Boris Johnson's Burkha Comments

DeVlaeminck

Rick Chasey wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Well Boris hasn't told anyone they can't wear it, he specifically said he was against a ban.

Rick, as I've already said I found the bank robber comment trivial and unnecessary. It was a silly insult and not something I'd associate myself with and I don't accept your attempt to associate my views with it.

My "issue" with the burqa is that it is a cultural practice that oppresses women. I think at best it's a choice made through a false consciousness and often something which isn't even a choice in that sense of the word. We only have to look around the world to see the status of women in cultures where the burqa is common, I include communities in the uk in that, to pretend it is anything other than repressive shows naivity.

So it’s a kinda mix between white man “I know best” and broader mainsplaining “I know better than you about your attire”.

If you think female oppression is an issue, banning items of female clothes or alikening them to criminals isn’t the way to go about it, is it?

I'm neither in favour of a ban nor do I condone making jokey comments about bank robbers, I thought I'd made that clear ?

rjsterry

Pross wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Pross wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

drlodge wrote:

Pross wrote:

Thing is, it's not even a religious requirement just a narrow interpretation by elements who want to use religion to control things. I believe that use of the burka is quite low in Iran which I suspect most people would consider a fairly hardline Muslim country. Johnson has taken the completely wrong route if he wants to challenge its use as he is ridiculing people who potentially would rather not where it but are forced to and that is where the focus should be.

Agree on the first part, but I think BoJO's error, if there was one, was to say things that seemed to ridicule the women rather than the idea of wearing the clothing.

Perhaps rather than apologise, he should clarify what he meant...the niqab/burka/face covering bin bag outfit is a ridiculous idea and is not the norm in the civilised secular western world.

Love how a load of non-Muslim men KNOW for a solid fact why some Muslim women dress this way, and think it's any of their business to tell them that they shouldn't.

Not sure I said anywhere I KNOW for a fact why anyone wears one. However, I suspect that in some / many cases the woman isn't choosing to wear it - I can imagine it offers all sorts of practical problems (very hot in many of the countries where it is widely worn, very difficult to eat in public if you're wearing it). I've been told by Muslims directly (and also read and heard on TV / radio) that there is no religious need for them to wear it and that it is a cultural thing rather than religious. If a woman is wearing it through choice then they should be free to do so (but in my opinion they should also be expected to show their face where it is legitimately needed for security such as airports). However, they should also be free from being told they must wear it whether by non-Muslim men, Muslim men or anybody else.

Should they not also be free from being told they shouldn't wear it by anyone? You, I, Boris and everyone except the wearer need to butt out.

Of course and I thought I’d said that (or at least implied it) in the part in bold above. My only qualification is that faces should be clearly visible in areas such as airport security or immigration as I don’t see how they can be effective without being able to identify the person. Of course, that probably already occurs and the stories of immigration officials being unable to ask someone to uncover their face are likely Daily Mail style propaganda. Being a white, middle aged, non-Muslim male I obviously don’t have any insight on the subject but my instinct is that very few women, given a completely free choice (no pressure from family or religious leaders) would choose to wear something that appears to be so impractical but I accept I could be completely wrong.

At the other end of the spectrum there was a story a few years back about women in the City being told to dress in a certain (less conservative!) way which is equally unacceptable.

However, I’m not sure Boris’ comments or even calling for a ban altogether can be called anti-Islamic as (from my limited understanding) wearing a Burka is not a religious requirement.

I think they are very carefully crafted to be dismissed as just Boris's colourful language while giving a nod and a wink to the kind of reactionary could-defect-to-UKIP Conservative party member that think that Muslims should be a bit less obviously Muslim, or better still not Muslim at all.

Stevo_666

Surely Liberal ire should be directed towards those countries that have banned these forms of face covering - after all, actions speak louder than words:
http://www.itv.com/news/2018-08-08/the-countries-around-the-world-that-have-banned-the-burka/

DeVlaeminck

rjsterry wrote:

Love how a load of non-Muslim men KNOW for a solid fact why some Muslim women dress this way, .

I'd hazard a guess it's got something to do with either them or someone with some form of control over them believing in a particularly unliberal regressive version of Islam.

rjsterry

DeVlaeminck wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Love how a load of non-Muslim men KNOW for a solid fact why some Muslim women dress this way, .

