The Dutch propose a ban on wearing burqas

[RB TexLa]

How could anyone care?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6159046.stm


The burqa, a full body covering that also obscures the face, would be banned by law in the street, and in trains, schools, buses and the law courts.

The cabinet said burqas disturb public order, citizens and safety.

[helderheid]

1. I never saw anyone in the Netherlands wearing a burqa.

I lived there for a couple years in a highly Muslim neighborhood and never saw anyone wearing one.

[Mugu]

8. If nobody wears it then it shouldn't be a problem. N/T

[msongs]

2. why is it that muslim MEN do not have to cover up? hmmm nt

[Warpy]

4. And why don't all men have to be indoors all the time?

They're the rapists. Why not focus on THEM?

I've asked that question a lot.

[Katzenjammer]

27. It was the same religious-lunatic crap in Israel when Meir was PM

They were having an epidemic of rape, so one of the hyper-religious nutjobs recommended that women be placed under curfew. Meir had something to say about that, and it wasn't 'God bless you'.

[PsychoDad]

23. We do...

We must also dress modestly, and in addition we cannot wear silk or gold, while women can.

Indeed, the Quran is more detailed about restrictions pertaining to men than women as clothing is concerned.

(btw: The Quran does not require Niqab or Burqa. Women during Muhammad's (pbuh) did not cover their faces.)

[Warpy]

3. The burqa is the only garment

that completely obscures the face, including the eyes. It's a SHROUD, really, obviously designed by clergy in the closet who wished all women dead.

It's a safety hazard. I've known somebody who's worn one. You can't see anything but what is directly in front of you. You can't see anything you're about to step on (or in), anything to the side, and turning your head to find out what that sinister noise behind you might be is futile. All you see is thicker cloth. I can't think of a worse safety hazard.

The sooner the husbands and the fathers of such women get used to the hijab, the better. Kudos to the Dutch.

[Coventina]

6. You raise some really good points. The safety of the woman is compromised

by wearing a burqa.

IMHO, the burqa has no place in a free and open society.

Human beings communicate primarily by face-to-face contact. Without facial expressions, communication is severely limited.

[wuushew]

9. The Netherlands is a free and open society

the government knows best because religion has killed the concept for free will from the oppressed?

[Coventina]

10. Burqas are an extreme form of patriarchal bullshit.

I'm happy to see them banned anywhere.

I am "intolerant" of the oppression of women.

[wuushew]

12. How is it oppression if it is being done voluntarily?

the Netherlands is not Saudi Arabia. Between the requirements of naturalization and the public education system how can any Dutch Muslim be ignorant of the avenues of personal choice availible to them?

How is choice of dress different from what one chooses to eat or read? Even the most brainwashed or childlike mind should be able to draw simple conclusions out of a civil socratic discussion.

More talk, less laws.

[Coventina]

13. Voluntarily. Yeah, riiiiiight.

If you cannot acknowledge that the burqa, and the fact that only WOMEN are required to wear them, is oppressive and misogynist, I have nothing more to say to you.

[PsychoDad]

16. Forcing women to cover their breasts....

while men need not to is also oppressive and misogynist, is it not?

Or is this form of male oppression ok because it is your culture?


Peace.

[Coventina]

18. I happen to agree with you. Breasts are WAY over-sexualized.

They're function is to nourish babies, so why they are considered "naughty" is beyond me.

:shrug:

[helderheid]

46. see post 25

:hi:

By the way, I appreciate your posts - they are very enlightening.

[yurbud]

66. Women are doing us a favor by covering them. It doubles our IQ and prevents slack-jawed drooling

[wuushew]

17. I just want to know why you feel a ban is justified

when other non-legal alternatives seem available. To what degree should a government determine what is appropriate or not? Is it a objective measurable thing?

Certainly some people may wish to wear the burqa even cognoscente that they have an option not too. Lacking data how can you say such a forced action will not disappoint more people than it pleases? You are basing your argument that government authority is the best route to societal wellbeing.

[Katzenjammer]

26. Burqas are deeply, institutionally insulting to men, for one thing.

The thesis behind all this post-Muhammad (sawa) folderol is that men have no self-control at all, and the sight of any part of a woman's body will immediately cause them to commit rape. So women have to cover themselves completely and never go out without a protector lest they be raped repeatedly in doorways and alleys.

Pretty effing sick, if you ask me. Or even if you don't.

