That’s why, with banning burkas, they have to give some IMO bullshit security justification of not wearing ‘face-covering headgear’ in public. Banning only Burkas straight up, as a symbol of religious female oppression, probably would be illegitimate.
Well, of course they do, because these rules were made up in the 20th century, and continue to be made up as progressives go along, and religions actually have older traditions that they are loathe to change in order to keep up with a fad. The idea that requiring certain genders to wear certain things is ‘harsh sexual oppression’ simply hasn’t existed for very long, and quite frankly, probably won’t exist for very much longer.
Of course there are. It’s almost as if the secular left specifically targets elements of religious culture to declare ‘inappropriate’ in order to seperate people from any source of moral teaching that isn’t the State. If religions aren’t allowed to have any traditions that go against what western secular culture decides is super important this week, we may as well ditch religion altogether. For example, this week it’s trannies. It’s super important to the secular west that everybody understands that being born with a penis doesn’t make you male, and that laughing at a man in a dress is hate speech. Well, I’m sure that consigns plenty of religions to the dustbin of history…who knows what super important revelations the secular west will have for us next week.
Indeed, one has to draw the line somewhere.
Perhaps the primary reason for banning all face-covering headgear were burkas, but the security justification shouldn’t be overlooked. The most reliable way of recognizing and remembering somebody is by their face. Banning face-covering headgear will therefore reduce crime by making criminals easier to recognize, find and arrest. I’m not necessarily justifying the ban, but I think it has its positive side. People are much more dangerous behind a mask, whether a literal one in real life or a figurative one in the form of anonymity on internet - they don’t care as much about consequences of their actions.
I agree, it’s sad that some people think they can get away with pretty much anything, from bigotry to rape and murder by appealing to “freedom of religious belief”, as if the belief being religious makes it magically more justified and allowed.
Another thing that France could have done is ensure equality of its citizens and not let its citizens be forced to stay in a religion. If Muslim women want to wear Burqas they should be allowed to, but if they don’t, the state should make sure they aren’t forced to. For such a course of action to be successful though, Muslim women would have to stand up to their husbands, and I’m not sure how many of them would dare considering the radical forms of punishment Islam has for disobedient women. Perhaps then it is more effective for the state to take action instead.
Here we go with bigotry again. Gender, as well as sexuality, isn’t black and white. Through hormone therapies somebody with predominantly male characteristics (a person we call a male) might change and become more feminine than some women who were born that way. Uccisore, zinnat13, Arminius and all other conservatives - here are 2 simple pictures for you to prove yourselves wrong, just ask yourselves which one are you more attracted to?
[tab]
[/tab]
[tab]
[/tab]
And guess which one was born female and which one was born male.
Placing cameras everywhere would also reduce crime. It doesn’t make placing cameras everywhere a good measure, because there are other things - besides reducing crime and security - that factor in. And even then… I’d say the benefit to security of banning face-covering headgear, is marginal at best.
The issue concerning the Burkhas has been completely misconceived.
It has nothing whatever to do with recognition.
Here are three items of dress that are not banned in France…
AND
ALso
So who are you kidding?
Burqas reveal more about men than women
The Age newspaper, October 20, 2014, Australia
"Over the past few years I have bitten my tongue when statements about Islamic women wearing burqas and veils have cropped up in the press. The common, misinformed perception is that Muslim women mostly wear the burqa to express their religious devotion. That’s rubbish.
I am not anti-islamic, I lived as a Muslim woman from the age of 17 until I was 22, but I would like to put the record straight once and for all, to wear a burqa, hijab or headscarf during daily life is not wajib (mandatory and prescribed by the Koran) but only Sunnat (recommended culturally and as a matter of personal choice).
Having married a prince in an Islamic country, Malaysia, and originally hailing from Australia, I was required to undertake four years of Islamic study under the tutelage of the royal household’s iman and religions teacher, a respected national scholar. These twice-weekly classes were chaperoned – not for my chastity or purity but, as the iman explained to me, for his! He truly believed that neither I nor any woman could be trusted alone with a male without the baser female instincts coming to the fore.