I'd hazard a guess it's got something to do with either them or someone with some form of control over them believing in a particularly unliberal regressive version of Islam.

A guess. Having read a few accounts from Muslim women who wear the niqab, the hijab or no overtly Muslim clothing, there didn't seem to be any common reason. Examples included, "because I feel like it", "because I don't like men looking at me" and in defiance of people who say they shouldn't wear them. Now that's all anecdotal, but it suggests that it's not just something that other people tell women they should wear.

rjsterry

Couldn't immediately find any UK research, but here's something from Oman looking at the reasons Muslim women have given.

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... te_of_Oman

I don't think forms of dress are a reliable indicator of whether the wearer is being oppressed or forced into wearing it in some way. If they are then action should be taken against the oppressor, not by simply replacing them with someone else telling them what (not) to wear.

DeVlaeminck

rjsterry wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Love how a load of non-Muslim men KNOW for a solid fact why some Muslim women dress this way, .

I'd hazard a guess it's got something to do with either them or someone with some form of control over them believing in a particularly unliberal regressive version of Islam.

A guess. Having read a few accounts from Muslim women who wear the niqab, the hijab or no overtly Muslim clothing, there didn't seem to be any common reason. Examples included, "because I feel like it", "because I don't like men looking at me" and in defiance of people who say they shouldn't wear them. Now that's all anecdotal, but it suggests that it's not just something that other people tell women they should wear.

I was being facetious, there seems to be something of a correlation between that ideology and that way of dressing no ? Do you really think people wear a veil in the kind of temperatures we've been having because they feel like it ! Do you really not think that it is representative of a regressive ideology where women are distinctly second class citizens?

cycleclinic

Given the small number of woman wearing the burka I do wonder what the fuss is about. If they choose to for whatever reason what does it matter. They are not forcing use to wear it. People should be able to wear whatever they like if other others don't like it tough. We don't have a right to see someone face. People get worked up over this issue and I can't see why. Yes it feels odd not being able to speak to some one wearing a burka but that more about us than them.

Johnson needs to be recalled. The fact he has not says more about his constituents than him. No wonder we are screwed up as a country when folk like Johnson get elected and have significant support even after he gaffs (and that's being genorous) again and again.

In my book anyone who tries to tell or imply what someone should wear deserves to be told to bluntly f*** off. That goes for most of the commentators who have talked about this. No one it seems has been bothered to talked to the women who wear the burka to see what they think. They do think and while many may not want to share there thoughts, some will.

In this "debate" I just hear assumptions and prejudice.

rjsterry

DeVlaeminck wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Love how a load of non-Muslim men KNOW for a solid fact why some Muslim women dress this way, .

I'd hazard a guess it's got something to do with either them or someone with some form of control over them believing in a particularly unliberal regressive version of Islam.

A guess. Having read a few accounts from Muslim women who wear the niqab, the hijab or no overtly Muslim clothing, there didn't seem to be any common reason. Examples included, "because I feel like it", "because I don't like men looking at me" and in defiance of people who say they shouldn't wear them. Now that's all anecdotal, but it suggests that it's not just something that other people tell women they should wear.

I was being facetious, there seems to be something of a correlation between that ideology and that way of dressing no ? Do you really think people wear a veil in the kind of temperatures we've been having because they feel like it ! Do you really not think that it is representative of a regressive ideology where women are distinctly second class citizens?

Covering the head is pretty standard for both sexes across the Middle East and North Africa where it is considerably hotter than the low 30s. If you go to the western Sahara, Tuareg men that cover their faces and the women don't. Does that mean they are oppressed? Women are pretty clearly second class citizens in somewhere like Saudi Arabia, but I think it's a huge leap to say that therefore the wearing of a niqab indicates that a particular woman is being treated badly. Or that not wearing one indicates freedom and independence. I don't think you can tell the reason why someone has dressed the way they have by looking at them. And we may be a bit better at hiding our sexism than Saudi Arabia, but there's still plenty of it around.

Personally I find the idea that a woman should cover her head for reasons of modesty as an abdication of responsibility on the point of men, in much the same way that people suggest that some women shouldn't wear short skirts, heels, whatever if they don't want to be leched over or worse by men. But firstly I'm not a Muslim woman, so what I think about it is irrelevant. And secondly from what I've read and heard that is just one of many reasons why women wear one or other form of veil. And I am sure you can't tell which reason without asking them.

