Islamic veils is it right to ban and issue fines?

il_principe

Sarkozy = anti-muslim, short-sighted and short.

Stupid law, will only serve to alienate further. But Sarko doesn't care, look at his attitude to Turkey, a country that the West should be wooing, yet he is against allowing them to join the EU - something that might help arrest Turkey's gradual slide into the hands of the Islamic right-wing (the ruling AKP party). As demonstrated rather neatly by the increase in headscarf toting women to be found in the historically liberal towns and cities of SW Turkey.

rjsterry

gtvlusso wrote:

The Normans won one battle against a rabble of anglo-saxon peasants armed with bits of wood. These peasants had just legged it from the North of England to Hastings after winning another battle - ever so slightly knackered. The Normans had a cavalry and professional troops too.

Pretty amazing feat really - defeat of a numerically superior Viking army, then a march of over 260 miles in 15 days, then held off the Norman army for most of the day, their cavalry only breaking through the English shield wall after a feigned retreat led the English front ranks to rush down the slope that they had held. The 'rabble of peasants' bit is a bit of Victorian guff, and the archaeological evidence suggest that aside from the Norman cavalry, and the English housecarls, the two sides were fairly evenly matched. Indeed the Bayeux Tapestry shows them similarly equipped.
[/knowall]

Back on topic, the one thing that bothers me is the hypocrisy of the 'it's a symbol of the oppression of women' argument, as though sexism and so on are something that we in western Europe left behind in the Middle Ages.

Gazzaputt

In answer to the question yes it is.

lost_in_thought

Il Principe wrote:

Sarkozy = anti-muslim, short-sighted and short.

Stupid law, will only serve to alienate further. But Sarko doesn't care, look at his attitude to Turkey, a country that the West should be wooing, yet he is against allowing them to join the EU - something that might help arrest Turkey's gradual slide into the hands of the Islamic right-wing (the ruling AKP party). As demonstrated rather neatly by the increase in headscarf toting women to be found in the historically liberal towns and cities of SW Turkey.

The french have a long-standing dislike of Turkey and its people - to the extent that even when studying French at school I learned about it as a fact, particularly in Paris.

It's kind of a vicious cycle, though, the more the 'turks' (as they call them, it's their all-encompassing word) are excluded, the more they become an apparent problem, the more they are excluded etc. Go to Gare du Nord at around 3pm any weekday and you'll see what I mean by 'apparent problem'.

I think Greg makes some excellent points, as usual!

EDIT: I don't think Sarkozy is the only opponent to Turkey's joining the EU. A good friend through a past job is one of the people fighting for it, and she feels she's fighting a losing battle with the increase of the more severe versions of islam and the associated oppression of women as well as other issues in Turkey.

DonDaddyD

Wallace1492 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

So, our French (well the Normans did conquer Britain) overlords have decided to ban and issue fines to women wearing the Islamic veil.

While the law doesn't specifically name Islamic veils it does, apprantly, list a number of exceptions which essentially singles out Islamic veils.

Do you think such a ban is the right? Would you like to see the UK to adopt such a stance? And obviously why?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13050445

Just a quick history lesson, the Normans were decended from Viking stock that settled in Normandy, therefore technically not French.

There are two sides to this debate. It is obviously designed to free women from oppression, where they are seen to be forced to wear the veil. On the other hand, their culture is being forced out of them where they voluntarily wish to wear a veil.

When I travel abroad, I accept the local customs - no alcohol, long trousers in certain places, whatever it may be, even though I do not agree with it. (especially the booze one!)

I agree that women should not be forced to wear the veil as many seem to be, but a full on ban in perhaps heavy handed.

You don't think that whole bit about "French Overlords" was just emotive baiting...

Kieran_Burns

I wonder if we shouldn't combine the beard and burka threads?

Sewinman

Silly law - as with most prohibition it will probably have the opposite effect to that intended. Wearing one will now become a political statement, rather than a fairly benign religious convention.

rjsterry

Sewinman wrote:

Silly law - as with most prohibition it will probably have the opposite effect to that intended. Wearing one will now become a political statement, rather than a fairly benign religious convention.

