The Dutch to ban burqas

[Bululu]

Re: The Dutch to ban burqas

De huminazing as you say Yao would be allowing women to be exhibited on the streets and in stores naked while being sold like animals, covering your head or your face or your ass if it was your personal choice is freedom for the person who choosed to do it, but if it interferes with the local laws like working or travelling than I am with you it should be banned but not on the streets.

[malayday]

Re: The Dutch to ban burqas

i dont see how a viel objectifies a woman at all im sorry...in fact it probabely helps her insulate or curtail any approach and 'appreciation'....and by appreciation i mean you know when you see a sweet lili girly walking down with a lil ol skirt on twiddling her thumbs hair flowing skin showing ..mm mm mmm....you cant stop yourself from thinking something....just a lil nasty...and you would assume that she wore those clothes and decked herself up like that knowing that indeed this is what she would provoke...not that there is any malicious intention...its just were used to it....thats how it is...

so it seems odd that some woman would not want to do that....and volunatrily make herself less appealing...i think on the contrary it would be liberating....but she has the right to choose at least....its her right...its her choice....

in fact the other day i was thinking why these women from the subcontinent "choose" to wear thier traditional clothes rather than a shirt and jeans or a dress perhaps...i mean wouldnt they have wanted to growing up in a conservative traditional society...isnt it every girls desire..to look pretty....but then how fuked is that thought.....absurd it seems to me im no girl...and even if i was its almost demeaning to think that that is what people think...that my pbjective in life is to be good looking and ill take any oppertunity to do that....why does wearing jeans suddenly make you part of a society..cuz everyone else does?....i dont think so....

plus i mean think about how uncomfortable for these people it would be to suddenly not wear thier traditional clothes which they feel really comfortabvle with...i ask all the boys here to wear a dress....im sure they wont feel comfortable...(altought some i feel will feel right at home)...regardless its because your not used to it its wierd..it feels wierd...

so what if these women 'choose' not to wear a fitted clothes...stuck to thier skin showing thier bits....it must be uncomfortable and a wierd feeling...the majority of the clothes they wore throughout thier life was nothing like this 'western' clothing (if there is such a thing)....its what they feel comfortable with and its thier choice....
in no way is it a 'threat' to national security or whatever the fonk....that a load of shit...and how its suddenly ostrasizes them from a community is not thier problem..its the communities problem and in ability to see someone past thier appearance..how fickle.....

[sammwalk]

Re: The Dutch to ban burqas

@ Sightless: I respect your opinion in this, I may not agree but I do see the point in what you say. I don't know why I see it differently, but it might have to do with the fact that of late Muslims have been using the burqa/niqaab and things like not shaking hands to provoke reactions, to which of course they reacted in outrage, accusing us of discriminating them.

I think I've pointed you to the case in which a hardline Muslim wanted to be hired in a public function and still insisted on wearing traditional clothing and refusing to shake hands with women. I don't know about you, but refusing to shake hands with someone around here is seen as an active sign of disrespect, and insult. I think it is no more than fair that when you live here, you behave accoring to certain rules of politeness, as is expected of me when I'm in a foreign country. Since we live in a secular state, religion should also be kept out of the public sphere, especially when in a public function. Meaning no traditional religious clothing or explicit religious behaviour. Not to mention the simple dresscode to which one should abide in such a position: suit. This guy totally pissed off everyone with his whining about racism, while all he did was make ridiculous demands. The worst thing is that the Committee for Equal Treatment backed him up!! That committee has always been a group of mega-lefties that think everything from outside is good and everything Dutch is despicable. I have some documentation on this feature, something very common among leftist intellectuals, but I need to find an English translation. The committee is one for, thank god...they are getting the boot.

At the office where I work 2 ladies wear a scarf, but their don't veil their faces. I wouldn't accept it either to be honest...I can't stop it but I definitely wouldn't approve of it - for the personal reason that I think it's something that is meant to objectify women. Just as I will refuse to shake the hand of a man that won't shake my woman's hand.

okay...i see how you might want to take away certain practices which encourage or enable social dissention, but it seems to me that the problem is not only with some the angry (and, from what you're describing, exploitative) muslim population, but from those who would accept their claims as valid (like, everyone else). I don't know who to blame for this phenomenon, because it happens everywhere: the media, public confusion and lack of understanding and context, prejudice, whatever, allow people who make a big deal out of something (however originally inoffensive or innocuous) to make it seem actually more offensive and/or contemptable simply through media scrutiny. So, from what you're saying, the reaction to the offense, such as breach of social norms resulting in insult (misconstrued or otherwise) seems to be just as inflammatory because the victimized muslim (or any minority) population is seen to be more credible than the "offenders". The reaction by the muslims automatically validates their own claims of racism through self-qualification, even be they hardly meritorious, because the put-upon minority is "always right".