DeVlaeminck

rjsterry wrote:

Covering the head is pretty standard for both sexes across the Middle East and North Africa where it is considerably hotter than the low 30s. If you go to the western Sahara, Tuareg men that cover their faces and the women don't. Does that mean they are oppressed? Women are pretty clearly second class citizens in somewhere like Saudi Arabia, but I think it's a huge leap to say that therefore the wearing of a niqab indicates that a particular woman is being treated badly. Or that not wearing one indicates freedom and independence. I don't think you can tell the reason why someone has dressed the way they have by looking at them. And we may be a bit better at hiding our sexism than Saudi Arabia, but there's still plenty of it around.

Personally I find the idea that a woman should cover her head for reasons of modesty as an abdication of responsibility on the point of men, in much the same way that people suggest that some women shouldn't wear short skirts, heels, whatever if they don't want to be leched over or worse by men. But firstly I'm not a Muslim woman, so what I think about it is irrelevant. And secondly from what I've read and heard that is just one of many reasons why women wear one or other form of veil. And I am sure you can't tell which reason without asking them.

And do Tuareg men in Western Sahara face repercussions if they don't cover their faces as women often will in societies, that is the point. I think we know that women being compelled to wear the veil in public arises from a view of women as having very much less freedom than we would think acceptable in Western society. Without knowing the origins of the Tuareg custom I really can't judge but I suspect it is very different.

As I said earlier if you are familiar with Lukes' work on power even if someone claims to be making a free choice it doesn't mean they aren't oppressed. If you look at the origins of the custom, the justifications for it given by adherents to it of both sexes, the associated beliefs and the kind of societies where it is commonplace it's something which is clearly oppressive and at odds with values which people fought hard to establish. Yes there is an element of being intolerant of intolerance in my view but that is a necessary evil.

mr_goo

BoJo's comments were directed at the wrong sex of those that follow Islam. He should be challenging the faith leaders in the UK Islamic community..... all male. He should not have demeaned the poor female muslims, in many instances they are treated poorly and nothing more than legal slaves to the misogynistic religion.
The niqab/burkha are merely restraints imposed on Muslim women by the male controlled religion. I have no issue with women wearing a head scarf (hijab), my late nan used to wear one, although that was to go out shopping with her hair in curlers. But I do think this complete covering of the female form is a total nonsense.

The only good that could can come from this storm in a tea cup is that it opens up a debate on the treatment of females within the Muslim community.

rolf_f

rjsterry wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Love how a load of non-Muslim men KNOW for a solid fact why some Muslim women dress this way, .

I'd hazard a guess it's got something to do with either them or someone with some form of control over them believing in a particularly unliberal regressive version of Islam.

A guess. Having read a few accounts from Muslim women who wear the niqab, the hijab or no overtly Muslim clothing, there didn't seem to be any common reason. Examples included, "because I feel like it", "because I don't like men looking at me" and in defiance of people who say they shouldn't wear them. Now that's all anecdotal, but it suggests that it's not just something that other people tell women they should wear.

These don't exactly sound like thought through considered reasons. Which is kind of the point. Should we object to these forms of clothing because they may well be worn as a consequence of male oppression (hence the unconvincing reasons for wearing them given above) or should we support these forms of clothing because it is the womens choice to wear them?

If you know the answer to that then the politically correct response is clear.....

rick_chasey

Rolf F wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Love how a load of non-Muslim men KNOW for a solid fact why some Muslim women dress this way, .

I'd hazard a guess it's got something to do with either them or someone with some form of control over them believing in a particularly unliberal regressive version of Islam.

A guess. Having read a few accounts from Muslim women who wear the niqab, the hijab or no overtly Muslim clothing, there didn't seem to be any common reason. Examples included, "because I feel like it", "because I don't like men looking at me" and in defiance of people who say they shouldn't wear them. Now that's all anecdotal, but it suggests that it's not just something that other people tell women they should wear.

These don't exactly sound like thought through considered reasons. Which is kind of the point. Should we object to these forms of clothing because they may well be worn as a consequence of male oppression (hence the unconvincing reasons for wearing them given above) or should we support these forms of clothing because it is the womens choice to wear them?