I learnt that husbands can beat their wives providing they don’t mark their faces; and that fathers who instigate their daughters’ circumcisions will be rewarded in heaven, even though this abhorrent mutilation has nothing to do with religion but is a cultural practice to control women and temper their sensuality. In fact, much of the teaching, rather than being religious, was cultural and archaic.
The primary reason that women are required to swathe themselves in fabric, covering their collarbones necks, arms, legs, ankles, elbows, shoulders, throats, thighs, ears, the napes of their collarbones, necks, their hair and in some cases their faces, is because culturally, they are considered untrustworthy and immoral, condemned to the role of seductress. The fine shape of an ankle or tendril of hair are the tools of seduction. In essence, the veil, much lauded by so-called Islamic teachings, is a protection for men against us voracious vixens of the mortal world. Not, as so many pundits state, a protection for women against men".
The burqa is an abomination and a serious hindrance in today’s uncertain climate.
Is a motor cyclist allowed to enter a bank with his helmut on?
The problem with many people today that like to be seemed as an expert of every issue because they do not have the courage to accept that i do not know or i am not sure.
Before some wise people misrepresent the things more, let me remind that security was never the issue behind banning burkas.
Many people may not be aware of the fact that France also banned Turbans, which are used as a head gear for Sikkhs as a part of their religious tradition. This issue is being fought in the France by Sikkh community since 2004 and finally decided in the favor of Sikkhs in 2008 by international human rights organizations.
The government of the France may say one day in its wisdom that all women should have cut down their heir to 2-3 inches because this also may be potential security concern as they fake their identities by changing their hair style. And also, men should also be banned from having beard and wearing glasses for the same reason.
I wonder why France has not done that yet!
Secondly, this whole turban issue puts the wisdom of France Judiciary in question. I do not see any reason by any stretch of imagination how wearing a turban merely around the heir can cause fake identity and how France Judiciary gave verdict for banning turban. No wise and fair judge would ever do that.
That gives the insight of how a typical French intellectual (even the judges) sees the things. Any person having some common sense can clearly see that all this is not about the security.
It is nothing but telling the immigrants that if you want to live in our country, you have to go by our religious mindset, not yours. We do not care about your right to have your religious practices. But, as they cannot say that openly in the public, thus they choose indirect methods to impose their authority. It is as simple as that.
with love,
sanjay
May be. But going by your argument, one should criticize an established civil practice in a civil manner too, in the first place. Why one should cross the line by stretching a discussion in the territory of insult? Who is crossing the line first?
Do not twist my words and intention to suit your argument. You are not as innocent or naive as you are pretending to be one.
I did not say that one’s mother should not be criticized for any wrongdoing. That is acceptable. But, someone should not show her son the photos of having her sex. That is not necessary for criticism by any means.
Say, one’s daughter or sister is getting married today. Two persons come to congratulate him for the occasion.
One says - Congratulations, your daughter got married today.
The second one says - Congratulations, now your daughter will have something for her holes.
Given that both are saying the truth, which way of congratulation would you prefer to have according to your values in the case of your sister/daughter?
I think that i have explained enough.
with love,
sanjay
Right. Put in more or less a-moral terms, woman have an effect on men, and consequently society. Woman that are dressed up and use make-up that makes them look like they are permanently arroused (lipstick, a blush on their cheeks…), even have a greater effect on men and society. Ain’t that something!
Burqas reveal more about men than women…
Aint that something.
Yeah maybe a more appropriate measure would be to neuter men instead. They are the ones to blame afterall… for their instincts.
Yet shieldmaiden quoted the testimony of a woman force to wear a burkha.
I think you need to stop patronising women, pretending to be an expert.
Maybe you need to listen to the “weaker” sex more??