So, it seems like they're getting away with an insidious form of exploitation, much like existing racial tensions here in the US cause exploitation of people with no racist agenda.

...but back to the matter at hand: these women are wearing the burqa in a free society, not a theocracy. the claims that the burqa is demeaning to women are baseless; the women wear them out of custom or respect, not out of obedience to law. Now, if they are planning to violently overthrow the government, take them out. but what does clothing have to do with that?

[day_for_night]

Re: The Dutch to ban burqas

...but back to the matter at hand: these women are wearing the burqa in a free society, not a theocracy. the claims that the burqa is demeaning to women are baseless; the women wear them out of custom or respect, not out of obedience to law. Now, if they are planning to violently overthrow the government, take them out. but what does clothing have to do with that?

you really believe that?! these women are wearing them because they were brainwashed to, and because if they don't their husbands will either beat or disown them, probably both. anyone who says otherwise needs to wake up and smell the subjugation.

[Yao]

Re: The Dutch to ban burqas

I really don't care what people say, but the Burqa is something that has been installed as a prescripted piece of clothing by religious clergy - women that say they wear it voluntarily may do so but fail to realize how it is a habit (and as such accepted) which is a cultural/religious construction. The sole authority on this clothing lies within Islam, especially here >> the nly people covering themselves like that for practical reasons must be the Tuareg who live in the Sahara desert. Probably more people in Arabic regions used to dress like that for practical reasons (strange as it may seems, it keeps you cool in the hot desert sun), and if that was case it has always been men and women, not just women.

You see...the practical side is virtually non-existent in this case, which is underlined by the fact that it is a prescription that only goes for women. Just like the rule that men are obligated to grow a beard among hardliners...it's simply one of many little rules that ultimately design your whole life. As Maladay also noted, it has a lot to do with sexuality - it is to be repressed, especially among women. Why? Because the men are in power in Islam, despite the 'rights' women have. The very fact that it is necessary to mention that women DO have rights in Islam makes that statement completely worthless and intrinsically points to the fact that their status is not equal to that of men. There is also a lot of anthropological literature that explicitly connects power to sexual power, and if one is to take enough time it's most probably very easy to apply that to the structure of Islam.


@Sammwalk: pretty interesting (and hard to decipher, but i think I managed), and I do agree that the media and the general spirit at the moment do play a role. I myself however have always had this stance towards the burqa and the niqaab, I just know how to phrase my arguments a little better after a few years of anthropological studies ;-).
It has been researched and has become apparent that it is a trend amng leftist intellectuals to (1) favour that which is foreign over domestic, and (2) favour the 'underdog' or minority over the majority. Meaning: We're always at fault here - for example: we are solely guilty of Africa's misery according to a lot of them, and we should respect other cultures when we meet them.

What these people tend to forget is that we also have a culture of our own, why shouldn't we respect our own? And is it so harmful to look at the real reasons why Africa is still backwards in it's economic development? I'm not allowed to mention the problem of corruption there (which is extreme!! - I've done my thesis research on this), but I am allowed to repent for the fact that my ancestors traded slaves. That is completely unbalanced, isn't it? Cultural relativism is good to a certain extent, but it becomes a problem when I start denying my own values and identity IMO....

[thesightless]

Re: The Dutch to ban burqas

you really believe that?! these women are wearing them because they were brainwashed to, and because if they don't their husbands will either beat or disown them, probably both. anyone who says otherwise needs to wake up and smell the subjugation.

that is so far from the truth. maybe in saudi arabia, but not many other places. i have been called a lot of shit here.. anti muslim, anti jew, racist..... but comon. are you serious.. it is a devotion to something higher. just because you and me dont hold religion close, doesnt mean they dont. i used to wear a cruxifix everywhere. attended mass every sunday until college.. voluntarily. they do too. they dont do it in fear. if they feared it that badly on a large scale, you would be hearing a HUGE outcry. accept and embrace the fact that they hold faith high in their lives and live in sacrifice and devotion to something more than the typical bullshit ppl cry about.

my opinion here is that of admiration. if they choose to wear the veil, in the face of the modern world, then they should be admired.

lets name people who did things they beleived were right while the world/coutry/surrounding disagreed.

lincoln
rose parks
MLK...

thats just three.