If you know the answer to that then the politically correct response is clear.....

You don't need to object or support.

You could just not give much of a sh!t and let people get on with it.

lostboysaint

bianchimoon wrote:

He's going full on populist, taking Bannon's advice, He'll start to act more and more like Trump.. He's a deluded twunt.. as are the people who think he'd make a politician, never mind a prime minister.

Well it took a few posts but someone finally got it. Welcome to Bannon's Britain.

rjsterry

DeVlaeminck wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Covering the head is pretty standard for both sexes across the Middle East and North Africa where it is considerably hotter than the low 30s. If you go to the western Sahara, Tuareg men that cover their faces and the women don't. Does that mean they are oppressed? Women are pretty clearly second class citizens in somewhere like Saudi Arabia, but I think it's a huge leap to say that therefore the wearing of a niqab indicates that a particular woman is being treated badly. Or that not wearing one indicates freedom and independence. I don't think you can tell the reason why someone has dressed the way they have by looking at them. And we may be a bit better at hiding our sexism than Saudi Arabia, but there's still plenty of it around.

Personally I find the idea that a woman should cover her head for reasons of modesty as an abdication of responsibility on the point of men, in much the same way that people suggest that some women shouldn't wear short skirts, heels, whatever if they don't want to be leched over or worse by men. But firstly I'm not a Muslim woman, so what I think about it is irrelevant. And secondly from what I've read and heard that is just one of many reasons why women wear one or other form of veil. And I am sure you can't tell which reason without asking them.

And do Tuareg men in Western Sahara face repercussions if they don't cover their faces as women often will in societies, that is the point. I think we know that women being compelled to wear the veil in public arises from a view of women as having very much less freedom than we would think acceptable in Western society. Without knowing the origins of the Tuareg custom I really can't judge but I suspect it is very different.

As I said earlier if you are familiar with Lukes' work on power even if someone claims to be making a free choice it doesn't mean they aren't oppressed. If you look at the origins of the custom, the justifications for it given by adherents to it of both sexes, the associated beliefs and the kind of societies where it is commonplace it's something which is clearly oppressive and at odds with values which people fought hard to establish. Yes there is an element of being intolerant of intolerance in my view but that is a necessary evil.

I'll have a look at Steven Lukes, but from a quick look at his Wikipedia page I think I get your point.

I would expect that in the case of Tuareg men, there is a degree of social enforcement of what is considered the 'right' way to dress, just as there is with most societies. People facing pressure to conform and repercussions for not fitting in is not something limited to Muslim women.

As I said, I don't believe the covering of the face in itself is a reliable indicator of whether the wearer is doing so of their genuine free will, as a consequence of general social expectations, or under a specific threat of repercussions. The latter is the thing that is wrong and the thing that needs to be addressed. The covering of the face itself is not. If you believe that covering the face is mostly socially or directly enforced, then attacking the wearer for doing so is attacking the victim, not the perpetrator. This is before we consider the way that statements like Boris's are likely to give a perceived license to people who genuinely are Islamophobic to attack these women for being obviously Muslim.

bianchimoon

lostboysaint wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

He's going full on populist, taking Bannon's advice, He'll start to act more and more like Trump.. He's a deluded twunt.. as are the people who think he'd make a politician, never mind a prime minister.

Well it took a few posts but someone finally got it. Welcome to Bannon's Britain.

Thank you LBS, I’m amazed more people on here aren’t discussing ‘why’ Johnson said what he said at this moment in time. It has nothing to do with Muslim dress code, it’s amazing how easily people are distracted/fooled into going down this blind alley while the arsonist who makes his inflammatory comments gains political capital.

rjsterry

Rolf F wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Love how a load of non-Muslim men KNOW for a solid fact why some Muslim women dress this way, .

I'd hazard a guess it's got something to do with either them or someone with some form of control over them believing in a particularly unliberal regressive version of Islam.

A guess. Having read a few accounts from Muslim women who wear the niqab, the hijab or no overtly Muslim clothing, there didn't seem to be any common reason. Examples included, "because I feel like it", "because I don't like men looking at me" and in defiance of people who say they shouldn't wear them. Now that's all anecdotal, but it suggests that it's not just something that other people tell women they should wear.

