Burka ban

fontanalis · 23-09-2011 01:47PM

robindch wrote: »

If there's no coercion, then that's fine. The issue here is that there is coercion.
Would you agree that anyone who forces another person -- I trust you'll grant directly, or indirectly, adult or child -- to wear a burka is out of order?

If so, then you're probably pro-ban, rather than anti.

Yes, but I see myself as more anti ban.
I remember going through Heathrow a few years ago and there was a family going through security before me. The wife (presumably) had the whole garb on, and a young daughter who not only had to be dressed with this symbol of sexual repression but was also confined to a wheel chair.
The way I look at it is I think people who are pro ban (in general) see the ban as a way of showing Western cultures are different in that we don't want these symbols of opression, but one thing I think the West should pride itself on is giving the people the right to wear what they want (which is the opposite of the places where women must wear those things).

Scotty # · 23-09-2011 02:12PM

I'm religious and support the ban

robindch wrote: »

fontanalis wrote: »

If someone wants to wear something no matter how ridiculous or what kind of statement it gives off, shouldn't they be allowed to wear it?

If there's no coercion, then that's fine. The issue here is that there is coercion.

And if it's not coercion it'll be due to indoctrination.

Fontanalis, you can't win. The pro-ban lobby have decided these women can't possibly have come to the decision of their own free will to wear the burka as is their culture and therefore must be forced to conform with the risk of imprisonment.

AhSureTisGrand · 23-09-2011 04:52PM

I'm religious and support the ban

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I think there's a difference between someone coerced to do something which takes what half an hour a week compared to someone being coerced into excluding themselves from interacting with society.

So is it the coercion or the clothing that bothers you?

Rev Hellfire · 24-09-2011 10:47AM

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

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

So is it the coercion or the clothing that bothers you?

The coercion primarily. You see I fully accept that their are some women who possibly freely decided to wear such garb.

But what it comes down to me is weighting their right to wear what they want against providing legal protection for those to whom such decision is denied.

AhSureTisGrand · 24-09-2011 10:53AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

The coercion primarily. You see I fully accept that their are some women who possibly freely decided to wear such garb.

But what it comes down to me is weighting their right to wear what they want against providing legal protection for those to whom such decision is denied.

By denying them the decision? You are advocating far worse coercion than any Muslim husbands could manage, because their methods of coercion are illegal

Your position is such that if a number of people were being coerced into wearing Adidas tracksuits you would have to ban them to protect the innocent

Scotty # · 24-09-2011 11:09AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

But what it comes down to me is weighting their right to wear what they want against providing legal protection for those to whom such decision is denied.

WOW!! that's quite the policy. There were several people found as slaves in the UK recently. To protect anyone else becoming a slave you suggest we ban all manual labour?

You want to provide, and this is the WOW! part... "legal protection for those to whom such decision is denied"!! by also denying them such decision?? Ingenious.

Any idea what proportion of woman are being forced to wear the burka? No? But yet you want an outright ban? That stinks of Islamaphobia to me.

Rev Hellfire · 24-09-2011 12:53PM

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

Scotty # wrote: »

WOW!! that's quite the policy. There were several people found as slaves in the UK recently. To protect anyone else becoming a slave you suggest we ban all manual labour?

Yes that's exactly the same, well done you've caught me out.

Rev Hellfire · 24-09-2011 12:58PM

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

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

By denying them the decision? You are advocating far worse coercion than any Muslim husbands could manage, because their methods of coercion are illegal

Yes, it could be viewed as such. I personally believe its a case of the lesser of two evils. Though I understand how others might view it differently.

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

Your position is such that if a number of people were being coerced into wearing Adidas tracksuits you would have to ban them to protect the innocent

Yep, if a number of people where forced to wear Adidas tracksuits such that it served as a way of removing them from society I would also be pro-banning them as well.

Logical Fallacy · 24-09-2011 01:15PM

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

The coercion primarily. You see I fully accept that their are some women who possibly freely decided to wear such garb.

But what it comes down to me is weighting their right to wear what they want against providing legal protection for those to whom such decision is denied.

