Women should be forced not to war burqas in public.

[Tiggeroshii]

[Warpy]

1. Any man who wants to FORCE us to wear anything

is looking for a whole lot more trouble than he thought he'd ever see.

[Tiggeroshii]

2. Agreed =)

[anigbrowl]

5. Reread the OP title, which might have been better phrased as 'should women be forbidden from burqas'

[Dorian Gray]

193. Exactly

I can't imagine that the word choice in the OP was unintentional, and I find the numbers of people answering "YES" to be sort of surprising.

I don't like burqas, but to force someone NOT TO wear them is just as bad as forcing someone TO wear them.

[Tiggeroshii]

235. Annnd you are absolutely right. =)

And I agree. 30 percent is ridiculous for a forum such as this, I think.

[Gwendolyn]

249. You're in favor of the state providing for women/men who can't work...

...due to the constraints of their religion? No matter who they are, whatever they propose, you're in favor of providing for them, for life, based on their choice of garb.

Please sign me up!

[imdjh]

274. Especially pantyhose nt

[joeybee12]

3. No woman should be forced to wear or not wear or DO or not do anything...

...end of discussion.

[marybourg]

9. Disagree.

Aside from the woman's right to wear or not (a right that in most cases is actually denied to her by her family's religious mandates), society itself has some rights. Among those is the the right to have its citizens' photographs on drivers licenses and passports, the right to assess a citizen's credibility when that citizen is a witness to a crime or is a defendant, plaintiff or juror, the right to have its children grow up learning to assess adults' expressions when those adults interface with children and the right to inculcate its social belief that women are not objects to be covered up but humans, equal in social worth to men.

[joeybee12]

13. Then you can force a man to do or wear something, according to society...

...but you can't single one out because of sex to do or not do something.

[KittyWampus]

19. Sorry, not allowing ANYONE of any sex to appear in certain public areas wearing a mask is reasonable

[joeybee12]

52. That's nto the question...the question is "public" not "certain public areas"

the OP is very broad and cannot be supported.

[GA_ArmyVet]

47. They Already do in this country

In most places wearing a mask or hood of any sort is illegal...Face must be visible...(Anti Klan measure I think, at least here in the south).

[imdjh]

276. Even more useful now.

Why storekeepers don't call the police as soon as someone wearing a hoodie (UP) and sunglasses walks into the store, I don't know

[Gwendolyn]

68. As I said downthread... we most certainly would force men to take off black face masks.

If thousands of them started to walk around the streets masked, unrecognizable, no one would put up with it. If only for security reasons. Women wouldn't feel safe.

The state puts the kibosh on clothing items and certain types of behavior all the time.

[anigbrowl]

23. But the rights of society you describe are not what's at issue here

The new suggestion is that you cannot wear a burqa in public at all, not just remove it for official purposes. Now, I'm no fan of burqas but there's a difference between being required to remove it in some cases and being forbidden from wearing it. At least some people actively choose to do so.

I would be an interesting exercise for a man to wander round Paris in a burqa to see what kind of reaction it garners; or any other complete body-concealing garment.

[marybourg]

38. The woman who've been brainwashed into covering themselves

completely don't remove their wrapping in public at all. If they believed it was alright to be seen by any man other than their immediate family, they wouldn't be wearing those wrappings. They have, though, made demands on society such as that if they are stopped while driving, a woman cop be called to look at their face to see if it's the same as the one on their license; that they be allowed to come to the witness stand with only a slit for their eyes, that they be allowed to teach in public classrooms and act as a role model for little girls. No, they're not taking the wrapping off in pulic roles. They're withdrawing from the society instead. That's not in our society's interest.

[anigbrowl]

53. Many don't, but this is not universally true

About 10 years ago I lived in Amsterdam rented an apartment for a year from a landlady who was from Pakistan, who was a single Muslim. She lived nearby and we got to be friends, so every so often she'd just just drop by for coffee or to pick up old mail. She worked at a local bank.

She wasn't particularly religious (or at least, not enough to be bothered about meeting a man, ie me), but she quite liked her culture. So some days she'd come by wearing a pantsuit and blouse, other days she'd be wearing something sari-like (I forget the name, Saris are Indian but they're called something else in Pakistan), twice she popped round wearing a burqa - possibly for the shock value, but seeing as she said she liked to wear one sometimes, who am I to argue?

I'm not in favor of anyone being forced to wear a burqa, forbidden from driving, or any of the other religiously-inspired gender restrictions in Islam. On the other hand, blanket assumptions frequently turn out to be misleading.

[JVS]

66. There is a difference though, between banning the burqa and not hiring people who wear them.

If they are withdrawing from society, I'd like to know what society's compelling interest is that justifies forcing them not to withdraw.

[madeline_con]

230. Female teachers in the insatnce you refer to teach girls and

uncover their faces while they're at school. The fucking ignorance here is amazing.

[KittyWampus]

45. I'd have to say the preference would be to ban burqas only in places like courthouses, airports etc

However, that would be rather hard to enforce. Thus, a complete ban in public is defensible, IMO.

[anigbrowl]

55. It sounds a lot easier to enforce than a total ban, to me.

I believe that this is how it works in practice in the UK and various European countries, though it's been a while since i was in the EU.

[NNN0LHI]

So should some dude with a big ass Santa Claus beard be forced to shave that mother off?

What good is a drivers licence photo of some guy with a huge beard if he shaves it off the next day?

Don

[Posteritatis]

83. Nah. See, it's only okay to regulate women's clothing (nt)

[Warren Stupidity]

195. Nothing you listed is a 'right'.

Your list is simply a set of policy objectives that you think are appropriate for our society. The state doesn't have a 'right' to have a person's photograph on their driver's license, a person has a privacy right that is not absolute and that can, as in this example be limited by the state by requiring a driver's license application to include a photograph of the applicant.

[madeline_con]

228. What an idiotic statement : children ...learning to assess adults' expressions

"... when those adults interface with children "

Do you think women wear viels in their homes.
:rofl:

[maxsolomon]

4. WAR burqas?

get your shit correct

[omega minimo]

12. maybe they spelled "bras" wrong

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

6. Let's really do this, then.

Women should be forced not to be stoned for infidelity.

Women should be forced not to have their clitorectomy.

Women should be forced not to be killed at birth.

Women should be forced not to immolate on their spouses death.

Women should be forced to reject their right to vote, own property or run for office.

[me b zola]

32. +1

:applause:

[EFerrari]

44. What the fuck is the matter with people.

[GA_ArmyVet]

48. Wow..I dont think there is enough room on this forum to

answer that question...

[EFerrari]

50. Okay. Stupid question.

lol

[me b zola]

65. I don't know

Can you imagine if a few things were switched around? Should AA men be forced not to wear shackles?

The burqa is distinctly different from the other traditional garb of Muslim women. The burqa is synonymous with shackles.


edited for speeling

[EFerrari]

113. You're right. There is no cognate for men.

Hello?!

[sam sarrha]

it's called... IGNORANCE. people here have no idea what women suffer under Islam

[EFerrari]

88. If that's right, it's saddening to know.

[sam sarrha]

94. i lived in an Islamic Republic in the Peace Corps '73

[scarletwoman]

57. Brava! I wonder how many people arguing for the "freedom" to wear a burqa, would also defend

the "freedom" for a woman to be handcuffed and led around on a chain by her husband in public.

I can't believe the way some people think. :banghead:

sw

[lukasahero]

70. Oh, I'm sure there are plenty who would argue for that here

"But it's their culture!"

I've given up fighting the women's rights issue here for just this reason.

[scarletwoman]

86. "But it's their culture!" -- Thanks, it's such an infuriating argument.

It's not OUR culture, and there's no good reason why we should tolerate it. If they want to live that way, then they can stay in their own countries where it's the norm.