These don't exactly sound like thought through considered reasons. Which is kind of the point. Should we object to these forms of clothing because they may well be worn as a consequence of male oppression (hence the unconvincing reasons for wearing them given above) or should we support these forms of clothing because it is the womens choice to wear them?

If you know the answer to that then the politically correct response is clear.....

I'm sure you give deep and careful thought every time you get dressed , but that reads an awful lot like "oh, the poor dears, they don't even realise why they're wearing it."

rjsterry

bianchimoon wrote:

lostboysaint wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

He's going full on populist, taking Bannon's advice, He'll start to act more and more like Trump.. He's a deluded twunt.. as are the people who think he'd make a politician, never mind a prime minister.

Well it took a few posts but someone finally got it. Welcome to Bannon's Britain.

Thank you LBS, I’m amazed more people on here aren’t discussing ‘why’ Johnson said what he said at this moment in time. It has nothing to do with Muslim dress code, it’s amazing how easily people are distracted/fooled into going down this blind alley while the arsonist who makes his inflammatory comments gains political capital.

Point is, he can only gain political capital by connecting to the kind of person that thinks that Islam, particularly overtly observed Islam, is somehow incompatible with living in Britain. There's a bit of that in this thread, unfortunately.

rolf_f

rjsterry wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Love how a load of non-Muslim men KNOW for a solid fact why some Muslim women dress this way, .

I'd hazard a guess it's got something to do with either them or someone with some form of control over them believing in a particularly unliberal regressive version of Islam.

A guess. Having read a few accounts from Muslim women who wear the niqab, the hijab or no overtly Muslim clothing, there didn't seem to be any common reason. Examples included, "because I feel like it", "because I don't like men looking at me" and in defiance of people who say they shouldn't wear them. Now that's all anecdotal, but it suggests that it's not just something that other people tell women they should wear.

These don't exactly sound like thought through considered reasons. Which is kind of the point. Should we object to these forms of clothing because they may well be worn as a consequence of male oppression (hence the unconvincing reasons for wearing them given above) or should we support these forms of clothing because it is the womens choice to wear them?

If you know the answer to that then the politically correct response is clear.....

I'm sure you give deep and careful thought every time you get dressed , but that reads an awful lot like "oh, the poor dears, they don't even realise why they're wearing it."

I don't think it does. "Because I feel like it" isn't a meaningful reason for anything. "Because I don't like men looking at me" doesn't require that degree of cover up (and is arguably counter productive in the West). "In defiance of people who say they shouldn't wear them" works both ways.

You're right. I don't give that deep and careful thought every time I get dressed. I do wear (as previously stated elsewhere on here) a mildly incompetently ironed shirt and tie which in the current office atmosphere could be argued to be self oppression but I can come up with a better reason for it than "because I feel like it". And that's for a relatively trivial choice of dress.

rjsterry

I think "Because I feel like it" is as good a reason as you should ever need for a choice of dress. Why on earth should anyone have to justify what they wear?

Why are you wearing brogues? WHY, DAMMIT?!

It's absurd.

Jez mon

rjsterry wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

lostboysaint wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

He's going full on populist, taking Bannon's advice, He'll start to act more and more like Trump.. He's a deluded twunt.. as are the people who think he'd make a politician, never mind a prime minister.

Well it took a few posts but someone finally got it. Welcome to Bannon's Britain.

Thank you LBS, I’m amazed more people on here aren’t discussing ‘why’ Johnson said what he said at this moment in time. It has nothing to do with Muslim dress code, it’s amazing how easily people are distracted/fooled into going down this blind alley while the arsonist who makes his inflammatory comments gains political capital.

Point is, he can only gain political capital by connecting to the kind of person that thinks that Islam, particularly overtly observed Islam, is somehow incompatible with living in Britain. There's a bit of that in this thread, unfortunately.

So I'd say that any extremist religion is incompatible with living in the west...

DeVlaeminck

rjsterry wrote:

I think "Because I feel like it" is as good a reason as you should ever need for a choice of dress. Why on earth should anyone have to justify what they wear?

Why are you wearing brogues? WHY, DAMMIT?!

It's absurd.