[mondo joe]

51. In a free culture, people are free to insult men, and to do all manner of

sick things.

[shimmergal]

86. The thing is..

where there's a strong possibility that wearing the burqa isn't from a woman's free choice, having a law trumps the pressures overbearing males may put on her to wear it.


Just like "it's the law" ends any arguments with little kids about wearing their seat belts in cars.

[mondo joe]

44. Is it voluntary to require women to NOT wear them?

[Katzenjammer]

58. There's an argument for school uniforms to the effect that some things

that are voluntary on their face turn out not to be voluntary because of social pressure. So a school uniform takes the burden, which can be intolerable in an insular society such as school or a religious community (see Faye Kellerman's novels about Rina Lazarus and Peter Decker for an exploration of that).

So yes, in a larger sense legally forbidding the wearing of a burqa in public can be empowering to someone who doesn't want to wear it but dare not refuse. It's not the best solution, but it's better than letting the religious nutcases have their way.

[mondo joe]

60. I disagree. I think people should be permitted to be religious nutcases

as regards their own bodies. I don't want them infringing on others, nor do I wantto infringe onthem.

[Katzenjammer]

67. We're not talking about the religious nutcases, we're talking about those who really don't

want to wear the damned things but feel intolerable social pressure. The nutcases will feel martyred, the non-loonies will feel relieved.

As far as I'm concerned, there are many, MANY rights more important than anything to do with religion. Religion was included in the BOR because of the way people were treated in Europe, and especially Britain at that time, with people being taxed to support a state religion, and civil rights being denied people who were of the "wrong" confession. Those were still biting issues in 18th century America, but here and now they're NOPs. So I have no sympathy with anyone who actually wants to flaunt her submission to misogyny.

[mondo joe]

70. You can't tell who's doing something they don't want to do in almost

any case. Only the individual can determine that.

The greatest right is autonomy over one's own body and mind. I don't think the government should inringe on either.

I support the right of women to wear the damn thing for the exact same reason I am absolutely pro-choice on abortion.

AnD I don't have to have sympathy for anyone to support their rights.

[Katzenjammer]

84. Okay, swell. How do you make sure that some women aren't coerced?

Unless you can do that, then you're left with 2 choices: write off those victims of pseudo-religious oppression --- or forbid burqa-wearing and write off those who want to wear burqas. So what's it to be?

[PsychoDad]

15. The interjection of "freedom of choice"....

Into these arguments often has no effect upon the Islamo-paranoia. We in effect are preaching to the choir. Those who understand freedom of choice vs. those who wish to impose homogeneous cultural standards.

Consider: These women in the west have a choice to wear this or not. Women in the west must wear a top lest you risk arrest for "lewdness", while men can go topless.

A veil, a blouse, both just cloth. Oppression is when there is no freedom of choice, not when there is.

Preaching to the choir.
Peace

[helderheid]

25. although in the Netherlands, women's breasts are not considered offensive

Go to any Dutch beach, watch any Dutch soap commercial and you will see this is so.

[WinkyDink]

92. "Offensive" isn't the issue, I don't think, is it? More like sexual, pardon

the term, titillation.
It's not like Europeans don't have nudie mags. And some without articles.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

28. But is it freedom of choice or is it Dad or Big Brother or Husband

saying, "No daughter/sister/wife of mine is going to show her face in public"?

Or, in the largely Muslim neighborhoods, is it young militants intimidating any woman who doesn't observe their idea of modesty?

You know, setting people of any specific race aside from the normal obligations and privileges of society is rightfully considered racism, but if you do those sorts of things to women, it's considered "culture."

[mondo joe]

50. You could ask that question about abortion too.

Or wearing high heels.

Or wearing dresses.

It's not the role of government to interfere in personal choices, though it might be called on to interfere in coercion.

[PsychoDad]

19. You make a very good point.

About public safety. If the ban upon the Burqa/nikab is for public safty and other such factors are also considered, ie: Dark sunglasses, etc, in the ban then I can understand the desire for it.

Public safety often overides freedom of choice and expression.

OTH, is this just more Islamo-phobia in Europe?

Peace.

[riderinthestorm]

22. Can I ask your opinion on the abaya?

The long coat that pious Muslim women wear is such a safety hazard. I work with rape centers and a women's shelter on a regular basis and we coach women all the time on wearing "safe clothing" - shoes a woman can run or walk effectively in (not high heels), clothing that allows them to kick or strike at an attacker etc.

