To Hijab or not to Hijab

[rvg]

So...

You sleep with the doors and windows unlocked and the curtains back?
...
If not, you're a hypocrite.

I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Only Americans live in America. Let Americans live in America and have their own way, and we'll have ours.

You guys don't seem to live up to that sentiment when it comes to America's gun culture.

[Pannonian]

You guys don't seem to live up to that sentiment when it comes to America's gun culture.

That's what I'm talking about. I think the American view on that is lunacy. But I respect their right to see things that way.

[a completely inoffensive name]

That's what I'm talking about. I think the American view on that is lunacy. But I respect their right to see things that way.

Ahh. I must have incorrectly remembered your views from the last gun control thread. In general, the European view seems to be "respect differences of opinion, unless we deem it to be wrong."

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Ahh. I must have incorrectly remembered your views from the last gun control thread. In general, the European view seems to be "respect differences of opinion, unless we deem it to be wrong."

Replace "wrong" with "beyond the pale" and you have it

[a completely inoffensive name]

Replace "wrong" with "beyond the pale" and you have it

British libel laws were known to be used to silence genuine critique because of the seriousness the British government takes in protecting "image" and "character".

This is why your government just reformed your terrible laws in 2013!

[Rhyfelwyr]

If Western countries want to ban all face coverings primarily because of real security concerns, then that is obviously not discrimination and is a reasonable thing to do.

If Western countries want to ban all face coverings primarily because of they go against their their social norms, then that is not discrimination but it is slightly illiberal.

If Western countries want to ban all face coverings primarily to stop Muslim women wearing a certain form of clothing, then that is obviously discrimination against a religious group.

It all depends on where you are coming from with your argument.

[Gilrandir]

Be my guest. You retain the right to be wrong.

You were the one to claim that the decoration law had vague wording. You didn't give any proof of it except "I AM telling you this is so". I retain my right not to trust your word without sufficient proof.

Give me an example of a non criminal walking down a street with their face covered - excluding people adhering to a Middle Eastern culture, naturally, and those wearing protective equipment.

Helloween, someone?

Oh no, the Welsh still hate the Romans too - but the Romans left (according to the Welsh).

I believe those Welsh are falling rather behind on the events in the world. You gotta update them somehow, otherwise they may consider sending some longbows to fend the Saracens off the Italian coast.

On a sidenote, how can you live in the society so pervaded with hatred?

And exactly when does one communicate through toned windows?

It was not about communication with a hidden identity. As far as I get it, it was about a ban on wearing clothes under which one can conceal evil intentions or a gun or both. The same might be suspected of a car passengers scheming behind the toned glass.

If someone comes to you speaking with their mouth covered, and you ask them to remove the covering because you can't hear to understand what they are saying.

That was because they were speaking with their mouth full, not because of a mask or something. Ban those nougat candy bars and leave the burkas alone.

[Beskar]

It all depends on where you are coming from with your argument.

There is the fourth too...

"If Western countries want to stop practices which cause harm.." like FGM.

But law wise, I believe you are not allowed to cover your face when buying things from a shop, in a bank, and other situation. Either from mask, motorcycle helmet or burka. Though the latter has been rule bent in many places for convenience.

[rvg]

But law wise, I believe you are not allowed to cover your face when buying things from a shop, in a bank, and other situation. Either from mask, motorcycle helmet or burka...

This is how it should be. Nobody should be required to accommodate those people, but forcing them to take off the mask is nothing short of tyranny.

[Fragony]

This is how it should be. Nobody should be required to accommodate those people, but forcing them to take off the mask is nothing short of tyranny.

I disagree, wearing a mask shouldn't be allowed in public at all. Not only is it a security risk but it's frankly rather insulting. I have absolutily no problem if those who wear full cover are deeply discriminated and I won't call an ambulance for them if they are wounded. Want to be nothing but a ghost, sorry if nobody notices you. I couldn't care less about a headscarve, but full cover, if you want to be invisible deal with being it.

[Brenus]

"I retain my right not to trust your word without sufficient proof." Just what I said.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Helloween, someone?