What is absurd is that you equate the cultural processes that lead to people wearing full body cover in public through so called choice or coercion with a decision to wear brogues!

slowbike

thecycleclinic wrote:

In my book anyone who tries to tell or imply what someone should wear deserves to be told to bluntly f*** off.

I tell my wife what she should wear ... she just ignores me ... then usually tells me to change my T-Shirt .... yes Dear ...

Going back to being a little more serious - there are loads of blokes who do dictate what their wives should wear - many dominate their partners and take control of their whole lives. The UK has made "coercive or controlling behaviour" criminal offenses in order to tackle this ..

Loads of religions (and more specifically branches of) dictate the sort of clothing that people should wear - I suppose you could say that the individual is free to leave the religion if they don't like it, but that's not always easy when family and friends are involved. Some are more draconion than others.

I've said it before - but I'll say it again - religion is purely a way of controlling the masses - it's not all bad of course, as it does bring people together to work towards a cause - but as with everything that relies on team work, there's individual sacrifice - which is fine when it's given by free will - but not when it's imposed - IMHO, clothing being a major culprit ...

why does it matter what we wear - shouldn't clothes be for function over form? Nudity is only arousing because it's unusual (in our culture) - I'm sure if you walked around a nudist beach, you wouldn't see every bloke with an erection.

Do I want to see fat blokes walking around without clothes on? Not particularly - but it doesn't bother me in the changing rooms - so why should it bother me anywhere else?

rolf_f

rjsterry wrote:

I think "Because I feel like it" is as good a reason as you should ever need for a choice of dress. Why on earth should anyone have to justify what they wear?

Why are you wearing brogues? WHY, DAMMIT?!

It's absurd.

Who said anything about "have to"? In any case, it was you that brought up the justifications in the first place! IMO, as long as you actually do have a choice you can do what you want but you are a pretty empty soul if you don't know why you do things.

For example, I wear a tie because I feel like it. But actually, I wear a tie because it is the only purely non functional item of clothing that I can really wear as a bloke and I like that. I like the aesthetics of them and it helps to put a distinction between the clothing I wear in my free time and at home. I also feel that, in some way, a smart look is just respectful to my organisation (not that it deserves it!) and those that I deal with. I think that wearing an ironed, office shirt and no tie looks a bit crap really.

That is why I wear a tie. I haven't spent hours on spreadsheets and the internet researching it but that is why I wear an ultimately trivial piece of clothing. If the best you can do to explain why you wear an inherently impractical, arguably oppressive item of clothing is "because I feel like it" then I'd suggest you really aren't very bright. And there's nothing wrong with that but can we have some justifications from people who are capable of reasoned thought then?

rick_chasey

DeVlaeminck wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

I think "Because I feel like it" is as good a reason as you should ever need for a choice of dress. Why on earth should anyone have to justify what they wear?

Why are you wearing brogues? WHY, DAMMIT?!

It's absurd.

What is absurd is that you equate the cultural processes that lead to people wearing full body cover in public through so called choice or coercion with a decision to wear brogues!

Who are you to say they are, by sight, coerced?

rjsterry

Jez mon wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

lostboysaint wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

He's going full on populist, taking Bannon's advice, He'll start to act more and more like Trump.. He's a deluded twunt.. as are the people who think he'd make a politician, never mind a prime minister.

Well it took a few posts but someone finally got it. Welcome to Bannon's Britain.

Thank you LBS, I’m amazed more people on here aren’t discussing ‘why’ Johnson said what he said at this moment in time. It has nothing to do with Muslim dress code, it’s amazing how easily people are distracted/fooled into going down this blind alley while the arsonist who makes his inflammatory comments gains political capital.

Point is, he can only gain political capital by connecting to the kind of person that thinks that Islam, particularly overtly observed Islam, is somehow incompatible with living in Britain. There's a bit of that in this thread, unfortunately.

So I'd say that any extremist religion is incompatible with living in the west...

Have you seen the DUP? And they're in government. What definition of extremism are we using?

rjsterry

Rolf F wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

I think "Because I feel like it" is as good a reason as you should ever need for a choice of dress. Why on earth should anyone have to justify what they wear?

Why are you wearing brogues? WHY, DAMMIT?!

It's absurd.

Who said anything about "have to"? In any case, it was you that brought up the justifications in the first place! IMO, as long as you actually do have a choice you can do what you want but you are a pretty empty soul if you don't know why you do things.