If they want to live in a western democracy, then they must abide by our laws. We're not talking about outlawing mosques, or their language, or their traditional foods. We're talking about upholding the rule of law against the oppression of women.

sw

[sam sarrha]

108. there you go again using 'Reason'.. it just doesn't work that way.. it's Islam, get the book>>

'Understanding Muhammad':a Psychobiography by Ali Sina.
http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Muhammad-Ali-Sina/dp/0980994802

it takes a bit to understand there isn't Reason involved in Islam, Islam couldnt survive a day with reason.. it's faith and adherence, some modern Muslim societies allow more, but they aren't free, they are tied to the book, custom and above all the resident Oligarchy of the Mosque

[scarletwoman]

112. Reason isn't involved in ANY religion. But it IS involved in the state.

The state has perfectly reasonable right to forbid the oppression of its female citizens. If they don't like the laws of France, then they don't have to live there.

sw

[sam sarrha]

185. calling Islam a Religion is a stretch, its a Personality cult of a Vicious Narcissistic megalomaniac

read Understanding Muhammad:a psychologicalbiography by ali sina

[sam sarrha]

98. In Islam there isn't necessarily "Freedom" as we know it, a list of Taboo and approved, some areas

have different lists is all

[rucky]

7. That's just as Taliban-y as forcing them TO wear 'em.

[EFerrari]

8. No, it isn't. Our culture has banned many practices that are destructive.

[rucky]

16. I think I'm going to need an example. n/t

[EFerrari]

21. Women have the vote, can own property and run for office.

:shrug:

[anigbrowl]

29. Those aren't examples of something being banned.

The de facto ban suggested by Sarkozy (as opposed to a de jure ban) is not on women being forced to wear burqas, but on the wearing of burqas, voluntary or otherwise.

[EFerrari]

Oh, please. You're arguing that witches should be ducked.

Sarkozy is right. The burga can only put French women back 400 years.

[anigbrowl]

58. Ridiculous, and completely untrue.

I wonder why you feel the need to lie about other posters. I just pointed out that your reply above didn't address the question which was asked.

[EFerrari]

63. Of course it does. We don't allow witch duckings here any more.

Maybe you could argue this is a breach of witches rights.

And all of our laws giving women right do ban cultural practices like denying women their own property including their own children.

[anigbrowl]

72. You are the only one talking about witch ducking.

I haven't seen anyone on this thread argue in favor of denying rights to women or forcing them to dress in a certain way. The question is whether women should be prevented by law from wearing a burqa in the event that they should actually choose to do so. Although I have no particular fondness for Islam, I do support individuals' right to do as they see fit in public to the extent that it does not impinge on the rights of others.

[EFerrari]

80. Yes, I seem to be in the minority that sees the continuum of the oppression of women.

I have no problem being in that minority.

[anigbrowl]

149. Sure you are.

[harry_pothead]

222. I'm sure you didn't mean it, but children are not the property of their mothers.

[EFerrari]

236. But women were denied their parental rights over their babies

because they couldn't own "property". Wild, isn't it?

[sam sarrha]

87. in what percentage of Muslim cultures...??

[KittyWampus]

24. She provided one above. A clitorectomy is not legal. And baning the wearing of masks in certain

areas is quite reasonable.

[EFerrari]

31. How is it possible that so called progressives are arguing for the burga?

Which is designed to take women out of the public square, to control them, to erase them.

Un-fucking-believable.

[rucky]

75. You're assuming that everyone's wearing them against their will.

study up. there are some very religious people out there who should be free to practice.

or at least that's what some so-called progressives believe

[scarletwoman]

92. Then they can practice it in their own countries. If they want to live in a western society,

they will have to adapt to the fact that erasing another human being's identity is not acceptable.

sw

[rucky]

95. Which brings me back to my original point.

[EFerrari]

97. Not exactly, rucky. I'm assuming that if you put a woman in a shroud

curtail her movement and her vision, she can't participate fully in secular society. And more, that if a shrouded woman is the primary caretaker of children, that they, too, will come to accept the marginalization of women.

I think that's a pretty safe bet.

[rucky]

200. Okay, let's play it out. Suppose we ban them.

What should the penalty be? A fine or imprisonment?

It's punitive of the people we're trying to protect.

If the woman is a victim of being forced to do something against her will, that's the crime right there. Banning the symbol commonly associated isn't going to stop the underlying crime (or potential crime) - it'll just move it underground and make it harder to identify and investigate and help potential victims.

[EFerrari]

210. It's called enforcing boundaries. We do it all the time and for people

we're trying to protect.

And the issue here, or for me anyway, is that burkas isolate and marginalize women in public. Not to mention, if that woman is being abused, it's a lot easier to tell if you can see HER FACE.

[rucky]

214. Alright. Let's go out of the box here:

Burqas banned. "Penalty" is victim's rights counseling? Giving women new to the West access to resources and support, if they choose to escape an abusive relationship?

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

217. Sure. That's a great idea. DV victims here in town have a whole dept

at the DA's office where they go to counseling, get legal help and information about other resources.

[Warren Stupidity]

196. For it? Nope. Against laws telling anyone what they can or can't wear.

Dress codes are bullshit.

[EFerrari]

211. There is a greater good here. And one can dress modestly

without being cut off from the rest of humanity.

[sam sarrha]

90. not legal doesnt mean it isnt done... just words on paper,

[scarletwoman]

99. But the state rightly sanctions against it. And of course, it's not PUBLICLY done. (nt)

[patrick t. cakes]

40. slavery

[cali]

22. oh, no it's not. and thinking that it is is quite bizarre.

[rucky]

76. banning clothing strikes me as bizarre.

go figure

[Chef Eric]

187. Doesn't Germany have the right to ban the wearing of swastikas?

Doesn't a state need to place some limits on an individual's "freedoms" when those "freedoms" are associated with the elimination of other people's freedoms?

[Warren Stupidity]

197. Germany does not have a bill of rights including a first amendment

so it is not constrained from prohibiting political expression. We do and we are.

[Chef Eric]

201. I am defending the ban of burqas in France, not in the U.S.A. nt

[robcon]

10. Should nuns be forced to not wear their habits?

It's shocking that some DUers think they can dictate dress codes to others.

[anigbrowl]

14. An excellent question.

[KittyWampus]

27. easily answered if you know the difference between a burqa and a habit.

[KittyWampus]

25. Habits don't hide faces.

[Gwendolyn]

26. Nuns dress in a hijab-ish way. They show their faces.

No one cares about hijab, or any other garb that shows the face and allows for normal societal interaction.

The same people who defend covering the body head to toe as a female "religious" symbol of obedience to a male, would be aghast at the sight of a leather-masked sexual slave submissive being led down the street on a leash by her Master. We don't allow that, do we? And if thousands and thousands of men took to the streets wearing black masks and long rider coats, we'd put an end to that pretty fast too. Especially if they were the subjugated property of women, but not solely for that reason.

Religion is magical. It makes people behave in the most irrational ways.

[anigbrowl]

36. They do now, although they haven't always

That is, in some periods and places nuns wore face-covering habits (albeit of a different design, and also generally in separatist convents rather than in public). Your comment about leather-masked sex slaves (of either gender) is interesting, since I do see this on an occasional basis here in San Francisco. This too is rather irrational, but then we cherish the irrational here.

[Gwendolyn]

42. The past is the past for a reason.

Twernt no good and we changed it. :)

I think my analogy is pretty good. Both the birqa-clad slave and the sexual slave supposedly choose for themselves. Yet one, (the religious anti-sex symbol) is championed, while the other is reviled. A statement reflective of our society.

Anyway, it isn't an issue in the US. France has a diff secular culture, they don't have the same hang-ups about sex, there are probs with fundies same as here, only theirs aren't christian, they live their lives in cafes in public... yada, yada, the differences go on and on. We can't really judge what they do based on our society here.

[KittyWampus]

41. So Religion is like Sex, then. Both make people behave in the most irrational ways.

:)

[Gwendolyn]

49. Haha... yeah, I guess so!

:)

[JVS]

74. Since when don't we allow leather-masked sexual slave submissives to be led on a leash?

It is transgressive behavior but not illegal as far as I know.

[Gwendolyn]

82. Odd behavior is ignored in the right places, unless nudity is involved.

I think we also know that if thousands of happy-as-clams sexual slaves started popping up in middle America, that behavior would be halted immediately. Let's face it, sex slaves sporting leather masks and ball gags, promenading the city with their Masters on a Sunday aft would quickly be escorted out of most public areas across America. The reactions to it would be mostly open disgust and derision, personal choice be damned, but somehow the religious other kind of enslavement is to be embraced by all. How fecked up is that? From progressives no less.