Well done, plus one internetz. Carnival would also be an applicable answer, or any Masquerade.

Those are special events though where we deliberately suspend social mores in order to intermix with other groups - and they have religious significance. All Hallows Eve is the old Pagan end of the year, the liminal point at the end of the harvest when the year turns to darkness and the dead walk. Carnival was associated variously with Spring and the start of Lent.

I believe those Welsh are falling rather behind on the events in the world. You gotta update them somehow, otherwise they may consider sending some longbows to fend the Saracens off the Italian coast.

On a sidenote, how can you live in the society so pervaded with hatred?

Mostly you get by with a high standard of living which dissuades terrorism, though not in Northern Ireland, and you don't go to the bits of the Island where you're not wanted.

There is the fourth too...

"If Western countries want to stop practices which cause harm.." like FGM.

But law wise, I believe you are not allowed to cover your face when buying things from a shop, in a bank, and other situation. Either from mask, motorcycle helmet or burka. Though the latter has been rule bent in many places for convenience.

FGM raises an awkward question though - we turned away from it at the end of the 19th Century as a form of mutilation and sexual oppression but we still allow the mutilation of baby boys for what are basically religious or aesthetic reasons.

So we, as a culture, think FGM is bad but not circumcision, and we'd never consider removing a woman's clitoral hood - before someone makes that argument.

Let's face it - Strike is right, we're all just little Fascists at heart.

[Greyblades]

FGM almost always removes part or all of the clitoris, the equivilent of female circumcision in men would include removal of part the glans, not just the foreskin.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

FGM almost always removes part or all of the clitoris, the equivilent of female circumcision in men would include removal of part the glans, not just the foreskin.

Yes, I realise that, which is why I made the specific point that we would not even conscience the removal of the clitoral hood.

Reading - fundamentally lacking her of late.

[Gilrandir]

I disagree, wearing a mask shouldn't be allowed in public at all. Not only is it a security risk but it's frankly rather insulting.

Insult is a personal feeling you may get at anything and it has nothing to do with the law (unless you sue someone covering his face and will demand a moral compensation).

I have absolutily no problem if those who wear full cover are deeply discriminated and I won't call an ambulance for them if they are wounded.

It starts with it, then comes discriminating against those wearing sunglasses, red skirts, beards, those missing a tooth, those laughing too loud, those speaking an alien tongue, those having a darker skincolor, those kissing a same sex person....

First you don't call an ambulance if any of those are wounded, then you will wish them wounded, then you wish to wound them...

Carry on, you are moving in the right direction.

Mostly you get by with a high standard of living which dissuades terrorism, though not in Northern Ireland, and you don't go to the bits of the Island where you're not wanted.

Do you mean that the British have quite low internal mobility? I thought it was otherwise, something like in the USA.

[Fragony]

@Gilrandir Nothing is going to start from me. As I see it; an immigrant leaves his problems behind, a colonist takes it along. A headscarve is absolutily no problem to me, why should I have a problem with that. But if someone wants to make a statement they should know that we get the message. Not going to hurt, but I am also not going to help.

[Greyblades]

Yes, I realise that, which is why I made the specific point that we would not even conscience the removal of the clitoral hood.

Reading - fundamentally lacking her of late.

I have no idea how this relates to my point that your equivalence, between male circumcision and fgm, is false.

Reading - fundamentally lacking here of late indeed.

[Gilrandir]

@Gilrandir Nothing is going to start from me. As I see it; an immigrant leaves his problems behind, a colonist takes it along. A headscarve is absolutily no problem to me, why should I have a problem with that. But if someone wants to make a statement they should know that we get the message. Not going to hurt, but I am also not going to help.

You don't have to be a starter. All you have to do is to stand by and cheer on when a crowd stirred to action by a fanatic starts beating burka-wearers, blacks, gays or jews. Or do you have a different attitude to either of those?

My solution is to forbid immigration. Any. In this case you will have a homogeneous society and such issues will become irrelevant.

