ChatterBank0 min ago
France's burka ban
220 Answers
http://tinyurl.com/6gqmpsn
Well done the French for having the guts to introduce the 'burka ban', but it seems with a little trepidation.
/// Earlier, French police said they will be enforcing the country’s new burka ban "extremely cautiously" because of fears of provoking violence. ///
Belgium introduced a full ban last year, and a ban also looks likely in Holland, Spain and Switzerland.
Could Britain ever have the guts to do likewise?
Well done the French for having the guts to introduce the 'burka ban', but it seems with a little trepidation.
/// Earlier, French police said they will be enforcing the country’s new burka ban "extremely cautiously" because of fears of provoking violence. ///
Belgium introduced a full ban last year, and a ban also looks likely in Holland, Spain and Switzerland.
Could Britain ever have the guts to do likewise?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I do not like the burka and it does make me feel uncomfortable when I speak to a wear of one. But I believe it is overkill for the Government to get involve with how a person chooses to dress. It may not be a religious requirement, that is irrelevant. If they wish to wear it, then there must be good reasons for banning it.
I do not believe the crime prevention reason, but if that is the reason, where is the evidence? My intuition tells me that more robberies have been committed by people wearing hoodies than burka awarded, yet no one is contemplating a ban on that personal garment.
I do not believe the crime prevention reason, but if that is the reason, where is the evidence? My intuition tells me that more robberies have been committed by people wearing hoodies than burka awarded, yet no one is contemplating a ban on that personal garment.
so AOG "The other alternative of course is to move to a country where the wearing of one is acceptable. " Are you suggesting those in France who cannot now wear a burka come over here? How very tolerant of you!
This made me think of the Japanese trend, which has been highlighted recently, of wearing those face masks to avoid pollution, granted I'm sure one wouldn't wear one in a shop but walking down the street would it cause the same level of concern?
If you saw a man in a suit walking down the street in a face mask, would you react differently from seeing a man in a scruffy tracksuit wearing one?
This made me think of the Japanese trend, which has been highlighted recently, of wearing those face masks to avoid pollution, granted I'm sure one wouldn't wear one in a shop but walking down the street would it cause the same level of concern?
If you saw a man in a suit walking down the street in a face mask, would you react differently from seeing a man in a scruffy tracksuit wearing one?
I have absolutely no problem with a woman wearing a Burka, and i fail to see either the point of a legal enforecement like this, or the prospect of reasonably enforcing it.
The law is draconian, the French enforcement of it appears to be on a basis of where it is worn, rather than if.
If the UK is foolish enough to go down this road, then we will have our already overstretched police forces enforcing laws that belong in the Middle Ages, instead of concetrating on the civil unrest caused by the UK's exces alcohol consumoption, costing billions of pounds in both policing, and health care - something which Muslims are not a part of.
The law is draconian, the French enforcement of it appears to be on a basis of where it is worn, rather than if.
If the UK is foolish enough to go down this road, then we will have our already overstretched police forces enforcing laws that belong in the Middle Ages, instead of concetrating on the civil unrest caused by the UK's exces alcohol consumoption, costing billions of pounds in both policing, and health care - something which Muslims are not a part of.
I don't often agree with Yasmin Alibaih-Brown, but this article, written last week, contains a great deal of sense. It is also written from a female point of view, another point in it's favour surely? http://www.independen...-coverup-2261444.html
au contraire andy
fashions come and go but the principle that we are comfortable with bare legs, bare arms and bare faces is fundamental to the cultural norms of europe, most of africa, the americas, australasia, most of asia - in fact, most places not culturally colonised by the Arabs.
Furthermore, bare faces, bare arms and bare legs are acceptable in many muslim countries.
And finally, not wearing a burkha is not an issue in any muslim country - provided you are a man.
.
fashions come and go but the principle that we are comfortable with bare legs, bare arms and bare faces is fundamental to the cultural norms of europe, most of africa, the americas, australasia, most of asia - in fact, most places not culturally colonised by the Arabs.
Furthermore, bare faces, bare arms and bare legs are acceptable in many muslim countries.
And finally, not wearing a burkha is not an issue in any muslim country - provided you are a man.
.
I go with the folk that have argued the french have gone too far - and a good point was made about it being a law for show and keep President Sarcastic happy.
It does interfere with a woman's right to wear what she wants - and I emphasise the woman's choice and it should not be a symbol of male repression or force - that should be illegal
And yes, a law that all (all being underlined) hoods should be removed re banks, post offices, and a myriad of other shops and services where clear identity is needed makes a hell of a lot of sense.
It does interfere with a woman's right to wear what she wants - and I emphasise the woman's choice and it should not be a symbol of male repression or force - that should be illegal
And yes, a law that all (all being underlined) hoods should be removed re banks, post offices, and a myriad of other shops and services where clear identity is needed makes a hell of a lot of sense.
A fair point Zeuhl - but i terms of religious preferences, western religions have them as well.
A woman is not permitted to enter the vatican with bar arms, legs, or shoulders, and it was only a generation ago in this country that it would be considered improper for a woman to attend Mass bear-headed.
If some Muslim women prefer to wear a burka in public, i fail to see why it is an issue for the UK - or anywhere in Europe. I would not wish my dress sense to be imposed by law, ergo it follows I do not wish the same for others.
It does come down to a cultural preference, and those differenes to do harm that I can see.
A woman is not permitted to enter the vatican with bar arms, legs, or shoulders, and it was only a generation ago in this country that it would be considered improper for a woman to attend Mass bear-headed.