Faceless men in black shrouds would not be allowed in public either, for obvious reasons. Sounds like double standards to me.

[babythunder]

137. Gwendolyn I just want to say

you are doing a terrific job in this thread because for me it's too infuriating explaining to so-called progressives why the Burka should be banned in a Democratic Society.

[Gwendolyn]

203. It's hopeless.

:D My own hair was kind of singed by the end of the evening. Some of the other ladies did much better, and all I can say is that even though there is so much ignorance and misogyny out there in the world, at least it's good to know that there are women who understand the issue.

[me b zola]

34. Do you believe that women choose to wear a burka?

Do you believe that it is a fashion statement chosen by free women?

[pnwmom]

35. Nuns don't wear head gear that covers the face except for a slit or a lace patch

over the eyes.

[JVS]

56. I'm not sure that this is an apt comparison. There is an extensive voluntary process involved...

in becoming a nun. A more apt comparison would be "Should all Catholic women be forced not to cover their head while attending mass?"

[Warren Stupidity]

198. Our burqas good: theirs not so good. Excellent point.

[Mari333]

204. agreed. nt

[omega minimo]

11. In France?

[piedmont]

15. Many places outlaw covering your face in public-- for men and women. nt

[AsahinaKimi]

141. I'm not so sure about that

Surgical masks have become quite popular in Japan, as well as among many who love Anime
and go to Anime conventions.

[KittyWampus]

17. Burqas are not "clothing". They are full body MASKS. Head scarves? Fine.

[anigbrowl]

64. Well, this is why it's interesting

Does someone have the right to wear a mask in public? I'm not talking about in court, or in a bank (where people are requested to remove motorcycle helmets and the like), or being willing to remove a mask in response to a reasonable police request. I'm talking about just walking down the street in a non-suspicious manner, for whatever private purpose one sees fit.

Some examples - some silly, some serious:

[timeforpeace]

18. Forced, of course not. Want to, that's different. They might be comfortable and utilitarian.

[EFerrari]

28. Oh, effing please. You can't see and they limit your movement.

Utilitarian? My f#cking head is going to explode.

[pnwmom]

39. Comfortable and utilitarian? Are you kidding?

Not the burqas. Women who wear them say they are very hard to walk around in, easy to trip on, and they interfere severely with vision, since even the eyes are covered with a lacy patch and there is no peripheral vision. Also, in warm weather they're very hot.

[cali]

20. lol. a more blatant push poll has never been posted on DU before.

:rofl:

[sam sarrha]

30. some Muslim women wear a burqa by choice to prevent harassment

[Gwendolyn]

33. The very same can be accomplished by wearing baggy religious garb that shows the face.

No make-up or other adornments and you're set to go.

[sam sarrha]

69. i dont think you understand..

[Gwendolyn]

100. I do now, after reading your other post. Forget what I said.

:hi:

[sam sarrha]

284. it is just that they 'cant' change. they have a list of Taboo's and a list of permissions.. they are

not able to change the list. Islam is a Personality Cult.. Muhammad dictated this stuff, he was obviously by our science a delusional Psychotic disaffected Narcissist. and his Sock puppet Allah might have been a frontal lobe hallucination or just a sock puppet. he was totally paranoid, his Paranoia is deeply interwoven into Islam.. part and Parcel. he was paranoid that someone would lust after his many wives.. so he had them covered. it isn't just a garment it is the will of the Prophet.. they are consumed by trying to be the clone of the Prophet, and he has been rewritten to be a super god man.. he told his followers that god made his soul first, then god made the universe and all in it just for him, and all the people to have dominion over.. he said he sat with Allah and directed allah which souls to send to hell or heaven.. we now have a new definition of Narcissistic Megalomania. he was really nothing more than a blood thirsty psychotic thief, serial murderer, assassin;he assinated who ever talked badly of him.. or whatever you wish to call a man who takes a 6 year old bride 2 months after the death of his wife. the daughter of a friend, who knew he couldnt refuse without being killed.

i really don't think our culture understands what Taboo really is.. it isn't just a no no.. it can be something death is preferable to. i am certain most Muslims are good people try'n to live a good life make'n the best of something they cant leave caused their brainwashed or they will be killed if they quit islam, i've lived in an islamic republic, i hung out with the Moors, they were not hung up on Islam, the Moors were cool.
they hated the arabs cause they abducted their children and sold them for sex slaves. Muhammad was a slaver too, he let his men rape the slaves and married hostages. till they were sold or returned to their families for Ransom.

[EFerrari]

110. This may seem ridiculous but Western women also have their ways

to deflect harassment. I remember making myself baggy and pregnant looking. I didn't need a burga. And I believe that it's a little harder to harass women now than it was in 1975. It didn't happen by swathing women but by the whole idea becoming unacceptable.

[Withywindle]

272. Well, the harrassment is the problem, then, isn't it?

I've always thought that if the men can't possibly control their sinful thoughts, then THEY'RE the ones who should be sequestered in the house most of the time, shouldn't be allowed out without a female relative keeping tabs on them, and should have to wear a vision-obstructing garment, like blinkers on a carriage horse.

THEY'RE the ones with the problem, after all.

[cagesoulman]

37. Why the fuck would anyone with a choice want to wear a burqa?

If you're cold, grab a fucking sweater. If you're sexually repressed, join the GOP. 'Nuff said.

[sam sarrha]

81. well.. there is a lot of disturbing LEERING.. staring in repressed societies where women are

considered ignorant soul-less hollow shells whose only purpose is to birth male babies.

if a woman is raped she wont tell anyone to keep her throat from being cut or being buried up to her neck and stoned to death for adultery. remember the saudi woman caught in a guys car without a male family chaperon.. both were dragged out and viciously beaten, the woman gang raped and the guy ass raped.. the list of Taboo's has consequences, serious no mercy no quarter, Steven Fuck'n King nightmare inhumane consequences..

some men know this, and abuse it.. there are not morals as we know them in Islam, only a list of Taboo and what is permitted. and apparently what you can get away with if you keep your eyes open.. Islam really doesnt have a function of Reason as we know it.. dont make the mistake of projecting our value system on them. there is a Documentory, Behind the Veil ..a need to see

[scarletwoman]

120. I think maybe you're not aware of the context of this poll. A law was passed in France

forbidding the wearing of burqas. We're not talking about an Islamic country here, we're talking about a law passed in a western democracy.

What Muslims choose to wear in their own countries is not the matter under discussion.

sw

[JVS]

123. "What Muslims choose to wear in their own countries is not the matter under discussion."

Oh, so France is no place for muslims? Should they go back where they came from?

[scarletwoman]

126. If they want to live in France they have to live by the laws of France which give women

equal rights and do not allow the oppression of women.

[Djinn]

146. France is their own country though

Many of the women who'd be effected by this were born in France.

Should we ban other forms of oppressive clothing? Bra's are uncomfortable and really only serve the purpose of keeping our tits up high enough for men's enjoyment.

Stilletos cause pain and if worn often enough permanent damage.

On a 40C day the men around me can take their tops off, if I do I risk being arrested.

No-one should be FORCED to wear/not wear anything at all but there ARE woen who make this choice themselves, I know women fro virtually secular families who as adults made this choice. I don't see anything feminist is telling them they can't.

The laws of France did not include banning of any item of clothing when those currently living there either moved to France or where born there.

Should they also ban the daggy ankle length skirts worn by the daughters of fundie Christians?

[Withywindle]

269. Speak for yourself re: bras.

I regard them as a wonderful invention that allows me to run, jump, and dance without pain. I find going without to be MUCH more uncomfortable than going with (assuming one that fits well, that is). I'm not even all that huge, either.

[cherokeeprogressive]

218. I don't think France has actually banned burqas.

"Immediately after saying “the Muslim religion must be as respected as other religions”, Mr Sarkozy added: “The problem of the burka . . . is a problem of liberty and dignity for women . . . it is a symbol of servitude and humiliation.”

