How far will the rise of nationalistic populism go ?

[tinfoilhat]

As a country we have been historically very tolerant. Why stop now?

 

Because full face veils take the **** out of our society which strives (although admittedly often fails) for equality. When I can go and pay for my petrol wearing a crash helmet without being asked to take it off or walk into a bank wearing a ski mask in the middle of summer without alarms going off - fine. But that, sensibly, won't happen. If they are that fearful of their home life that these women must wear them, seek help. Otherwise show your face or push off somewhere else.

[Anna B]

Human beings are fine tuned into the interpretation of the nuances of facial expressions. It is part of their anthropological survival skills since ape man times, and is hard to override.

 

It allows a person to judge whether they are being threatened and in danger or being met with friendliness and without harm. Therefore to deny someone the right to see your face causes friction, misunderstandings and suspicion, as well as creating a physical and emotional barrier.

 

It is built into our DNA.

 

That's why I believe Face coverings should be banned by law.

[L00b]

Is that what Merkel did this last week when saying she wants a ban on full face veils?

Absolutely. And she's got an ECJ ruling (about the earlier French variant) ready-at-hand to support her if needed.

 

Easiest bit of political wind-stealing from AfD for her.

 

I'm quietly confident there'll be more (within reason) by next year.

 

She's getting another term in office.

[altus]

Because full face veils take the **** out of our society which strives (although admittedly often fails) for equality. When I can go and pay for my petrol wearing a crash helmet without being asked to take it off or walk into a bank wearing a ski mask in the middle of summer without alarms going off - fine. But that, sensibly, won't happen. If they are that fearful of their home life that these women must wear them, seek help. Otherwise show your face or push off somewhere else.

 

There are many reasons for banning full face veils but the 'motor cyclists have to remove their helmets' one is so poor just gets dismissed. The reason motorcyclists have to remove their helmets is because there were frequent robberies with people concealing their identities by wearing helmets. If we ever get to a position were robberies are frequently committed by people concealing their identities using veils banning them for that reason might be reasonable. Until then, pick a better reason.

[tinfoilhat]

There are many reasons for banning full face veils but the 'motor cyclists have to remove their helmets' one is so poor just gets dismissed. The reason motorcyclists have to remove their helmets is because there were frequent robberies with people concealing their identities by wearing helmets. If we ever get to a position were robberies are frequently committed by people concealing their identities using veils banning them for that reason might be reasonable. Until then, pick a better reason.

 

Equality. There. Top that. If I have to have my face uncovered to complete various transactions everybody else should. They don't have to wear them reading the chuffing news in Iran they shouldn't need them here. Ban them. Wear anything else. Wear nowt, pray to what ever I don't honestly care but the face covering is needless.

 

Speaking of knocking banks and petrol stations over, why is petrol stations have increased the use of the Perspex screen but banks have got rid? What's that all about? Is nobody robbing banks anymore?

[I1L2T3]

Because full face veils take the **** out of our society which strives (although admittedly often fails) for equality. When I can go and pay for my petrol wearing a crash helmet without being asked to take it off or walk into a bank wearing a ski mask in the middle of summer without alarms going off - fine. But that, sensibly, won't happen. If they are that fearful of their home life that these women must wear them, seek help. Otherwise show your face or push off somewhere else.

 

I think the bit in bold is probably closer to the real issue. We're a tolerant society that has in recent decades been more tuned into womens rights and made some inroads into reducing inequalities. If Islamic dress is used to oppress women then that is as good a reason as any to take action.

[tinfoilhat]

I think the bit in bold is probably closer to the real issue. We're a tolerant society that has in recent decades been more tuned into womens rights and made some inroads into reducing inequalities. If Islamic dress is used to oppress women then that is as good a reason as any to take action.

 

If it's a personal choice then they'll have to sacrifice it or live in a country where it's tolerated, or take on the court system (if it's brought in) like the naked rambler did. If they're being pushed into it, then they should be offered every assistance. I know I'm going to sound all little englander, but it's just not what we do here and never have done. Nuns have obviously dressed conservatively and I'm sure other followers of other religions at the more extreme end do it too. But it's not a requirement or they'd do it in all Muslim countries. They don't!

 

I'm sure you can find umpteen instances on the net where women want to wear it as a matter of choice but every woman I've spoken to about it see it as a form of oppression.

[sgtkate]

I find myself agreeing partially with the sensible people on here who are arguing for a ban without resorting to the usual trolling nonsense.