So to stop a group of people being, you feel, made to do something they don't want to do you need to make another presumably smaller group of people do what they don't want to do.

Interesting.

AhSureTisGrand · 24-09-2011 02:28PM

I'm religious and support the ban

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Yep, if a number of people where forced to wear Adidas tracksuits such that it served as a way of removing them from society I would also be pro-banning them as well.

This is not in question. They are absolutely hideous. Worse than the burka, I dare say. Meanwhile, I imagine some vile parents have indeed forced their child into wearing these clothes

Rev Hellfire · 24-09-2011 09:07PM

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

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

So to stop a group of people being, you feel, made to do something they don't want to do you need to make another presumably smaller group of people do what they don't want to do.

Interesting.

What's more interesting is the reluctance some people have to relinquishing any 'rights' they might have even if it means the potential liberation of a vulnerable group.

Shows whose rights they're really concerned about imho etc etc.

AhSureTisGrand · 24-09-2011 09:49PM

I'm religious and support the ban

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

What's more interesting is the reluctance some people have to relinquishing any 'rights' they might have even if it means the potential liberation of a vulnerable group.

Shows whose rights they're really concerned about imho etc etc.

What rights are you trying to uphold? The right to be forced not to wear a burka? The right to have your life choices dictated to you? Or is it the right to be "happy", whether you like it or not?

yammycat · 25-09-2011 02:32AM

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

If women were not forced to wear it then the issue of she really really wants to wear a sack on her head but you are denying her rights rawr rawr wouldn't exist. Stop forcing/torturing/beating/mutilating/brow beating women into this then the issue wouldn't exist.

Give them a real choice and then if they want to fair enough but no it's not OK for one woman to have a 'right' to wear whatever she wants while ten more have sulphuric acid thrown in their face because herp derp the man in the sky says you have to wear it and Mr Mullah and his vat of acid have issues with you not doing so.

MrPudding · 25-09-2011 02:38AM

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

The issue I have with it, which is the same as
many others here, is bow much of a choice is it?

To me it is similar to someone walking up to me, putting a gun to my head and "asking" me to hand over all my mobey. Yes, I have chosen, oft own free will, to hand over my money, but did I really have a choice

MrP

AhSureTisGrand · 25-09-2011 06:21AM

I'm religious and support the ban

yammycat wrote: »

If women were not forced to wear it then the issue of she really really wants to wear a sack on her head but you are denying her rights rawr rawr wouldn't exist. Stop forcing/torturing/beating/mutilating/brow beating women into this then the issue wouldn't exist.

I have a revolutionary idea: we ban those things instead

robindch · 25-09-2011 08:34AM

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

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

Robin: if you felt people were being coerced into going to Mass, say, would you support a ban on it?

As Rev Hellfire pointed out above, the church analogy doesn't work since people people tend to spend limited amounts of time within a church, rather than their entire adult lives. And it's something that happens within the privacy of a building.

The burka, on the other hand, is coercion which is continuous and public and intended to signal that the wearer has submitted (recall what the word "islam" means) to external control.

Does it not strike you as odd to believe (as I presume you do) that each wearer is exercising a fully free choice while at the same time, having no choice about what to wear?

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

I have a revolutionary idea: we ban those things instead

I think you'll find that those things have been banned, so the coercion and control is now exercised through the mandatory wearing of certain clothes.

robindch · 25-09-2011 08:40AM

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

MrPudding wrote: »

To me it is similar to someone walking up to me, putting a gun to my head and "asking" me to hand over all my mobey. Yes, I have chosen, oft own free will, to hand over my money, but did I really have a choice

I suspect that the anti-ban side would say that in that case, you did make a free choice.

While I'm happy to be corrected, the anti-ban side doesn't appear to accept the existence or possibility of coercion.

AhSureTisGrand · 25-09-2011 09:19AM

I'm religious and support the ban

robindch wrote: »

I think you'll find that those things have been banned

I think you'll find that was my point. I don't think there is a legal way in this country to coerce (coercion defined as involving the aggressive use of force or the threat of force) an adult to conform to a certain standard of clothing (unless you're a legislator of course).