France “cannot accept in our country women imprisoned behind a mesh screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity”, ...but he stopped short of advocating a ban on burkas"

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2009/0623/1224249339255.html

[NeedleCast]

43. Forcing them to or not to wear burqas...both are wrong

[EFerrari]

46. No. Both aren't wrong. Allowing women to wear burgas

whether forced by their culture or forced by their culture, is anti-democratic, period.

Observant woman have other choices that aren't so TOXIC to the culture as a whole.

[Gwendolyn]

59. TOXIC is the best word I've read to describe it.

You make soooo much sense. :)

[EFerrari]

60. I think people are thinking about this as if we were banned from wearing

MaryJanes or low cut blouses or make up.

But, the burga is so much more than that. The burga takes a woman out from participation in civil society. I don't believe anyone here would agree to that.

[Gwendolyn]

62. Exactly! it's much more than just clothing.

In the same way that the confederate flag is more than just fabric woven into a pattern. There's that symbolic aspect, which is bad enough, but mostly as you say, the fact that it isolates women and keeps them from actively participating in their society.

Of course, double standards being what they are, if this was about men wearing such a toxic thing, the reactions would be very different. I think even the men on here would admit that.

[Chef Eric]

188. Is it wrong for Germany to ban the wearing of swastikas?

Doesn't a state need to place some limits on an individual's "freedoms" when those "freedoms" are associated with the destruction of other people's freedoms?

[JVS]

51. No. Women should wear what they see fit to wear.

[EFerrari]

54. Nope. The burga should be banned just as lynching is banned.

Just as foot binding is banned. There is no good argument to spread the oppression of women into Western culture but thanks, anyway.

[scarletwoman]

61. Should women be forced to not be chained by their husbands in public?

Should women be forced to not have a bag put over their heads in public?

Should women be forced to not have their mouths taped shut in public?

Just how much oppression of women do you find socially acceptable?

Fuck your stupid poll.

sw

[EFerrari]

67. Agreed. Fuck this stupid poll.

[lukasahero]

73. +1

Bravo!

[LWolf]

71. Yes. No war in public. nt

[BlooInBloo]

77. Nor should they be prohibited from wearing them by the state.

[EFerrari]

91. Wrong. The state has a responsibility not to condone the oppression of women.

Which the burga surely is.

[scarletwoman]

96. Precisely! Exactly so! Brava again! (nt)

[BlooInBloo]

101. So in the name of women's rights, you would take away a woman's right to wear that?

Fascinating.

[EFerrari]

102. Maybe you should sit with that fascinating thought a while.

Yes, the burga should be banned. Just as tatooed numbers on flesh should be banned.

That victims of abuse sometimes embrace their chains is not news. That the culture around them cheers them on, that is new.

Wear a burga for a day and get back to me.

[BlooInBloo]

104. I hear you. Clearly women can't be trusted to decide for themselves what to wear...

Obviously it is The State, run predominantly by men, who should place restrictions on what women can wear.

EDIT: And no, I choose not to wear a burqa. I'm very, very glad that I have that choice. I support everybody having the same choice I do, unhindered by The State.

[EFerrari]

105. Right. Like the state decided we were citizens, property owners and voters.

[Bluerthanblue]

164. should breast enhancement be banned?

you may think they have nothing to do with oppression- but as a woman, I disagree with you.
And my voice is no less worthy than yours.

How about botox injections and all kinds of physical abuses done to our bodies in order to fit the image of the "ideal woman"?

Should women allowing their bodies to be used as sexual objects be banned? THAT is oppression and plays into a kind of sick self-abusive tradition that began forever ago- and kills and damages us just as much as burqua's do.

What did Kanye West's mother die from? Karen Carpenter? How many women and girls die to be "thin"? How many pay to have people cut, staple, and muitilate their bodies in order to achieve their own version of what a "woman" is supposed to look like?

The satisfaction that comes from achieving that kind of 'perfect body' shouldn't be any less offensive than a woman feeling content to cover her body from head to toe when in public using a burqa-

Do you share the same opinion about banning the dress of Amish and Mennonite women? About Catholic Nuns who wear habits?

I understand where you are coming from, but banning? sorry I can't agree.

[EFerrari]

174. The Amish and the Mennonite wear nothing like a burka.

And Catholic nuns, the few that do, wear their habit as a symbol of withdrawal from secular life. The burka is a sign that women don't belong in public. Yes, they should be banned.

[armyowalgreens]

271. Oh how easy your wordplay can cover up a double standard...

;-)

[Chef Eric]

183. Wrong. Isn't wearing swastikas illegal in Germany? Isn't that a good thing?

Sometimes a state places limits on individual "freedoms" when those individual "freedoms" are designed to have a negative effect on OTHER PEOPLE'S freedoms.

[omega minimo]

78. How can all these people have an opinion based on ZERO INFORMATION IN THE POLL?

:wow:

[anigbrowl]

151. Well, there's this thing called reading the news...

It's amazing. It allows you to form opinions in your own time and have an informed discussion about the issue at a later time.

[omega minimo]

163. and assuming you know what the empty OP intended and what the hell it's just a net poll anyway.

[SoCalDem]

79. France has every right to stay "French". If Burquas are "required" for religious services

woman should wear them,.... to the Mosque.

FRANCE IS A SECULAR NATION. People who want to live there, should expect to "become" French.

France is not the US. These days, even the US is not the "US" we think it is.

It's no secret that women do not have many (if any) real rights in most Muslim countries, so it's not unreasonable at all for the French president to uphold freedom for women by removing any possibility that husbands/fathers might be forcing "their" women into submission.

I'm sure the Fashion Gendarmes will not be going door to door, arresting women who wear "religious garb" in their homes or in their mosques.....but if they plan to be in the general workforce or in public schools in a country they CHOSE to call home, that's another story.

[EFerrari]

85. No feminist should be advocating for burgas just as we don't support

walking three steps behind husbands.

In this case the government does have a way to intervene in the subjugation of women. Good for them.

[Hippo_Tron]

125. Question for you: should women be fined or jailed for wearing a burqa?

In principle I agree with you and Sarkozy that the burqa represents the subjection and the state should intervene to stop that if at all possible. The problem is that this seems easier said than done. If you're going to ban the burqa, presumably you have to fine or jail people wearing them. Certainly fining or jailing women for wearing the burqa isn't going to help women. How do you solve this problem?

[EFerrari]

127. I don't see that problem. We were made to integrate our society.

We sucked at it but we did it because it was the law.

Women will wear head scarves instead and that will be the end of it. Until their daughters start growing up believing they have the same rights as their brothers. Look out!

[Hippo_Tron]

155. We didn't integrate becuase it was the law...

Orville Faubus, George Wallace, and others didn't give two shits that it was the law. Integration literally had to be done at gunpoint.

So again, comes the issue of how do you plan to enforce the law? Do you fine or jail women for wearing a burqa in public? And if you do that, doesn't that just punish women for something their husbands are basically coercing them to do in the first place. Furthermore, might this law not just encourage husbands to simply say, "alright well if you can't wear a burqa in public then you won't leave the house at all."

I'm not against this in principle. I just don't see how it's feasible.

[EFerrari]

168. Having the struggle is worth it, all by itself.

Women that succumb to the burga will not wear it in defiance of the law. They will switch to hijab or they will stay home. The few whose husbands are adamant can be dealt with -- and by themselves, prove this is not a choice.

And meanwhile, this terrible imprisoning of women in plain sight will end here. It's worth the effort, imo.

[Hippo_Tron]

205. Once again, laws have to be enforced or they will be defied...

I don't think I can emphasize that enough. If the penalty for wearing a burqa on the streets of France is one euro and that's only if the cop happens to be in a bad mood, then yes women will still wear the burqa in defiance of the law. So again, the question is: how much do you propose to punish women who still wear the burqa in defiance of the law? And furthermore how do you plan to deal with those "adamant husbands"?

[EFerrari]

209. You've really answered your own question.

It depends on the political will of the French.

