I...Agree with the French

[Fragony]

Being naked generally goes against the public decency laws almost across the entire globe. Being covered from head to toe does not violate public decency laws.

Perfectly normal here to us, every woman bathes topless here. Seeing a woman being covered from head to toe is much more offensive to us trust me.

[rvg]

Perfectly normal here to us, every woman bathes topless here. Seeing a woman being covered from head to toe is much more offensive to us trust me.

Okay, so you won't mind seeing a Papuan dude cavorting on the streets of Amsterdam with nothing except a tube on his schlong?

[Idaho]

Okay, so you won't mind seeing a Papuan dude cavorting on the streets of Amsterdam with nothing except a tube on his schlong?

I don't care what people wear. Live and let live.

[Fragony]

Okay, so you won't mind seeing a Papuan dude cavorting on the streets of Amsterdam with nothing except a tube on his schlong?

Ever been to Amsterdam


I don't think Fragony and Rory give a toss about women's rights. They are just scared of the filthy foreigners. <- Idaho

So in the absence of any reasoned argument you just go for a cheap dig. <- Idaho, two minutes later!



Scotty, bring him soup

[miotas]

There is another thread here that has a name perfectly suited to this one.

[rvg]

What about bridal veils? Should those be banned too? After all, they serve exactly the same purpose: concealment. Or better yet: gimp suits. Those conceal *everything* under a thick layer of leather.

[drone]

Instead of worrying about burkas and such, we should be focusing on a much more offensive trend, overweight people in tight clothing. Spandex is a privilege, not a right.

[Fragony]

What about bridal veils? Should those be banned too? After all, they serve exactly the same purpose: concealment. Or better yet: gimp suits. Those conceal *everything* under a thick layer of leather.

I really don't care, that's just fashion to me, as I said, but Idaho's mind mentally blocks that I said that. All fresh and fruity for Idaho, oh you marry your 12 year old daughter to a mullah in Childrapistan, how very exotic that just screams for intercultural dialogue since we did that 200 years ago, we can really learn from eachother.

Muslims are like Pokemon to some, they got to love them all.

[Idaho]

I really don't care, that's just fashion to me, as I said, but Idaho's mind mentally blocks that I said that. All fresh and fruity for Idaho, oh you marry your 12 year old daughter to a mullah in Childrapistan, how very exotic that just screams for intercultural dialogue since we did that 200 years ago, we can really learn from eachother.

Muslims are like Pokemon to some, they got to love them all.

You don't get it do you dearest Fraggles. The debate is not about what happens elsewhere. It's about the nature of our society. And fundamental to that society is freedom of conscience, religion and dress.

[Fragony]

You don't get it do you dearest Fraggles. The debate is not about what happens elsewhere. It's about the nature of our society. And fundamental to that society is freedom of conscience, religion and dress.

Yeah, we have that.

[rvg]

In that case people should be free to dress in burqas.

[rory_20_uk]

You don't get it do you dearest Fraggles. The debate is not about what happens elsewhere. It's about the nature of our society. And fundamental to that society is freedom of conscience, religion and dress.

So, when I get a husband directing me as to the healthcare of his wife this is OK? Not yet a statistical sample, but so far only those with one religion appear to be making these demands.

[Idaho]

So, when I get a husband directing me as to the healthcare of his wife this is OK? Not yet a statistical sample, but so far only those with one religion appear to be making these demands.

I would say that has nothing to do with clothing. 100 years ago in this country women were considered chattels of their husbands - and they didn't have burkhas on. You are confusing two issues.

[Rhyfelwyr]

What the , I am terrified by some people's attitutude in this thread. What right do secular authorities have telling religious people what their beliefs are? Like the example where someone said covering the face is not in the Koran... I'm still pretty sure it's in the hadiths, which is why we don't see Shi'ite Iranian women wearing these veils... then again I could be wrong, which is why we should ask a Muslim and not try to tell them what they believe. Or if we don't want to go down that line, maybe I can ban Catholics from following their traditions, it's not in the Bible after all, Sola Scriptura everybody. And that's not just me trolling the RCC, this is more or less what we are doing to Sunni Muslims here.

As for Louis example, I don't think it works because the laws demanding you cover your private areas are quite reasonable, there's a reason why (most) native peoples living in exotic jungles still go to the trouble of covering them up, its human nature not a cultural thing that anyone is imposing. So as long as you are dressed in such a manner that you won't terrify people, it's up to you.

And what is with the "burka's are denigrating to women" argument? So, are we going to liberate these women by telling them what they can and cannot do for their own good? Mummy state knows what is best for you, eh?

[Viking]

This topic reminds me of

http://www.thelocal.se/20250/20090624/

Women in Malmö have been given the right to bathe topless in the swimming pools of Sweden's third largest city.

[...]

The Bara Bröst network swept to prominence in late 2007 after two bare-breasted young women were called ashore by a lifeguard at a swimming pool in Uppsala. When they refused to cover up, they were asked to leave the premises.

Speaking to The Local at the time, Ragnhild Karlsson, 22, explained the womens' motives for swimming without bikini tops.

"It's a question of equality. I think it's a problem that women are sexualized in this way. If women are forced to wear a top, shouldn't men also have to?"

Outraged by what they regarded as discrimination, a group of women in southern Sweden made a show of solidarity by establishing the network, whose name translates as both "bare breasts" and "just breasts".

This should be followed up by a ban, since bikinis reduces women's natural potential to be distinct individuals.

In many cultures that have never heard about feminism, women walking topless is considered the norm.

-

I think some of the fashion Louis linked to really is as manly as fashion theoretically can get; it's only banned because we live in misandric societies.

[Vladimir]

This topic reminds me of

http://www.thelocal.se/20250/20090624/




This should be followed up by a ban, since bikinis reduces women's natural potential to be distinct individuals.

In many cultures that have never heard about feminism, women walking topless is considered the norm.

-

I think some of the fashion Louis linked to really is as manly as fashion theoretically can get; it's only banned because we live in misandric societies.

That's because Swedes are Stupid.

[Crazed Rabbit]

You don't get it do you dearest Fraggles. The debate is not about what happens elsewhere. It's about the nature of our society. And fundamental to that society is freedom of conscience, religion and dress.

Indeed. And I do not believe these women wearing burqas are free to do any of that. They are pressured into doing so by their relatives and their imported culture.

THAT is the point - that these women are not making a completely free decision to wear a burqas. It is a symbol of the repression of women.

Banning the burqa is therefore is therefore an attempt to fight this repression of women and introduce more western values - ie. of equality.

CR