While I'm happy to be corrected, the anti-ban side doesn't appear to accept the existence or possibility of coercion.

You don't seem to accept that it's illegal.

The burka, on the other hand, is coercion

No it's not. It may be a result of coercion or submission, but the wearing of this article of clothing does not force you to do anything.

intended to signal that the wearer has submitted (recall what the word "islam" means) to external control.

Did the burka hold a gun to their head and make them submit to Islam?

As Rev Hellfire pointed out above, the church analogy doesn't work since people people tend to spend limited amounts of time within a church, rather than their entire adult lives. And it's something that happens within the privacy of a building.

These burka-wearing women don't seem to me the sort that spend a lot of time in public. I would hazard a guess that the time they spend outdoors per week is comparable to the length of the marathon church services they have in Jesusland, USA.

Does it not strike you as odd to believe (as I presume you do) that each wearer is exercising a fully free choice while at the same time, having no choice about what to wear?

So now their own moral code is oppressing them? Either you're a libertine or you believe Allah most high is forcing them to wear the burka.

Scotty # · 25-09-2011 10:11AM

I'm religious and support the ban

robindch wrote: »

While I'm happy to be corrected, the anti-ban side doesn't appear to accept the existence or possibility of coercion.

What utter utter nonsense. Really Robin, pay a little more attention to what's being said. You might learn something.

25-09-2011 10:26AM

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

Of course there is coercion. So stop the coercion, not banning free choice for everyone else.

robindch · 25-09-2011 10:40AM

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

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

It may be a result of coercion or submission, but the wearing of this article of clothing does not force you to do anything.

That's not relevant to this argument, but it's a good start that you recognise that the wearing of the burka can be as the result of coercion.

So the question then becomes: if some activity happens (largely) on account of coercion, then is it reasonable to ban that activity, in the expectation that this form of coercion will cease?

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

So now their own moral code is oppressing them?

Yes, it's called religion. Or at least those parts of the religion which can be used by coercive males to control women, and for women to signal that they are controlled.

robindch · 25-09-2011 10:42AM

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

Scotty # wrote: »

What utter utter nonsense. Really Robin, pay a little more attention to what's being said. You might learn something.

Any further intemperate posts will earn you a card.

robindch · 25-09-2011 10:56AM

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

bluewolf wrote: »

So stop the coercion, not banning free choice for everyone else.

How would you suggest stopping subtle and unsubtle coercion?

The "choice for everybody else" is moot, since I don't believe there are any women who've freely chosen to wear the burka themselves -- have you ever worn it yourself, or wanted to?

The fact that no woman seems to want to wear it strongly suggests that the decision to wear it is pretty much exclusively coercive, and that the law to ban wearing is reasonable, since it does not restrict any activity currently undertaken by those who are not forced to wear it.

Scotty # · 25-09-2011 11:53AM

I'm religious and support the ban

robindch wrote: »

The "choice for everybody else" is moot, since I don't believe there are any women who've freely chosen to wear the burka themselves.

And nothing they could say or do will convince you otherwise. You know what is best for them and THEY WILL CONFORM or go to prison. I'm sure Muslim women are SO thankful for this liberation. :rolleyes:

robindch wrote: »

Any further intemperate posts will earn you a card.

...

robindch · 25-09-2011 12:10PM

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

Scotty # wrote: »

robindch wrote:

The "choice for everybody else" is moot, since I don't believe there are any women who've freely chosen to wear the burka themselves.

And nothing they could say or do will convince you otherwise.

Well, huge numbers of non-islamic women wearing the burka, or clamouring to wear it, would. The silence is somewhat telling, wouldn't you say?

Scotty # wrote: »

You know what is best for them and THEY WILL CONFORM or go to prison. I'm sure Muslim women are SO thankful for this liberation.

An elegant point I hadn't considered when weighing the merits and demerits of the ban -- count me converted!

AudreyHepburn · 25-09-2011 01:11PM

robindch wrote: »

How would you suggest stopping subtle and unsubtle coercion?

The "choice for everybody else" is moot, since I don't believe there are any women who've freely chosen to wear the burka themselves -- have you ever worn it yourself, or wanted to?