[Hippo_Tron]

213. So you're for severe punishments for wearing a burqa then?

Like lets say we should sentence any woman caught wearing a burqa to 20 years in prison. That would certainly cut down on a lot of burqa wearing. It would also pretty severely punish quite a few women who the law is theoretically intended to help in the first place.

And again, I think many husbands will just force their wives to stay home. How will that help women? And if you think we can deal with those husbands how do you propose to do it?

[EFerrari]

215. Over the top nonsense. There are already laws on the books

for abusive husbands.

There are dress codes in schools, on beaches and in restaurants. I don't recall the last time someone went to prison for wearing gang colors to school but the prohibition probably has avoided some violence.

It's too bad that we don't have the guts the French do. Social pressure works and it's about time we use it for a positive purpose.

[Hippo_Tron]

237. We'll have to agree to disagree

I think that societal pressure isn't even close to a strong enough force to change deeply rooted prejudices and traditions like this. It's not at all akin to gang colors at schools or forcing people to wear a certain amount of clothing on a beach.

The only way to change something this deeply rooted is at gunpoint. And in this situation it is entirely too murky as to who we should point the gun at and how we should point it.

[EFerrari]

238. We will have to agree to disagree. I come from a family where women

weren't allowed to work outside of the home. And that changed without guns of any kind. :)

[scarletwoman]

129. In the specific case in which this law came to be made, the woman was not allowed to

immigrate to France. Her boyfriend was a French-born citizen of Algerian descent who brought her in from another country and insisted on her wearing a burqa. I don't know what penalties are involved in the statute itself.

I'd have to go dig up the original news story which I think showed up showed up here yesterday or over the weekend, but I don't remember for sure.

[Gwendolyn]

135. it's not a law, Scarletwoman. They're opening an inquiry, backed by many, into whether...

... or not women are being coerced into wearing them.

If you want to know where a lot of the start of this movement started, read this. It's heartbreaking.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ni_Putes_Ni_Soumises

I know it's wiki, but it's pretty accurate and not so much to wade through.

[1]

89. i agree. they should be forced to wear fishnet stockings, a tight short skirt and a beret...

viva la france!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

107. The Germans said the same thing about staying German.

[Djinn]

147. France is secular huh?

Check out their numerous religious public holidays and get back to us

[Forkboy]

84. This is hardcore flamebait.

[sam sarrha]

93. it's called a discussion till someone pull's the plug to keep from facing up to reality..

[Forkboy]

106. There is no discussion in the OP, just a poll with no context.

Like what prompted the poll, what the OP feels about it, or what questions or points the OP wished to make about it.

Women shouldn't be forced to do anything, and with zero context in the OP there isn't much to discuss. :shrug:

[anigbrowl]

158. It's topical, however.

It would indeed help if the OP had provided some background context, but it's already obvious to a good many readers. FYI: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124566644926636675.html

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

103. Crazy fundamentalist oppression from white christians...

is superior to crazy fundamentalist oppression from swarthy muslims.

At least according to roughly 1/3 of those polled, apparently.

[scarletwoman]

109. Since when is equal rights for women "crazy fundamentalist oppression"?

Some people have some really skewed values...

[EFerrari]

114. I want any of these defenders to show me a single cognate for men

that would render the women's rights argument null.

They can't.

There isn't one.

This is about controlling women.

And shame on anyone that defends it.

[Gwendolyn]

115. The French don't have crazy christian fundamentalists.

They hate displays of religion altogether. No matter which it is.

We're the ones with the crazy fundamentalist christians and last I looked, we hold them in check every chance we can. What meanies we are, keeping their little nativity scenes out of the village square. Don't let them say the lord's prayer in schools, keep fighting that "God did it" meme they want put into science textbooks. What harm could any of these things do to our society?

But keep judging the French though.

[anigbrowl]

156. Oh yes they do

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_surrounding_the_Society_of_St._Pius_X for one example. Although France is a secular state, it is not a wholly secular society by any means. Your comment suggests to me that you haven't spent any great length of time there. It's certainly more secular than the US, but saying 'they hate displays of religion' in France is an oversimplification of a country which at least as complex as our own.

[Gwendolyn]

159. Of course it's an oversimplification. We'd all be typing for days otherwise.

France does not have anywhere NEAR the kind of wacky christian religious fundamentalism we have here. Schmall-like, tacky mega-churches, greasy-haired grifter preachers like Pat Robertson or Rick Warren, bumper-stickers and the like are virtually non-existent there. Of course, odd, and very hateful, groups exist, but nowhere near what we have. And nowhere near the cartoon-like, Disney proportion of drama. The group you posted did their worst work decades ago. Also compare figures citing Church attendance between them and us. It's impossible to walk the streets without a reminder of the influence the Church once wielded, but for the most part the people enjoy their secular lifestyle, and practice religion quietly and with some dignity.

My God, forget about crossing the pond. Just go up to Canada and feel the difference immediately. You can actually breathe without stumbling over a fundie.

[anigbrowl]

160. I don't need you to tell me this. I'm from Europe.

And while religion is far more in your face in the US, especially depending on which state you live in, I regret to say that it's just woven more deeply into the fabric of life in Europe. The latter (as a whole) is definitely more secular than the states and becoming more so, but the superficial differences do not tell the whole story by any means.

[Gwendolyn]

166. What you call superficial makes a big difference in the way people get to live their lives..

Besides, what's at issue, is not whether or not people are "religious." It's the extremism with which people express it. In this case, in the form of the virginity/property-based enshrouding of women. It's not even particularly "religious." It's just an example of the subjugation of women that receives validation because people have given it an undeserved place under the it's-religion-and-so-it's-okay banner.

[anigbrowl]

167. Certainly, but be aware...

that in Europe, expressions of secular freedom (as opposed to religious-motivated oppression of women) are also used opportunistically. I have no sympathy with conservative Islamic attitudes towards women, for example, but some of those in Europe who make the most noise about it do so to advance right-wing attitudes about immigrants and people of different races. Geert Wilders in the Netherlands is one example, or Jean-Marie Le Pen in France. The link between Christian fundamentalism and extreme right-wing radicalism is less obvious, but there nonetheless. Sarkozy isn't any kind of fundamentalist, but at the same time its an easy bit of political capital for him to mine.

[Gwendolyn]

202. I'm aware of that.

And so women's rights get thrown under the bus to avoid the appearance of intolerance in other areas? Sadly, what women can and can't do, is ALWAYS based on the political fashion statement of the moment, rather than a sense of universal empathy and equality. Before the election, it's doubtful to me that many women here would have dared even speak out about the burqa barbarism, as they would have been totally flamed off the board.

Just as I thought, as soon as a thread went up concerning christian fundies urging their women to be more submissive, some of the people who staunchly advocated the wearing of the burqa as a "freedom of choice" issue on this one, shuttled right over there to express their disgust.

[anigbrowl]

208. I think you misunderstand me

It's not that I think burqa-wearing is a burning issue of freedom, but that I'm skeptical of a remedy that involves outlawing a mode of dress, on the grounds that hard cases make bad law. I'm not sure that banning an article of clothing equates to throwing anyone's rights under the bus.

[Gwendolyn]

221. I do understand exactly what you're saying.

The Quebec language laws are similar. Sounds terrible in theory, but they work. There are times when coaxing and educating is futile. Had the language laws not been applied, the yutes would still be fighting in the streets.

We all know this is more than an article of clothing. It's a symbol of virginity and ownership. If it were just clothing, women could cast it off anytime they wanted to bask in the sun or go hiking. Women's rights are very much affected because the assurance it will be worn often requires force and impedes a woman's ability to function outside of her four walls. Implementing laws against it will certainly help make women employable, encourage them to join society, and thus provide the means to become equal. It will also mitigate the import of uneducated child-women for marriage.

Imagine saying this to someone... my religion requires me to be completely unemployable, therefore, if no man pays my way, I must be a child of the state and supported by the taxpayer my entire life.

[woo me with science]

111. Are BDSM couples allowed to use a leash in public?

Say, on a bus?

[scarletwoman]

117. That's completely irrelevent. Personal sexual proclivities have nothing to do with

widespread social and cultural practices.