 

There are just too many examples of women being forced into wearing them for me to continue to 'support' (only in terms of freedom of the wearer not culturally) them. However, I'm just not sure that banning them will help the women being forced to wear them at all. In fact it's quite likely to make things worse. Consider that if the women is being 'made' either through direct pressure or by cultural beliefs (same reason we don't walk around naked, no reason other than we've been forced into believing it's wrong) to wear a burqa then making them illegal is likely to stop them leaving their homes. I'm not exaggerating here, but for some the pressure to wear a burqa is so strong they would either be 'choose' or be forced to remain inside. For some on here, they are probably thinking 'good, stops me being offended by it', but for those who genuinely want to improve women's rights and think banning the burqa is the way forward, I really don't think it is. What we need to do is enforce domestic abuse laws better. Educate ALL children living in the UK about what is right and wrong for our culture as it stands whilst not hiding other cultures from them. Listen to the women who have been able to cast off the burqa and find out what made them do it and way and see if lessons can be learnt to help the next generation.

 

Using the personal safety and robbery argument is also ridiculous. Apart from one single incident I can think of where a burqa was used by a man to hide his identity there hasn't been a single other instance of a 'burqa' related crime. Whereas clown masks have been used in hundreds. So why no call to ban clown masks?

 

In terms of not being able to see the face, yes there are certain times when I think this should be a requirement of a specific role or job, but these would be the exception. I agree with Margarita Ma in saying doctors and teachers shouldn't wear them and I'd add police into that. I'd struggle to think of anyone else. If I can't see a shop assistants face, who cares? I'm not engaging into a potentially life or death situation with her where being able to read a nuanced facial expression is required!

 

Anyway, I think we've done this argument before and it's not related to the thread...

[L00b]

I find myself agreeing partially with the sensible people on here who are arguing for a ban without resorting to the usual trolling nonsense.

 

<snip for space>

 

Anyway, I think we've done this argument before

Indeed, and it is heartening to see you beginning to waver

and it's not related to the thread...

On the contrary, I'd argue that it is related to the thread: it, along with all other proselytising public expressions, has been turned into a major contribution to the rise of nationalistic populism lately.

 

Because it is so flagrantly counter-cultural, that makes it far too easy for populists to use for rabble-rousing purposes.

[Margarita Ma]

before the revolution in Egypt very few women even covered their hair except when they went to the Mosque which was rare. Only the women coming into the cities from the countryside would be covered, from head to toe in black They wore a long black abaya outside the house but the face would be uncovered. Nearly all the women under 60 wore modern western clothes in the cities, traditional long dresses which kept them cool in the villages and very brightly coloured too, at home.

 

This cover up completely stuff is something that has been forced on women by religious leaders who want power, it is the equivalent of women in Europe being forced to cover up their ears in the middle ages.

 

The Muslim faith does not command that women should be clothed from head to toe Mohammed when asked for advice on "how my wife should dress" simply replied " Modestly" That could be taken to mean that a man should not dress his wife up to look like a Christmas tree, by covering her with jewelry or adorn her with his wealth, some tribes carried their money/gold with them as they traveled from one grazing area to another, or that all her families dowry to her (traditionally gold jewelry and precious stones would be given)should not be worn when she went out among strangers, in case it made her a target for ruffians and thieves. Anyone can be modest by not wearing the most expensive clothes available, silks, furs, satin damask, or materials threaded with gold or silver.

 

 

Modesty has more than one meaning. It does not specifically mean that a person should be covered from head to toe in garments that hide every feature of a body so that it is impossible to tell if it is a man or a woman except by the cultural style of dress worn. There is absolutely no good reason for covering a woman from head to toe in a garment that causes her not to be able to see properly and constitutes a tripping hazard. These long loose garments were designed to keep a person cool and keep out dust in a hot, dry dusty environment. Tell me how they fit in with a modern lifestyle in a country where the temperature rarely goes above 25 in the heat of summer and is humid. Where their encumbrance forces a slow walking pace in the most inclement weather which we wish to be out of as quickly as possible.

 

I could write a whole dissertation on the case against these garments in the western world but the niquab I would ban simply because it proclaims the woman is the property of someone, it is an affront to the freedom that the wearer is entitled to. All sorts of reasons are given by men for forcing women to wear head and face coverings. The most common is you inflame the passions of men by going bare headed and showing your hair and your beauty should be shielded from the gaze of men. Well guess what. Most women have learned to control their passions for the period of time they are in public places, if women can do it so can men. Unless they are no better than animals. I have had it with all this "its my culture" crap it's not culture, its controlling behaviour.

Edited December 12, 2016 by Margarita Ma
Added text.