The fact that no woman seems to want to wear it strongly suggests that the decision to wear it is pretty much exclusively coercive, and that the law to ban wearing is reasonable, since it does not restrict any activity currently undertaken by those who are not forced to wear it.

Have spoken to any muslim women? Have you seen a survey or study on how they feel about the Burkha?

If, as I suspect, you haven't then how can you possibly know how they feel wearing it?

You do see the problem with your logic don't you? You want to stop women being forced to wear the Burkha....fine, I am with you there. So your own, and others, answer is to force them not to wear it. Instead of their husbnds/religion dictating to them you want the government to do so.

Surely you can see how skewed that logic is?

25-09-2011 01:24PM

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

The "choice for everybody else" is moot, since I don't believe there are any women who've freely chosen to wear the burka themselves -- have you ever worn it yourself, or wanted to?

That's a stupid argument and you know it. I've never wanted to go skiing, nor have I gone - does that mean nobody else in the world wants to? I've never worn some hideous fashion apparel, does that mean nobody else wants to?

The fact that no woman seems to want to wear it

That's not a fact. There have been articles linked on boards before (which I am having a nightmare finding again) on interviews with perfectly mentally sound women of both UK and US backgrounds who converted and decided to wear it. They spoke about how they like wearing it, and about the adjustments, and how they felt they wanted to do it as part of their religion. Just because you haven't met any nor spoken to any does not mean they don't exist.
Hell, here's someone who did try it for a month
http://muslimvoices.org/french-artist-wears-burqa-month/
with an interesting quote from a muslimah

Likewise, when she took it off at the end of the month, she too had trouble with people looking at her body, saying that the way people looked at her, especially her décolleté, “made her want to scream.” (p. 127)

Scotty # · 25-09-2011 02:46PM

I'm religious and support the ban

I posted a report in this thread also regarding women who choose to wear the burka, some of them against their husbands/families wishes.

robindch · 25-09-2011 03:04PM

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

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Have spoken to any muslim women? Have you seen a survey or study on how they feel about the Burkha?
If, as I suspect, you haven't then how can you possibly know how they feel wearing it?

As you're coming into this thread rather late, you may have missed the earlier posts in which I said that I travel regularly to the middle east and the far east -- indeed, I'm in Indonesia as I write -- and have spoken with muslim women in both regions about this topic, and all have been vehemently against the wearing of it. Granted, the women I meet here are for the most part, educated and well-travelled, so they aren't like the majority who are neither and have even less of a chance of avoiding coercion.

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

You do see the problem with your logic don't you? You want to stop women being forced to wear the Burkha....fine, I am with you there. So your own, and others, answer is to force them not to wear it. Instead of their husbnds/religion dictating to them you want the government to do so.

That's not a problem with logic and I've rebutted it quite a few times earlier in this thread.

On the contrary, it's a matter of balance -- no, it's crap on stilts that a government must ban an item of clothing, but it's being banned because the item is used to mark the commission of what I believe is a greater crime, namely the subtle or non-subtle coercion of a women to wear it. The government is simply stepping in to support the greater freedom to choose what to wear, by suppressing the lesser freedom of wearing a burka.

robindch · 25-09-2011 03:12PM

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

bluewolf wrote: »

robindch wrote:

The "choice for everybody else" is moot, since I don't believe there are any women who've freely chosen to wear the burka themselves -- have you ever worn it yourself, or wanted to?

That's a stupid argument and you know it.

Yes, it is a stupid argument, since it's missing the word "non-islamic" before "women" (I had three tabs open in ff and clearly got them mixed up).

bluewolf wrote: »

Just because you haven't met any nor spoken to any does not mean they don't exist.

Can you point to any non-islamic women who've made a fully unencumbered decision to wear the burka?

Not that it's going to make any difference if there are a few, as there may well be, since the number of them is far outweighed by the number of women who are coerced into wearing it and it's quite reasonable for the government, as I mentioned in the reply to audrey above, to choose to legislate for the greater freedom of the greater number, over the lesser freedom of the smaller.

Burka ban

Comments