[Gwendolyn]

118. If you're thinking of the Brit couple, no, they weren't. They got kicked off the bus.

[anigbrowl]

150. Well, that's a bus driver decision rather than a court decision.

As best I recall, there is nothing illegal about such behavior in the UK.

[Gwendolyn]

162. It was a sidebar discussion.

The point is, virginity-based enslavement shrouds for women are revered and promoted, whereas sexually-based slave garb makes feminists and men of morals want to rip their hair out. Both are supposedly choices, but we can clearly see how hypocritical our society is in terms of what kind of enslavement is permissible. The good, virginal kind.

I think you know perfectly well as we all do, that hundreds of thousands of sexual submissives walking the streets would not be acceptable. You also know that hundreds of thousands of males clad in dark mask sacks would also not be tolerated by any society. Why is shrouding and rendering someone faceless acceptable for the one gender and not the other?

[JVS]

119. Is a mall good enough for you? Although they have to explain to security, they're tolerated

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s76ezfUEBM0&feature=related

[Bluerthanblue]

116. No- we should be free to choose what we want to wear in public.

Being "forced" is wrong. Where does 'freedom' begin anyway?

[EFerrari]

121. The state should not condone the oppression of woman.

Not burgas, not foot binding, not female infanticide, not any of the rest of it.

Freedom for girl children should begin at birth. And those babies should be able to look forward to being able to see their world.

[Bluerthanblue]

139. The 'state' should not condone many things- but making it illegal

for a woman to wear a burqa IS a kind of oppression in itself in my view. If the choice to wear one OR NOT exists and a woman CHOOSES to wear one, we should respect her choice, even if we feel it is a poor choice.

I don't believe women should submit to extreme plastic surgery in order to see themselves as 'acceptable'- but there are many of us who do. I don't think it's my place to tell my sister she cannot have bags of silicone surgically implanted in her chest because it IS a kind of 'oppression' (viewing our worth based on the size of our breasts)- should I be able to dictate what clothing another woman chooses to wear, even with the religious strings that come attached? I don't think so. :shrug:

There are many ways in which we women are oppressed by society. Looking at outward symbols and 'banning' them isn't going to change the core of what is wrong. At least in this woman's opinion.

:hi:

[EFerrari]

170. Banning the burka is a step we can take to end the marginalization of women

in society. We'll seldom come upon such a simple one.

[anigbrowl]

157. But the things you are comparing buqas with...

...such as foot binding, infanticide, clitordectomy, lynching and so on, are all irreversible, and thus fundamentally different.

Wearing a burqa (which is not, by the way, spelled with a g) is no more permanent than any other item of clothing. It's not like putting one on prevents other kinds of clothes from being worn. There's no doubt that such a garment has an intense symbolic context, which I understand your objection to, but wearing a kind of clothing is in no way equivalent to a physical mutilation, even if both phenomena are motivated an intent to oppress or induce conformity.

[EFerrari]

169. They are on the same continuum, whether you acknowledge it or not. n/t

[create.peace]

122. phrase differently and i will take your poll.....nt

[TK421]

124. If they want to wear them, fine....that implies they have a choice, though

I'm against forcing any woman to wear one....

So- I don't know where to go with this one

[BlooInBloo]

128. I don't see the problem. People shouldn't be forced either way, by either The State or The Church.

(EDIT: or by anyone else, for that matter.)

How to *achieve* that goal is murkier, but the goal itself seems clear enough.

[TK421]

131. I'm totally against forcing anyone to do anything....but understand that

means I am against national drafts, taxes ( without representation! ) and getting married.........


Yes...you read that correctly, getting married, because apparently that is the only way a single person can survive nowadays is if they find a woman, marry her, have kids and live off the government.

Am I wrong? Shit, most parents guilt their children into marrying even if they don't want it

Back to the issue, sorry I got sidetracked but it's easy when you're drunk: Women shouldn't be forced to do anything, and I don't give a fuck if it's their country, their culture...it dehumanizes women and makes them less than human...and they fucking ACCEPT it because they have no other choice.

If that were my sister, guess what? The husband who slaves her around would find a blade buried so far into his fucking gut he could taste the handle...and I speak as a loving brother, not a badass

[EFerrari]

132. By the same logic, we'd still be trying to "achieve" integration. n/t

[EFerrari]

130. Burgas are the sign of maginalizing women. They have no more place

in a democracy than human sacrifice does.

[TK421]

133. which is why I said I'm against women being forced to wear one N/T

[EFerrari]

134. Burgas have no place in our society and they don't only affect

the wearers.

It's surprising how few posters to these threads understand that.

[TK421]

136. Well....obviously, I understand because I agree with you on this

and yes, to some people it is all about the culture and what is "expected" of their women....

As I stated above, if it were my sister being treated less than human, the husband would have a knife right in his gut....no, I don't kid about when it comes to family

Fuck with my family, you are toast

[EFerrari]

138. Your sister is a lucky woman. I'm lucky in my own brother as well.

:)

[TK421]

206. I would give my life for any of them n/t

[Djinn]

148. so are bras, high heels, make up, waxing et al

are you going to start campaigning for a law in the US banning all use of these exploitative/uncomfortable/oppressive items of clothing or is it only Muslim women who can't make up their own minds?

[EFerrari]

152. Nope. None of those things are on par with the burga.

[Djinn]

171. really? why?

some of those things can cause permanent physical damage, waxing inflicts considerable pain.

How many women in the west REALLY choose to wear any of them and how much is dictated by cultural norms which arise from a patriarchal society?

I know I spent 10 years in a job in which I HAD to wear crippling heels and annoying makeup.

Why is the burqa (as opposed to a burga) special? perhaps because it doesn't confirm to YOUR cultural norms?

Besides do you REALLY think that a woman who is forced to wear one by her father/brother/husband is going to be assisted in ANY way by this suggestion (which is purely and simply a sop to Le Pen fans nothing more)

Do you honestly think she'll now be free to run around Paris in a bikini? Or do you think it's FAR more likely that she'll be kept behind closed doors?

I'm really curious as to why you think only women in burqas are suffering as a result of cultural dress norms.

[EFerrari]

173. I didn't say only those women were suffering. But, the burka

is a whole different order of magnitude. You have no face, you can't really see and you can't move without being hampered. Then stir in, the social contract that falls into place as the thing becomes accepted. Society has to agree that you have no face, that you shouldn't see and that your movements need to be circumscribed.

A bra doesn't dehumanize a women and neither do heels or make up. Being a women is in some sense being in drag but wearing a burka is an erasure of who you are.

[Djinn]

175. Have you ever worn a burqa?

I have and I can guarantee you high heels are FAR more of a hindrance. I ran up and down dirt roads covered in potholes carrying loads with a burqa on and I sure as shit can't do that in stilettos.

I've only known a couple of women who choose to completely cover up (although they wore robes and the niqab it's the same amount of coverage) no-one told the to wear it, their mothers and other female relatives didn't and in the case of one, her father actually told her he wouldn't have it in his house - so she moved out. Their decisions (though I disagree with them) are THEIR decisions. Not mine, yours or Sarkozy's.

You are projecting YOUR view of "dehumanisation" onto women you know nothing about. THEY may well view plastic tits, stilettos and having all your pubes ripped out via the application of hot wax as considerably more demeaning/dehumanizing but the point is it's not them having it done ergo none of their business.

Still wondering why you think this would help the minority of French burqa wearing women who ARE forced into wearing it, do you really think a French law will overturn their husband/father/brother's misogyny?

[EFerrari]

176. It's not a projection to see that putting a woman in a shroud is dehumanizing.

I mean, you don't have to be a genius to figure that out.

And if you can't see how a supportive law would help women with abusive male relatives, I don't think I can explain it to you.

[Djinn]

178. Are you willfully missing the point?

There are ALREADY numerous "supportive" laws in France against domestic violence and compulsion. The thing is subservient women tend not to make use of them, just as they wont go to a police station to report their relatives forcing a burqa on them.

I did not EVER argue that the burqa isn't dehumanising, simply pointed out a myriad of OTHER dehumanising articles of clothing/rituals that women in the WEST subject them to.

