How far will the rise of nationalistic populism go ?

[L00b 441]

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 10]

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.

[mafya 243]

What if the woman wearing the burka does so of her own free will and is not being forced to wear it and does not want men ogling her?

Banning the burka is dictating what to wear on a women who wear one just because a small number may be forced to wear one.

Haredi sect Jews also wear burkas, are they also being forced to wear them? = https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haredi_burqa_sect

 

---------- Post added 12-12-2016 at 19:49 ----------

 

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 cmand that women should be clothed from head to toe Mohamed 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 jewelery or adorn her with his wealth as some tribes carried their money/gold with them as they travelled from one grazing area to another , or that all her families dowry to her should not be worn when she went out aamong 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.

 

Dear Muslim expert it's not only Muslim women that wear a burka= https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haredi_burqa_sect

[Margarita Ma 10]

Please be sure that you read the whole article and not just the first bit describing the sect.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haredi_burqa_sect

 

Even their own established religious leaders are against this fetish.

 

As for Ogling, looking at the woman's face will let you know if she disapproves or if your attentions are welcome. Not all attention from a man has to be Ogling. Get yourself under control.

Edited December 12, 2016 by Margarita Ma

[El Cid 214]

Dear Muslim expert it's not only Muslim women that wear a burka= https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haredi_burqa_sect

 

Does it make any different who wears the burka, full face covering in certain social situations should be banned, who ever it is.

[Penistone999 10]

Does it make any different who wears the burka, full face covering in certain social situations should be banned, who ever it is.

 

Hit the nail on the head.

[Justin Smith 10]

Not everyone wants to travel, I'm more than happy staying in this country and relaxing on a Greek/Spanish beach for a few weeks a year or maybe a few days in a European city. If being out of the EU makes that more expensive then that's a pill I'll gladly swallow and I'll make my relaxing beach holiday in the USA

 

So it`s not just my theory that people who don`t travel (or don`t want to, it amounts to the same thing) were more likely to vote to leave the EU ?

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2016 at 14:05 ----------

 

What if the woman wearing the burka does so of her own free will and is not being forced to wear it and does not want men ogling her?

 

A woman does not have to hide her face to dissuade men from ogling her. "Ogling" to me implies something sexual, most men ogle women wearing revealing clothes, I really can`t imagine most men ogling a woman, in, say, a boiler suit. They might think she`s attractive (as in attractive "pretty") if her face was really something special, but ogling, no.

If you`re saying the woman concerned doesn`t want men to think she`s pretty that`s fair enough, but she could go a long way down that path by her choice of hair style or make up (or lack of it), etc etc. I remember the 80s when a lot of student type women used to dress not to look pretty, which, of course, was entirely their choice.

Edited December 13, 2016 by Justin Smith

[Halibut 12]

So it`s not just my theory that people who don`t travel (or don`t want to, it amounts to the same thing) were more likely to vote to leave the EU ?

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2016 at 14:05 ----------

 

 

A woman does not have to hide her face to dissuade men from ogling her. "Ogling" to me implies something sexual, most men ogle women wearing revealing clothes, I really can`t imagine most men ogling a woman, in, say, a boiler suit. They might think she`s attractive (as in attractive "pretty") if her face was really something special, but ogling, no.

If you`re saying the woman concerned doesn`t want men to think she`s pretty that`s fair enough, but she could go a long way down that path by her choice of hair style or make up (or lack of it), etc etc. I remember the 80s when a lot of student type women used to dress not to look pretty, which, of course, was entirely their choice.

 

But she can if that is what she wants to do - and who the hell are you to say that she can't?

[unbeliever 10]

But she can if that is what she wants to do - and who the hell are you to say that she can't?

 

 

I just don't know about this. There is a cultural tradition here and a matter of freedom of expression at stake. Banning Muslim women from covering their faces is an act of intolerance and you can't get away from that.

On the other hand, we can't effectively defend women from being oppressed if we tolerate what is very obviously a symbol and a means of oppressing women, that just happens to have religious links.

Are we in fact under any obligation to tolerate the oppression of women even if they are voluntarily cooperating or even initiating that oppression?

 

It's one off those awkward lesser-evil things which I think has to be evidence based. Both options are harmful. The question is which is less so.

The bans are starting to come in across other countries now, so we should have enough evidence one way or the other before too long.

 

Even then what's higher priority? Avoiding the oppression of religion by the state or preventing the oppression of women by non-state actors.

Edited December 13, 2016 by unbeliever

[Margarita Ma 10]

So it`s not just my theory that people who don`t travel (or don`t want to, it amounts to the same thing) were more likely to vote to leave the EU ?

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2016 at 14:05 ----------

 

 

.

Edited for space and relevance.

 

Well your theory needs to be proved and one persons comment does not do that you need about two thousand in a double blind trial.

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2016 at 17:44 ----------

 

I just don't know about this. There is a cultural tradition here and a matter of freedom of expression at stake. Banning Muslim women from covering their faces is an act of intolerance and you can't get away from that.

On the other hand, we can't effectively defend women from being oppressed if we tolerate what is very obviously a symbol and a means of oppressing women, that just happens to have religious links.

Are we in fact under any obligation to tolerate the oppression of women even if they are voluntarily cooperating or even initiating that oppression?

 

It's one off those awkward lesser-evil things which I think has to be evidence based. Both options are harmful. The question is which is less so.

The bans are starting to come in across other countries now, so we should have enough evidence one way or the other before too long.

 

Even then what's higher priority? Avoiding the oppression of religion by the state or preventing the oppression of women by non-state actors.

 

The cultural tradition that I see at stake is the culture which shows the face of an individual in public. We have fought a long battle in this country for equal treatment of women and men, it is not yet won and this is part of that same struggle.

People who come here to live should expect to learn the language and customs of the country, that includes women being treated as equals and walking barefaced in the street, in shops and hospitals. Not expecting to get a job where a female will be allowed to cover her face, like the person who tried that one when she turned up for her first day as a teacher though she had not worn the niquab at her interview. Being able to identify someone by their face is part of our culture faces, are recognisible as far away as 20 feet or more. Friends will wave to each other across a busy street. Why should that privilege be limited to men.

[hauxwell 243]

Edited for space and relevance.

 

Well your theory needs to be proved and one persons comment does not do that you need about two thousand in a double blind trial.

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2016 at 17:44 ----------

 

 

The cultural tradition that I see at stake is the culture which shows the face of an individual in public. We have fought a long battle in this country for equal treatment of women and men, it is not yet won and this is part of that same struggle.

People who come here to live should expect to learn the language and customs of the country, that includes women being treated as equals and walking barefaced in the street, in shops and hospitals. Not expecting to get a job where a female will be allowed to cover her face, like the person who tried that one when she turned up for her first day as a teacher though she had not worn the niquab at her interview. Being able to identify someone by their face is part of our culture faces, are recognisible as far away as 20 feet or more. Friends will wave to each other across a busy street. Why should that privilege be limited to men.

 

Well written Margarita Ma. I thoroughly agree with everything you have wrote.

[El Cid 214]

I like openness, in appearance, social and in financial matters. I full veil goes against this principle.