For example, I wear a tie because I feel like it. But actually, I wear a tie because it is the only purely non functional item of clothing that I can really wear as a bloke and I like that. I like the aesthetics of them and it helps to put a distinction between the clothing I wear in my free time and at home. I also feel that, in some way, a smart look is just respectful to my organisation (not that it deserves it!) and those that I deal with. I think that wearing an ironed, office shirt and no tie looks a bit crap really.

That is why I wear a tie. I haven't spent hours on spreadsheets and the internet researching it but that is why I wear an ultimately trivial piece of clothing. If the best you can do to explain why you wear an inherently impractical, arguably oppressive item of clothing is "because I feel like it" then I'd suggest you really aren't very bright. And there's nothing wrong with that but can we have some justifications from people who are capable of reasoned thought then?

The original point was to illustrate that of the small sample of anecdotes, none said "because I should". They were on the face of it independent choices, irrespective of the 'quality' of those choices.

rolf_f

Rick Chasey wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

I think "Because I feel like it" is as good a reason as you should ever need for a choice of dress. Why on earth should anyone have to justify what they wear?

Why are you wearing brogues? WHY, DAMMIT?!

It's absurd.

What is absurd is that you equate the cultural processes that lead to people wearing full body cover in public through so called choice or coercion with a decision to wear brogues!

Who are you to say they are, by sight, coerced?

And who of us are to say that they are not? On that basis we should end the thread now. And all the other threads on here where we basically don't know what we are on about which is most of them!

On the other hand, Michael Gove did tell us that we are sick of experts so maybe it is for us to say that they are coerced or not coerced........

rolf_f

rjsterry wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

I think "Because I feel like it" is as good a reason as you should ever need for a choice of dress. Why on earth should anyone have to justify what they wear?

Why are you wearing brogues? WHY, DAMMIT?!

It's absurd.

Who said anything about "have to"? In any case, it was you that brought up the justifications in the first place! IMO, as long as you actually do have a choice you can do what you want but you are a pretty empty soul if you don't know why you do things.

For example, I wear a tie because I feel like it. But actually, I wear a tie because it is the only purely non functional item of clothing that I can really wear as a bloke and I like that. I like the aesthetics of them and it helps to put a distinction between the clothing I wear in my free time and at home. I also feel that, in some way, a smart look is just respectful to my organisation (not that it deserves it!) and those that I deal with. I think that wearing an ironed, office shirt and no tie looks a bit crap really.

That is why I wear a tie. I haven't spent hours on spreadsheets and the internet researching it but that is why I wear an ultimately trivial piece of clothing. If the best you can do to explain why you wear an inherently impractical, arguably oppressive item of clothing is "because I feel like it" then I'd suggest you really aren't very bright. And there's nothing wrong with that but can we have some justifications from people who are capable of reasoned thought then?

The original point was to illustrate that of the small sample of anecdotes, none said "because I should". They were on the face of it independent choices, irrespective of the 'quality' of those choices.

Point taken but would you expect people to necessarily own up to "because I should"? It's not going to be easy to get an accurate picture of that issue even with a decent sized sample group.

It's interesting that there seems to be an element of disbelief here that oppression can be a reason why women wear these forms of clothing yet as Cycleclinic alludes to, there is plenty of entirely non religious oppression of women going on in this country; and that doesn't seem to be questioned.

rick_chasey

Rolf F wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

I think "Because I feel like it" is as good a reason as you should ever need for a choice of dress. Why on earth should anyone have to justify what they wear?

Why are you wearing brogues? WHY, DAMMIT?!

It's absurd.

What is absurd is that you equate the cultural processes that lead to people wearing full body cover in public through so called choice or coercion with a decision to wear brogues!

Who are you to say they are, by sight, coerced?

And who of us are to say that they are not? On that basis we should end the thread now. And all the other threads on here where we basically don't know what we are on about which is most of them!

On the other hand, Michael Gove did tell us that we are sick of experts so maybe it is for us to say that they are coerced or not coerced........

No it’s not the same. At a glance you are in no position to assert why someone wears something.

As I said previously, depending on context the dress can be seen as an act of rebellion or a symbol of their coercion.

Generally it’s best, as in life, not to judge people by their appearance.

Why is that so difficult?