wrong. Just couldn't reconcile that a woman had to do this to get a swim.

I get the feeling these women aren't fully interacting when they leave the sanctuary of their homes. Horrible way to exist. These women need our help.

And I was recently at a pool resort in Spain, where there was a group of M.Eastern men (ethnicity) living in the area (learned through conversation), who insulted or made obviously inappropriate gestures towards the women in their bikinis or more modest swimsuits.

Women wearing Burqa's, Hijabs, and all-covering swimwear doesn't solely affect the women themselves. It affects those around them. Allowing such habits, encourages Muslim men (and women) to retain their attitudes (learned/developed in their original country/culture) while living in the West. It reinforces the difference, and encourages a dual attitude towards perception regarding behavior.

Wearing a bikini on a beach, a short skirt on a street, or a sexy outfit while out for dinner, is all part of western culture. Most people would see such, and ignore it beyond their own appreciation (internalized or vocalized)... but we have laws to reduce the harassment that women receive... because it's wrong. It shouldn't be happening.

However, allowing a subculture to dress differently due to their religious beliefs encourages that belief to be pushed on to others. After all the reasons why the Burqa or Hijab are worn is not to do with the garment itself... it is what is to be hidden. To show modesty. To show respect.

FTA69

emo72 wrote: »

I remember a holiday in Spain sharing a communal pool. There was a woman head to toe in some black plastic suit swimming. Yeah it's none of my business but I had a strong reaction thinking this is so wrong. Just couldn't reconcile that a woman had to do this to get a swim.

I get the feeling these women aren't fully interacting when they leave the sanctuary of their homes. Horrible way to exist. These women need our help.

Have you ever spoken to a woman in a hijab or niqab? The idea that you’re going to help a woman by forcing her to tog off at the pool is loopy mate.

Muslim women aren’t dopes. They also happen to believe in Islam and often have deep concepts of modesty. They don’t want or need you to insist they wear a bikini for their own good.

suicide_circus

didn't the Turks figure out many moons ago that the only way to successfully marry democracy and Islam was to repress all public displays of devotion. A policy which Erdogan is steadily reversing...and is turkey getting better or worse for it?

emo72

I remember a holiday in Spain sharing a communal pool. There was a woman head to toe in some black plastic suit swimming. Yeah it's none of my business but I had a strong reaction thinking this is so wrong. Just couldn't reconcile that a woman had to do this to get a swim.

I get the feeling these women aren't fully interacting when they leave the sanctuary of their homes. Horrible way to exist. These women need our help.

[Deleted User]

Wibbs wrote: »

My "answer" would be pretty simple; don't import the problem in the first place. The problems of multiculturalism are massively reduced by massively reducing multiculturalism in the first place. The last few years of opening Europe up to the many hundreds of thousands from very different cultures is to me beyond moronic.

Well, I'm slightly different with you on this. Immigration has been happening for thousands of years without any huge conflicts, however, the numbers of people involved were more controlled. People didn't travel. They went, possibly, to the next country beside them, but were more likely just to bear the crap of their own countries.

We need to take a more balanced perspective when it comes to modern immigration and multiculturalism. Numbers matter. But more importantly, religion matters. The West is moving rapidly away from western Religion(s) having any strong influence in the running of society... but in many countries around the world, the opposite is happening. Religion in Muslim countries is gaining influence rather than losing it... and the people who immigrate to Europe from Muslim countries, are not separate to that movement to increase religious influence.

When it comes to Islam, Hinduism, etc you cannot separate religion from culture. We can when it comes to Christianity, but we shouldn't be applying the same standards or logic to other faiths.

Multiculturalism works when it is primarily culture that is involved. Chinese people moving to Western countries don't cause any major conflicts. Japanese with their rather lackluster approach to religion also don't cause any issues, and the numbers of Asians from non-religious countries in Europe far outweigh the numbers of Muslims. And little to no trouble with Asians (apart from organised crime and minor incidents of racism).

Religion is the key factor here, and we need to step up to recognize that. This pandering to religious groups is not working. It isn't. It's denial of the facts of the situation.

Personally, I have no issue with Islam. I've been to Iran three times, and found it to be a wonderful experience each time. It suits that country. It makes sense. However, I have seen nothing to suggest that Islamic culture/religion makes sense to be tolerated, or more accurately, encouraged in Europe. And it is being actively encouraged.