[day_for_night]

Re: The Dutch to ban burqas

that is so far from the truth. maybe in saudi arabia, but not many other places. i have been called a lot of shit here.. anti muslim, anti jew, racist..... but comon. are you serious.. it is a devotion to something higher. just because you and me dont hold religion close, doesnt mean they dont. i used to wear a cruxifix everywhere. attended mass every sunday until college.. voluntarily. they do too. they dont do it in fear. if they feared it that badly on a large scale, you would be hearing a HUGE outcry. accept and embrace the fact that they hold faith high in their lives and live in sacrifice and devotion to something more than the typical bullshit ppl cry about.

my opinion here is that of admiration. if they choose to wear the veil, in the face of the modern world, then they should be admired.

lets name people who did things they beleived were right while the world/coutry/surrounding disagreed.

lincoln
rose parks
MLK...

thats just three.

i'm not making this up...honestly. my neighbours before i moved cities were very strict muslims. i knew the son well, and he said if either his sister or mom was caught outside not wearing the full burqua, that they were pretty much out of the family, no exaggeration.

its the same thing for several religious groups (ie. muslims, shiks, jews) if you marry outside your faith. you get disowned. just cause they've moved countries doesnt meant they stop being the way they were back in their homeland...

[thesightless]

Re: The Dutch to ban burqas

ok, now ask the husband for permission to ask the wife a question and ask HER why she wears it. do hindu women wear traditional garb out of fear as well?

i dont want to drag others into this. but i would ask kamal on what sugana's opinions on holding traditional ideals close are..

[day_for_night]

Re: The Dutch to ban burqas

ok, now ask the husband for permission to ask the wife a question and ask HER why she wears it. do hindu women wear traditional garb out of fear as well?

i dont want to drag others into this. but i would ask kamal on what sugana's opinions on holding traditional ideals close are..

you can't honestly think you're gonna get a straight answer from someone who has to be given *permission* to respond to a question!?

[thesightless]

Re: The Dutch to ban burqas

i only say that as to not offend the husband if he truly is a devout muslim who deems his wife is only eleigible to leave the house with him. you damn well know what i meant

[sammwalk]

Re: The Dutch to ban burqas

I really don't care what people say, but the Burqa is something that has been installed as a prescripted piece of clothing by religious clergy - women that say they wear it voluntarily may do so but fail to realize how it is a habit (and as such accepted) which is a cultural/religious construction.

but think about how many things we do that are habits of social and religious construction that in some ways limit ourselves and/or control our thinking. it's unstoppable.

It has been researched and has become apparent that it is a trend amng leftist intellectuals to (1) favour that which is foreign over domestic, and (2) favour the 'underdog' or minority over the majority. Meaning: We're always at fault here - for example: we are solely guilty of Africa's misery according to a lot of them, and we should respect other cultures when we meet them.

What these people tend to forget is that we also have a culture of our own, why shouldn't we respect our own? And is it so harmful to look at the real reasons why Africa is still backwards in it's economic development? I'm not allowed to mention the problem of corruption there (which is extreme!! - I've done my thesis research on this), but I am allowed to repent for the fact that my ancestors traded slaves. That is completely unbalanced, isn't it? Cultural relativism is good to a certain extent, but it becomes a problem when I start denying my own values and identity IMO....

but shouldn't culture (specifically, and not national identity) be something that exists on its own and not something that is enforced? and i don't see how allowing people of other faiths to wear their traditional garb, however unflattering to equality it may be, impinges on others' values. i think the thing to be aware of is not allowing rabble-rousers to add significance to something which has little or none.

my opinion here is that of admiration. if they choose to wear the veil, in the face of the modern world, then they should be admired.

to me it seems like it's just a basic freedom. to wear what you want. if it carries religious symbolism for some, so be it. if not for others, okay. we attach significance to these things as people; symbolism is not intrinsic to the articles.

personally, i don't care about what happens to the muslim population. however, the liberties sacrificed in the name of security will eventually extend to others, for less and less justifiable reasons.

[Bululu]

Re: The Dutch to ban burqas

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

[subterFUSE]

Re: The Dutch to ban burqas

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Playing devil's advocate.... But define "essential" liberty.

[Bululu]

Re: The Dutch to ban burqas

Prove me wrong better than just showing us that you know words Mr. noob. Essential means I respect you and you respect me , I don't do anything that offends you but at the same time you don't stick your nose in everything I do, Is this general definition of what I am mean by essential liberty enough for you or should I continue ?

[Yao]

Re: The Dutch to ban burqas

Th funny thing is that Muslim can be Muslims to a great degree in ur society, but I cannot be really me in theirs. I think I'm still way ahead in giving freedom to those people.

As for that quote: if you read it correctly it says that people that are willing to give up liberty to get safety in return don't deserve either - you only deserve liberty when you're prepared to take it all the way, including the unsafety it might bring. I'm sick of being told what to do in my country by people that (1) don't come from here and (2) live far away - Malaysia for example has fuckall to say about our policies. The funniest thing yet is that the ban here is being criticized all over the world, but i hear NOTHING about the ban in what was it...Jordania or Tunisia? We we do it, it's wrong, and if they do it we keep quiet about it.

Fuck ostrich-politics and political over-correctness.