Indeed, I think some (although we are talking a minority of a minority here) already do wear one at least partly as a political statement. It is certainly seen as a political statement by the far right in this country - just try googling 'burqa as political statement' and a whole load of fairly unsavoury links come up.

bails87

ndru

ndru wrote:

I never said western culture is being attacked

Not explicitly, but I thought it was kind of implied through this:

ndru wrote:

suddenly western culture is offensive to everyone else

ndru wrote:

westerners are bigoted and intolerant towards themselves

Anyway....

ndru wrote:

if I find something that makes me feel uneasy I just say it

Fine. But that's got nothing to do with 'Western culture'. It's to do with your personal hang-ups. If we were talking about banning the crucifix, or shutting down churches then yeah, talk about western culture, but what's happened here is the restriction of the rights of a minority. That's wrong. Just as it would be wrong if 'Western' things were banned.

ndru

Fine. But that's got nothing to do with 'Western culture'. It's to do with your personal hang-ups. If we were talking about banning the crucifix, or shutting down churches then yeah, talk about western culture, but what's happened here is the restriction of the rights of a minority. That's wrong. Just as it would be wrong if 'Western' things were banned.[/quote]

It definitely is. However in my eyes this doesn't stem from hatred against muslims, but a reaction to a an action of covering once face at all times in public. It addresses the perception of covered face in western culture. That's all.

bails87

ndru wrote:

bails87 wrote:

Fine. But that's got nothing to do with 'Western culture'. It's to do with your personal hang-ups. If we were talking about banning the crucifix, or shutting down churches then yeah, talk about western culture, but what's happened here is the restriction of the rights of a minority. That's wrong. Just as it would be wrong if 'Western' things were banned.

It definitely is. However in my eyes this doesn't stem from hatred against muslims, but a reaction to a an action of covering once face at all times in public. It addresses the perception of covered face in western culture. That's all.

I'm 'western'. I have no problem with people wearing what they want to.

I'll sya it again, this is a law that is based on personal hang ups and religious persecution, being used as a populist move to win votes from an increasingly right wing public.

If you don't like people covering their faces then fine, you've got every right to think that. I hope you tell brides and mourners wearing veils that you're offended by them.

ndru

bails87 wrote:

If you don't like people covering their faces then fine, you've got every right to think that. I hope you tell brides and mourners wearing veils that you're offended by them.

I agree that it might be populist.
Now about what I quoted - you do understand the concept of context, don't you? If you came to work wearing speedos you'd be frowned upon, unless you work in adult film industry, however if you wear them on the beach it's fine, how's that?

walkingbootweather

I'm pretty much live and let live. Wear whatever you like, or nothing if you prefer. However, there are inconsistencies between cultures.

Having lived and worked in Arabia for three years, I accepted the laws and expectations of that culture. One of which is an insistence that women dress modestly and cover their hair. As a westerner this is not negotiable – put up with it or leave.

I can see why some people might argue that we should be equally rigid in insisting that people in our society comply with our behavioural norms (whatever they are).

I do feel that face covering does create a barrier to integration and can foster suspicion; however legislation does seem heavy-handed and may just be counter-productive.

If we could ban anyone wearing a hat while driving though, I’d be 100% behind it.

notsoblue

I want more of Jeremy's wisdom on the subject please.

bails87

ndru wrote:

bails87 wrote:

If you don't like people covering their faces then fine, you've got every right to think that. I hope you tell brides and mourners wearing veils that you're offended by them.

I agree that it might be populist.
Now about what I quoted - you do understand the concept of context, don't you? If you came to work wearing speedos you'd be frowned upon, unless you work in adult film industry, however if you wear them on the beach it's fine, how's that?

Errr...because that's a private company setting standards for their staff. If you work in Tesco then you have to wear a 'Tesco' t shirt, but in your own time, in a public place you can wear what you want.

Just like a nightclub can have a 'no trainers' rule, but the same rule won't apply at a gym. It's a completely seperate issue.

bails87

Charlie Brooker made a very good point last night about these extremists just outside Paris, blatently flouting the ban on head coverings:



They're up to no good I tells ya!