What I believe you are projecting is your belief that the burqa is the WORST form of this issue, when to others (including other women who wear the burqa) it is demonstrably NOT

I'd suggest you get to know some women who actually wear it before expecting others to conform to YOUR beliefs. Because without any personal experience I'm not sure I can explain it to you.
:eyes:

[EFerrari]

180. I think you need to do some reading on the concept of projection

because you don't seem to know what it means.

Additionally, you "project" or attribute a number of positions to me that I don't hold. But, yes, the burka is worse than any of the silly examples you have forwarded. And especially worse in the sense that it networks with systems of sidelining women.

[TK421]

232. HIDE THEIR HAIR...!!!!!!!! THEY CAN'T HAVE HAIR !!!!!!

NOT ALLOWED!!!! PUNISHABLE BY DEATH!!!!!!!!

[Wizard777]

140. If your question is Should women not be allowed to wear burqa's in public.

The answer is no. Women should be allowed to wear what they feel comfortable in. Even if that's a burqa. If that's not your question. Sorry, I can't change my vote.

[aikoaiko]

142. Women should be free to choose what they want to wear -- even a burka.

of course I understand the intent is to free women from a repressive quasi-religious practice, but such a law would violate the first amendment.

[1]

143. free to choose? not according to some here. personally, i think that those who dress like "britney"

are as oppressed.

perhaps we should ban that garb for women too...

[aikoaiko]

144. As well intentioned as a burka ban would be, such a ban is an offense to liberty

eta:
If a woman chooses to not wear one and someone beats her or confines her (or otherwise forces her to wear one) then we have legal remedies for those crimes.

[BlooInBloo]

154. I'll never understand those who think the road to freedom is paved...

with governments taking away their rights.

(shrug) On the other hand, I don't have to understand it. It's a free country. :rofl:

[JVS]

182. I agree. Make laws against the coercion to wear a burqua, not against the burqa itself.

And people should keep in mind that just because people are living in France doesn't mean they want to be French. France has immigrants from former colonies who are there for the money and using the law to force them to assimilate is just as pig-headed as the "speak English or GTFO" faction in the US.

[kevinbgoode]

145. Sure..as long as men are forced to wear makeup and shave their legs, too.

well, and their armpits...

[themoreuknow]

153. ...and you're a man. When I clicked on your profile

it disappointed me to see that. I so wanted your statement not to be as paternalistic as it sounded.

(Do you realize how it sounds?)

[Tiggeroshii]

186. For whatever it's worth, I disagree with my statement immensely.

I definitely know how I sound, and I was doing it because that statement helps in a way to explain the ridiculousness of statements such as Sarkozy's: "Burkas have no place in modern society." Because that's what he would be doing: forcing women not to wear a head scarf. I completely believe that as soon as a state decides to enforce a person's religious beliefs(what they can and can't do), it risks trampling on their own religious freedoms. I do believe that the opposite is just as bad or worse once a religious autonomy is forcing people what to do, but I also think condemning people for their religious attire is stupid.

[EFerrari]

219. A burka is not a head scarf. And the objection to it is not on religious grounds.

Don't allow your mind to become so open that your brain falls out.

[Tiggeroshii]

240. Then why?

[EFerrari]

243. Because no woman should be so humiliated in public, Tiggeroshii.

Because we respect women more than that and because we support human rights for women that have been denied around the world. That's why.

[Tiggeroshii]

244. Then is it not a human right and religious right for them to wear what they want to wear?

The implication in your argument is that people don't wear burkas by choice. That the religion "forces" them to. That is the only connection with "being humiliated" that one could make from your statement. And if that is the case, then it is a religious argument. And denying their right to wear what they want to wear is encroaching on their freedom. And denying a human right(religious right) for women around the world.

[EFerrari]

245. No, it's not a religious argument in any way.

Think about what you are supporting.

Women being denied their sight, their identity, their ability to interact with others in public.

You might as well be arguing that a slave's shackles is a sartorial decision.

[Tiggeroshii]

246. If they do it by choice it isn't force.

If it isn't forced or interfering with others, they should have the right to do it. My question to you is who are you saying is humiliating them? Themselves? for choosing to wear it? Or the religion? If it's the religion you are saying is humiliating them then this is a religious argument.

[EFerrari]

250. This has zero to do with religion.

And I've never met a little girl who couldn't wait to go up so she could wrap herself up in yards of suffocating material, give up seeing her surroundings and hiding her face from everyone around her. Have you?

Choice, my @ss.

The burka is a means to control women, pure and simple.

[Tiggeroshii]

251. Again you aren't stating by who.

Who is doing the controlling? If not the religion or the state, then who?

[EFerrari]

253. The only power allowed in those cultures is to male relatives.

And second to them, social expectation. Seriously, didn't you see any of those photographs of women pushing their burkas over their heads after we invaded Afghanistan? The look on those young faces was like a swimmer coming up for air.

[Tiggeroshii]

254. So by the state?

Is that what you are saying? Or by the family?

[Gwendolyn]

260. Depends. Who's paying for the luxury of having women in the society who can't work?

The family. Then they do. The society? Sure why not. Where do I sign up? I hate working and wouldn't mind wearing a shroud for one year.

[EFerrari]

265. Most of these people are tribal so, it's hard to translate.

The closest we might come is male relatives and social expectation.

[Liquorice]

161. It should be illegal to wear a covering like that in public, for many reasons. nt

[Djinn]

172. name one?

does it apply to floppy fringes that cover one's face or bulky jackets? or is it confined only to coverings that some Muslims wear?

[Liquorice]

177. 1. It's illegal to wear a mask or other garb that hides the face in public. 2. It is

probably nearly impossible to see well and certainly you can't drive with a cloth over your face, so it is limiting and potentially dangerous to the woman and others. 3. It is a sign of subserviance, and thus degrading to all women. 4. Parents will often force a teenager girl to start wearing the burqa, so she doesn't really have a choice. Take away the 'choice' to wear one, and you take away the parent's ability to force it on their daughters.

The question, by the way, was should wearing a burqa be illegal, and a burqa is this:



and this:




You're damn right it should be illegal.

[ZombieHorde]

165. Is this poll really about reading comprehension? nt

[Greyhound]

179. OK, the double negative has me confused. We should not be forcing women to

do or not to do anything. Likewise, we should not be forcing men to do or not do anything. It's the whole forcing people thing that I object to.

So is that a No?

[Tiggeroshii]

189. that would be correct

:thumbsup:

sorry for the confusion =)

[JVS]

181. A question for the yes voters: how should women who wear the burqa be punished?

How much jail time are you going to give her to protect her freedom?

[armyowalgreens]

184. Can a woman wear a burqa as a fashion statement and not a religious statement?

The concept of this poll is absolutely ludicrous. We are now going to control what people wear because we fear oppressive head coverings?

WHAT THE FUCK?

What if a woman just wants to wear it to keep the sun off her head? Can she do it then?

Or is this just someone trying to control how people choose to be religious?

What a bunch of bullshit.

[Chef Eric]

190. No, not WE. FRANCE.

France is willing to place limits on individual "freedoms" in order to protect the greater freedoms that come with living in a very secular society. Vive le France.

[armyowalgreens]

194. They have an extremely secular government. That does not mean secular society...

Wearing a burqa is a freedom of speech issue. If a woman wants to wear a burqa for religious reasons, who are you or anyone else to stop her?

[EFerrari]

220. Were I a French citizen, I'd say the burka is anti-democratic

and has no place in a civilized nation that extends equal rights to women.

[armyowalgreens]

223. So in other words, you'd be a hypocrite...

I see.

[EFerrari]

225. Excuse me? Your failure to see why the burka is incompatible

with democracy or equal rights doesn't make me a hypocrite.

[armyowalgreens]

226. No no no no no no no

What you are failing to understand is that if a woman wants to cover her head for her religious beliefs, or simply because she thinks it's fashionable...

YOU CANNOT STOP HER.

I don't care how you sugar coat shit. It's still shit. What you are suggesting is taking away a womans right to dress herself as she sees fit. As long as she is not violating the "exposure" laws, she can wear whatever the fuck she wants.


Your stance is about as anti-feminist as anything I've seen on DU. Which is really fucking sad.