Those men that live sexually repressed lives are more vulnerable to the sight of female flesh, and the more that it is covered up the more covering is required to stem the urge.
Some cultures have no problem with nudity. The Kalahari Bushmen go about naked except for a small leather g-string. Nudity is not a signal for male arousal. But in societies where the body is covered, disrobing becomes all about sex.
Islam denies the woman their freedom, and denies he man their natural urges, only to be expressed by furtive sex with a subjected women behind closed doors.
I can’t imagine what they think their “Allah” was thinking when he imposed sexual desire onto men! But the result is to blame the women for enflaming desire - a thing which women do completely passively just by existing. The result is that women become evil just by being alive.
This is not a new idea, and did not originate in Islam. Mohammed borrowed from St. Augustine, like he did from so many other traditions.
alternet.org/belief/20-vile- … -robertson
Religion is confused about women. Madonna or Whore. Let them breath!
Please take a look!
The sense of mystery is probably the most prominent feeling associated with the burqa. Seduction becomes a mission to make that person “graspable”. It doesn’t quell the appetite, it excites it. This cultural practice suggests that men would unzip their pants for anything that has a pulse and women must be held responsible. This whole concept of “cover up” is insulting to men and degrading for women, it goes against human nature. Women should resist being possessed as a commodity, because that is what this is about, men’s ability to control and if he cannot he is shamed in other’s eyes.
an after thought
In other words, the worth of a man is valued by how he controls his womenfolk.
Lev and a Shieldmaiden,
I’m not defending religion on this - I specifically tried to loose the moral associations of voracius vixens and the like - i’m saying the way the western world deals with it, is not necessarily ideal. Or do we think it is?
Surely western culture and dressing style is also for a good part about seduction, exciting the appetite and commodifying women.
And what is it exactly that you are suggesting here as the solution, just start running arround naked like monkeys again… to be more in line with ‘human nature’ ?
Then the men get sued or attacked for “controlling” women.
It is all supposed to be self-defeating, frustrating, and futile.
Unlike many others, i never claim to be expert of religions. I consider myself very much a student. But yes, i know about religions far more than average intellectuals like you. If i know about 50-60% about the religions, which seems fair enough, then you stand merely 10% for sure. The same is about the women, both eastern and western. You may know more about many things than me but certainly neither about religions nor the women.
And yes, i support women because i see those more important and valuable than men to the mankind and nature. Nature is hugely inclined towards feminity. It needs just a hand of maleness to survive. But, all that is not pertinent here.
with love,
sanjay
Many posters said many things about burkas and women and men’s role and position in Islam. Let me also add something to that.
A very simple and most obvious fact, which no intellectual ever pays attention to, is that covering the whole of body is very practice of the Islam, irrespective of the gender. Arab males also cover their body and head. I wonder why no one is able to see such a common thing.
And, the reason is very simple. Islam spent its initial days in the desert where sandstorms were a regular phenomenon. Besides that, that region also suffered from the intense heat and severe scarcity of the water too. Covering the whole body helps a lot in both cases. It not only helps to prevent harm from heat of the desert but also keeps body free from the fine particles of the dust, which tends to stick to the body with the sweat, and very hard to remove, given that people do not enough water to bathe.
Secondly, as the beauty is more important for the women than men, thus women were asked to cover their faces too, in order to avoid sun marks. But, just like many other old social practices, this veiling also became the part of Islam. I am not a historian, but my assumption is that burkas must be in the practice in that part of the world even before the advent of Islam. Islam must have maintained that social practice seeing it helpful in many ways.
This was one of the reasons why Muslim women were supposed to wear burkas.
with love,
sanjay
Desert fashion is NOT the reason women are compelled to cover their face. How absurd. You are in denial.
Can you name any passage in the Quoran which even suggests or compels women to the burkha?
The you will be able to indicate the Surah that demand women have to cover their entire bodies?