We do need to look at religion and acknowledge that this is the primary difference that distinguishes between those who integrate, (or even exist without friction), compared with the very obvious friction that is occurring in Europe today. And... to bring in laws/regulations/social rules which limit the influence of religion (any religion) in our society.

Roger Hassenforder

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Just to pick two recent examples in AH alone off the top of my head, there’s a woman on trial by social media for having too many children, and how she is nothing more than a leech and a drain on society, and then there is the more recent thread about a woman whom I gather there are a few posters would only wish she would wear a burqa to cover herself up :pac:

Like I said - it’s a matter of perspective, and we’re no better or worse in the West as a society than they are in the Middle East.

Neither of those would be on Middle East social media!!

LirW

bfa1509 wrote: »

Of course I would not ban burkas/hijabs. I would follow Sebastian Kurz, the austrian president. He made the very valid point that Islam is more than a religion, it is a set of political ideologies (sharia law) and that it simply could not co-exist with his own government. So he closed down seven mosques and plans to expel 40 imams from the country. And before you say "Oh, that's racist. Oh freedom of religion", come back to me in 10 years when we will have much bigger problems on our hands than people wearing burkas/hijabs.

Look, what you see here is a free-standing idea of a foreign politician. I grew up over there and still have family there and am quite knowledgeable about the political climate over there. If you know and see the bigger picture of the political situation you might think differently about that. What happens there at the moment is a political segregation of the society with cheap populistic methods where people are forced to either take a far right or far left stance, because there are lots of troubles brewing over there. The political middle ground completely vanished over there and a lot of these proposals are covers for introducing higher taxes and cutting welfare benefits because "it targets the foreigners".
Make yourself familiar how the last blue-black coalition left the country in absolute shambles before the foreign party lost almost all of their voters.
Also Kurz is Chancellor, the president is a former Green party member.

One eyed Jack

wakka12 wrote: »

Second class citizen would mean more restrictive laws governing one group differently to another
Which happens many muslim women, such as not having been able to drive
Western world has no such laws
Western world treat women a lot better, it just goes without saying

Just to pick two recent examples in AH alone off the top of my head, there’s a woman on trial by social media for having too many children, and how she is nothing more than a leech and a drain on society, and then there is the more recent thread about a woman whom I gather there are a few posters would only wish she would wear a burqa to cover herself up :pac:

Like I said - it’s a matter of perspective, and we’re no better or worse in the West as a society than they are in the Middle East.

Wibbs

Yep, it's the second and third generation that both feel the failure of multiculturalism and react against it. I understand why they might too. I know I would, or strongly suspect I would in their position. They feel British/French/Whatever, but they're made to feel slightly less British/French/Whatever by the dominant population and culture. They're not quite true blue examples of their own origin culture either. Swinging on a rope between the two. A bloody horrible position to be in.

Now at this point the notion of more tolerance and more acceptance comes into play and it seems like the right idea and it is. As an idea. In practice it ignores basic human nature. Basic human nature will bite you every time. It also looks like pandering(to both sides), even condescending. Doubly so to people who already consider themselves British/French/Whatever. By acknowledging the gap, too often you increase it. In steps the radicals and the traditionalists who promise a place for them, a sense of pride. One that's apart from both the dominant culture and the origin(though wears the clothes of the latter). If I was swinging on that rope I'd see that as a welcome foothold. From there it's hardly a leap to getting stabby or bomby in a crowded place of people you don't consider your own(these people also blow up folks from their "own kind").

bluewolf wrote: »

Who has the answer, i don't, but i think more proactive positive things that they all must do, rather than things that only 50% must not do, would be a better approach. And i think it will be a lot more subtle than this one public image

My "answer" would be pretty simple; don't import the problem in the first place. The problems of multiculturalism are massively reduced by massively reducing multiculturalism in the first place. The last few years of opening Europe up to the many hundreds of thousands from very different cultures is to me beyond moronic. And no amount of emotively harsh pics of a poor dead kid on a Greek beach* - who wouldn't be there if the door weren't open in the first place - is going to change my mind on that front.

*and before the gales of outrage kick off. Name him. Go on. No google allowed. Funny how our wailing emotions are so transient and amnesiac.

suicide_circus

can woman who wear the burqa full time be involved in the ordinary workforce?