If some Muslim women prefer to wear a burka in public, i fail to see why it is an issue for the UK - or anywhere in Europe. I would not wish my dress sense to be imposed by law, ergo it follows I do not wish the same for others.
It does come down to a cultural preference, and those differenes to do harm that I can see.
Fair enough Andy
<<I would not wish my dress sense to be imposed by law>>
But it would be in Saudi and many other arabic/arab influenced countries
A female's dress sense defined by law even more so.
With an implicit assumption that we are not 'allowed' to see someone's face and they require protection from our gaze?
So why should our mores be challenged in this country?
Where we have a long tradition celebrating the human form in art and literature and have spent the past hundred years or so liberating people's attitudes to their bodies.
If I can't engage properly with another individual i will not interact with them at all. If a woman in a burkha (or anyone in a mask that had no practical purpose) approached me I would politely explain I couldn't understand what she was saying.
End of interaction until she approached me properly.
Even without a total ban, that sort of situation in any service situation; eg education establishments, public offices, shops etc should be made unlawful
.
<<I would not wish my dress sense to be imposed by law>>
But it would be in Saudi and many other arabic/arab influenced countries
A female's dress sense defined by law even more so.
With an implicit assumption that we are not 'allowed' to see someone's face and they require protection from our gaze?
So why should our mores be challenged in this country?
Where we have a long tradition celebrating the human form in art and literature and have spent the past hundred years or so liberating people's attitudes to their bodies.
If I can't engage properly with another individual i will not interact with them at all. If a woman in a burkha (or anyone in a mask that had no practical purpose) approached me I would politely explain I couldn't understand what she was saying.
End of interaction until she approached me properly.
Even without a total ban, that sort of situation in any service situation; eg education establishments, public offices, shops etc should be made unlawful
.
Zeuhl - I would agree that in terms of direct interaction dutring employment - such as in school - a burka is simply not practical, and can be deined on that basis - as I believe has happened to a teaching assistant who was interviewed sans burka, but appeared wearing it in the classroom.
However, there is surely a world of difference between saying - burkas (and indeed hot pants!) are not suitable for a classroom for simple reasons of appropriate dress, and communication, and enforcing a law to ban them?
We have to ensure that simple cutural differences are not enforced by legal means.
My wife is currently in Abu Dhabi for a month working in schools as a schools inspector. When women are together, no veils are worn, if a man wishes to enter the classroom a bell is rung, and the ladies put on their veils - simple system, everyone is happy. That is cultural acceptance at work.
The only requirement was that ladies are clothed to their ankles and wrists - some from the visit last year did not comply. Thery were not prosecuted, nor was any mention made - they were simply not invited back this year.
Similarly, food and drink are offered to all visitors, and it is a grave offence to refuse - not illegal, just offensive.
Surely we can adapt a similar system on an individal basis? If you feel uncomfortable interacting with a lady weearing a buka, you could ask her to remove it, or to deal with another individual not wearing a burka. Is that not preferable to dealing with a woman who is deeply uncomfortable because she is forced by law to abandon her cultural modesty?
These issues have to be dealt with by a degree of tolerance, and mutual understanding, not a sledgehammer application of a legal system that obviously has far better things to do.
However, there is surely a world of difference between saying - burkas (and indeed hot pants!) are not suitable for a classroom for simple reasons of appropriate dress, and communication, and enforcing a law to ban them?
We have to ensure that simple cutural differences are not enforced by legal means.
My wife is currently in Abu Dhabi for a month working in schools as a schools inspector. When women are together, no veils are worn, if a man wishes to enter the classroom a bell is rung, and the ladies put on their veils - simple system, everyone is happy. That is cultural acceptance at work.
The only requirement was that ladies are clothed to their ankles and wrists - some from the visit last year did not comply. Thery were not prosecuted, nor was any mention made - they were simply not invited back this year.
Similarly, food and drink are offered to all visitors, and it is a grave offence to refuse - not illegal, just offensive.
Surely we can adapt a similar system on an individal basis? If you feel uncomfortable interacting with a lady weearing a buka, you could ask her to remove it, or to deal with another individual not wearing a burka. Is that not preferable to dealing with a woman who is deeply uncomfortable because she is forced by law to abandon her cultural modesty?
These issues have to be dealt with by a degree of tolerance, and mutual understanding, not a sledgehammer application of a legal system that obviously has far better things to do.
Andy you make it sound so nice
>>> When women are together, no veils are worn, if a man wishes to enter the classroom a bell is rung, and the ladies put on their veils - simple system, everyone is happy. <<<
What you mean is they have no choice
>>>The only requirement was that ladies are clothed to their ankles and wrists - some from the visit last year did not comply. <<<
>>> they were simply not invited back this year.<<<
What next make them all wear gloves
Now Andy if people are not happy with these laws they should no go so why do we in this country have to change laws to accomodate other people .
Do any Gay school inspectors ever get to go to these countries.
>>> When women are together, no veils are worn, if a man wishes to enter the classroom a bell is rung, and the ladies put on their veils - simple system, everyone is happy. <<<
What you mean is they have no choice
>>>The only requirement was that ladies are clothed to their ankles and wrists - some from the visit last year did not comply. <<<
>>> they were simply not invited back this year.<<<
What next make them all wear gloves
Now Andy if people are not happy with these laws they should no go so why do we in this country have to change laws to accomodate other people .
Do any Gay school inspectors ever get to go to these countries.
Latest Posts
News1 min ago
Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Film, Media & TV4 mins ago
Film, Media & TV5 mins ago
Starmer In Jobs Push.....right Oh!
News15 mins ago