[Gwendolyn]

229. Sure you can. What nonsense.

You aren't just talking about a woman's right to dress herself. You're talking about people who require extra privileges in order to live among others, and who, because their dress code renders them completely dependent upon others for their economic wellbeing, may very well end up living off the state. In this case, the taxpayer does certainly have an opinion.

[armyowalgreens]

257. Excuse me

But what the fuck are you talking about?

Please I'd really like to know.

[Gwendolyn]

261. Which would you prefer? The long version or the Clliff's notes.

I would put you at between 17 -20 years of age. It's quite obvious. :)

[armyowalgreens]

267. I'd like a full explanation. You already failed at cliffnotes...

Your explanation as to why a woman wearing a burqa would become dependent on welfare was a poor at best.

As for my age, I think it's an irrelevant issue. But thanks for the personal poke...

[Gwendolyn]

270. Not really. It's quite obvious that a woman or man who covers the face will never work...

I was right about your age, wasn't I? Lol...

No prob. I'll give you the long version tomorrow. In the mean time YOU keep defending the oppression of people in the name of tolerance. A worthy cause.

[armyowalgreens]

273. I never said I like the Burqa.

I just think that forcing a woman to not wear one is just as bad as forcing her to wear one.

Education about the oppresive meaning behind the religious burqa would be far more effective and meaningful than simply banning it. At least that gives women the right to do as they please...

But of course we can't have that now, can we? Women clearly are not capable of making such monumental decisions on their own.

Like I said before, my age is irrelevant. But your obsession with it leads me to believe that you are insecure with your argument. ;-)

[EFerrari]

231. Wrong. Enabling the oppression of women is not a feminist act.

[armyowalgreens]

256. If the woman is willingly participating, there is nothing you can do.

But of course you don't get that. You'd rather force the woman to "escape" oppression than let her do it on her own. And that's assuming that they don't willingly wear the burqa in the first place.

Seriously, your logic is so ass-backwards it's frightening.

[EFerrari]

262. By the same logic, you'd shrug off female infanticide.

"If they do it willingly, there's nothing you can do."

And you're wrong, the culture can set limits. Good for the French.

[armyowalgreens]

275. Comparing a burqa to infanticide?

You clearly have no measure of severity or magnitude.

But that's okay. The straw-man fallacy comes through LOUD and CLEAR.

[EFerrari]

277. I'm comparing it to other measures used in society to oppress women.

But thank you, Captain Oblivious, for your considered opinion. I only hope you never get to vote to bring back droit de seigneur or stoning.

[armyowalgreens]

279. You assume that I actually like the religious Burqa...

But GASP...

I actually think it is being used as a religious tool of oppression.

I object to the way it is currently being used. I do not however object to the Burqa. And that is what you clearly cannot grasp. There is a difference between objecting to it being used as a tool of oppression and simply objecting to it being used.

Because if you want to not allow women to use it, you are being more oppressive than if you simply disagree with the way it is currently being used.

That's a bit of grey that your black and white mind will probably not be able to process.

[EFerrari]

282. No, I assume no such thing. Fail. n/t

[armyowalgreens]

283. Your silence speaks volumes...

[quaker bill]

191. non-establishment of religion by government

indicates that government not be involved in this decision. A few Quakers wear the historic "simple" attire somewhat like the "Quaker Oats guy" as religious testimony. I do not. Once the basic exposure laws are met, clothing is a matter of personal choice, and the government should not be granted the power to question peoples decisions in this regard. Should there be laws against poorly matched golf attire? Perhaps it would improve the general aesthetics, but still I would say no.

[EFerrari]

212. This isn't about religion but about condoning the oppression of women.

No one is oppressed by golf attire but the viewer. lol

[armyowalgreens]

224. So you want to fight female oppression by not allowing them to wear something...

:crazy:

That makes perfect sense.

[EFerrari]

233. You bet. And I'm sorry that your understanding of this situation

is so shallow. But, you must be used to that by now.

[armyowalgreens]

258. HAHA whatever bud. Get a clue.

You want to know what an anti-feminist looks like? Grab a mirror.

[EFerrari]

266. Thank you for that deep contribution to our discussion.

:)

[armyowalgreens]

268. I could say the same to you...

My argument is that if you want to stop oppression, not allowing an oppressed woman to wear something is the wrong answer.

Your argument seems to be some unintelligable jumble that a woman shouldn't be allowed to wear something because you see it as a symbol of oppression. All well knowing that your view is absolutely subjective. And also fully knowing that not allowing someone to wear a head dress is simply being more oppressive.

[EFerrari]

281. A burka is not a head dress. And just because you can't understand

an idea doesn't make it a jumble or unintelligible.

[Dorian Gray]

192. Women

should NEVER be forced to do anything.

[Warren Stupidity]

199. I need some clarification.

Which of these should be banned?











And. should we have, as the Iranians have, police officers tasked with inspecting the attire of women in public to determine which ones have violated our new rules regarding how women must appear in public?

[Tiggeroshii]

234. "Burkas have no place in modern society"

That's almost what it sounds like Sarkozy would want.

[EFerrari]

239. Burkas have no place in a *democratic* society.

I can't see most of Warren's links but feel fine asserting that.

[Tiggeroshii]

241. Even then, why would it be democratic to ban burqas?

[EFerrari]

242. Because it is an instrument of oppression. We also don't allow

human sacrifice or foot binding.

/edit for clarity

[Tiggeroshii]

247. And who is oppressing who if they do it by their own choice?

If they see personal meaning in it that other people don't see?

[EFerrari]

252. You can't be serious. There is no personal meaning in becoming a cipher.

The burka is the erasure of personal meaning because it is an erasure of identity.

This is a practice enforced first by the male hierarchy and second by social practice. Just like foot binding, it's held to be some kind of standard of femininity but you'd have to be blind not to recognize it as a measure of control.

[Tiggeroshii]

255. Concepts dictated by the religion. Of which most are dominated by man

You can have your issue with the religion(I know I do with any religion), but you should at least admit now that this is a religious argument for the moment. And if it's not a religious argument(some states require it for the purposes you say without religion which is wrong), then you are right. But in a western society, the only reason a woman will be wearing a burka is because she believes it to be the right thing to do. If you don't like that, then that's on you. Not anybody else.

[EFerrari]

259. Not exactly. Many observant Muslim women don't wear the burka.

In fact, I think most of them don't. They wear hijab or nothing at all. So, no, Islam does not require the burka.

And regardless of why a woman wears a burka, it has no place in a democracy any more than foot binding does.

[Tiggeroshii]

263. dude. the burka is a part of hijab.

Depending on their beliefs, some Muslims will wear more than others as required by Hijab. Some only headscarves, some burkas. Yes. In some Muslim teachings they do believe that the burka is necessary, sometimes more than others. But it is a religious belief. "Hijab" just means covering, by the way, and it constitutes modest dress for both men and women under Islamic teachings. Some people interpret this differently then others, but they are all a part of Sharia law and Islamic teachings.

[EFerrari]

264. Head scarves. And you're right about the meaning of "hijab".

[frogmarch]

207. We women should not be forced to not do

anything we might want to do, dammit! :mad:

[harry_pothead]

216. Absolutely not

I personally disagree with the philosophy a burqa - that womens' sexuality is "dirty" and should be hidden. But that doesn't mean I'm about to impose my personal opinions on everyone else. If someone else feels differently and wants to wear a burqa, go for it.

PS: This is assuming we're not talking about a place like a bank or an airport where someone in a burqa could raise security concerns.

[madeline_con]

227. And you should be forced to go nude. n/t

[Tiggeroshii]

248. By the logic of my op I agree.

And anybody who agrees with the statement should abide by yours.

[libodem]

278. Every women

should be forced to wear a burka, in every country, in the world. It would stop teen age pregnancy and abortion. :sarcasm:

[Amonester]

280. Yeah, but it would boost the number of Bank robberies.

But seeing how much Bankers rob us, maybe it's not a bad idea. :hi:

[McCamy Taylor]

285. If I want to wear a Hefty bag, that should be my right. But the airline still gets to see my face

upon request. Public safety trumps freedom of expression.