[Fragony]

You don't have to be a starter. All you have to do is to stand by and cheer on when a crowd stirred to action by a fanatic starts beating burka-wearers, blacks, gays or jews. Or do you have a different attitude to either of those?

My solution is to forbid immigration. Any. In this case you will have a homogeneous society and such issues will become irrelevant.

I am not cheering, I don't even vote. But if you get what you want don't blame me please, It wasn't me.

[Gilrandir]

I am not cheering, I don't even vote. But if you get what you want don't blame me please, It wasn't me.

This is called indifference. I may sound didactic or patronizing but I like this quotation (from Robert Eberhart, I believe). This is how it goes (in my translation):

Don't fear enemies - in the worst case they can kill you. Don't fear friends - in the worst case they can betray you. Fear the indifferent - it is through their acquiescence that murder and betrayal flourish in the world.

[Fragony]

This is called indifference. I may sound didactic or patronizing but I like this quotation (from Robert Eberhart, I believe). This is how it goes (in my translation):

Don't fear enemies - in the worst case they can kill you. Don't fear friends - in the worst case they can betray you. Fear the indifferent - it is through their acquiescence that murder and betrayal flourish in the world.

Point taken and I guess I qualify. But indifference isn't such a bad thing when you already expect the worst imho.

[Brenus]

"My solution is to forbid immigration.": Let them die. And that is not fascism? How do you intend to enforce it? I am quite curious on the methods?

[Greyblades]

Let them die. And that is not fascism?

[Viking]

Let them die.

That is hardly ever the alternative. As a matter of fact, a majority of the recent migrant deaths would likely been avoided if they felt certain that Europe would not let them enter. They did not leave behind countries that had turned into lakes of lava; especially not the peaceful countries the they travelled through (and in some cases: lived in) before getting to their final destination.

----


If I were in charge of this country, I'd put a temporary moratorium on non-work immigration in order to see how well it can cope with its current cultural de facto segregation.

I.e. primarily only those who already have been given a job or those who have not spent more than, say, 6-12 months trying to find one would be allowed to stay. Exceptions could be made for high-profile individuals as well as groups of people that are likely to assimilate over a few generations (such as people from 'similar' cultures, or small groups of people from cultures not already present in the country).

[Husar]

So we are all glad that Putin removed the Russian immigrants from Ukraine now?

[Kadagar_AV]

I don't mind Hijabs and stuff, if the women themselves wake up in the morning and feel like wearing it.

The problems arise when others want to force it upon them.


This is of course a tough nut to handle for a democratic western society... We support religious beliefs, but also the individual's right. When these two sides clashes, it's hard to pick a side.

Well, for some. For me it isn't.


I am ALL for a ban on the Hijab in public... Mainly because the "religious freedom" argument is basically taken hostage by desert tribal people 2015.

I don't exactly see muslim intellectual women on the barricade to allow hijabs... In fact, among muslim intellectual women they generally shy away from the hijab.

Also, don't bring your fugged up culture that already ruined YOUR nation to MY nation, mmmmmmkay?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Do you mean that the British have quite low internal mobility? I thought it was otherwise, something like in the USA.

No, just the 600,000-odd Welsh speakers, they tend to have relatively low mobility.

I have no idea how this relates to my point that your equivalence, between male circumcision and fgm, is false.

Reading - fundamentally lacking here of late indeed.

Firstly, the equivalence is not false, both are decisions taken by elders and enacted upon juveniles and both effect sexual performance and pleasure - one is just more extreme than the other. Now, the reason I mentioned removal of the clitoral hood was to point out that we would not even accept that, so even with direct anatomical equivalence we will do to little boys what we will not do to little girls.

Now, was that clear enough or do I need to start posting academic sources to buttress a very obvious point?

[Fragony]

Wouldn't go that far, I don't have a problem with a hijjab as long as I can have problem with it. So no complaining if you don't get hired somewhere if you insist on wearing it. Should go both ways.

edit, was @ kads

[AE Bravo]

Hijab hasn't ruined any nation.