The long coats just scream "prey" to those of us at my shelter (we've talked about this at length). You can't kick or run effectively in them.

Many hijabs are fitted to obscure peripheral vision which just makes us crazy - it's so unsafe (this isn't even going into the niqab or burqa vision obscuring problems).

These garments just seem to be designed by men with very misogynistic rules behind them: women must only go out escorted by a male or they should stay home etc. The safety issues are an enormous part of my distaste for these garments which is a part of their misogynistic/patriarchical basis.

I'm not going to get into the whole "choice" argument on this thread, or differing cultural interpretations of masking the face, or how the burqa is inherently discriminatory against men etc. etc. I've said my piece in other threads but will limit this only to safety concerns for women.

[PsychoDad]

29. Couldn't agree with you more about "safe clothing"

And making acting in a safe manner a habit.

I think a woman (or even man) should be aware of the environment they will be in and dress accordingly. There's a big difference between a dinner party, the mall, or walking downtown at night. An ayaba might be ok at the mall with friends or at the Masjid, or even perhaps at your place of work, if it doesn't get in the way, but probably not the thing to wear if you work the late shift and have to walk across town to get home.

My wife and daughter often wear abaya as a quick and comfortable way to "cover up" they can toss a "formal" looking ayaba over their house or street clothes. Normaly they wear them only when together with other sisters in public or at Masjid or when they just want to "dress up" (this is probably all secret, and I'll probably be severly beaten for mentioning any of this :silly:) When out where one would expect street clothes that's what they wear. Jeans, blouse, sneakers and hijab.

Islamic law overall would support the need for personal safety to override any cultural dictates of modesty or fashion. Jeans and a good pair of running shoes amy well be more appropriate than an ayaba in some conditions. The only Islamic consideration would be one of "modesty", but, in western culture particularly, one can dress quite modestly and still be safe.

There are many styles of Hijab. Hijab should also be worn with the environment in mind. There are Hijabs that don't obscure peripheral vision and sound and would therefore be a safer choice.

Muhammad (pbuh) stated that Islam should be a soft thing, not a hard thing... It was meant to be flexible to the needs of the people, a thing of reason not rigid dogma.

In the end we have to consider the safety of ourselves and our community and act accordingly. It is a telling shame that many of the things we muslim men do to "protect our women" actually endanger them.

Have you considered approaching a Mosque about classes for women on personal safety? I might recommend visiting and learning who the head of the women's committee is and talk to her. Perhaps working with some of the sisters you could come up with ideas and a lesson plan that would benefit everyone. I think I'll recomend something simular.

:) And thank you for your work in the community and in the ER.

Peace.

[riderinthestorm]

31. My area of expertise isn't in programming

I am a grant writer and development officer, and a volunteer board member. I also man the rape hotline on occasion and have acted as a personal rape advocate (not my first choice - this is very time consuming and emotionally draining. Huge mad props to the social workers out there, you know who you are!).

I do know that people have approached the local masjids but haven't gotten a good reception. It would be better coming from within was always our conclusion. You could/would be very effective at that.

I wish there wasn't such a huge pressure on Islamic women about their clothing. No matter how Muslims and non-Muslims want to talk about "choice", I know you know that the social and religious pressures within the community to conform and to wear the garb are very, very heavy. I appreciate your acknowledgement that Muhammed's real directive was for "modesty",and that first and foremost he was a fairly flexible guy. Even the dictates about the hijab are vague.

Peace.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

42. No kidding.

One only needs to visit a Middle Eastern hospital and experience the horrors of the Fell Down an Open Manhole Ward and the Walked Right Through a Plate Glass Window Wing in order understand just how dangerous those burqas are.

[EFerrari]

55. I always think of shrouds, too. nt

[wuushew]

5. Stupid idea

I hope it fails. Please cite one example of a burqa related traffic accident or a successful criminal act employing a burqa garment. Seems like a real threat to personal expression based on unfounded hypotheticals.

[RB TexLa]

7. remember they "have to protect the white culture"

after all, people wearing certain clothing is "destroying" it. :sarcasm:

[originalpckelly]

14. I've watched interviews with women whom wish to wear the burqa...

They seemed as if they wished to wear it. If they make the conscious choice to wear it, and are not doing so because they are made to by their husbands/fathers, it ought to be allowed.

I think we ought to discourage it, and there ought to be privately funded campaign to get people to not wear the burqa, but it should not be done in law.

However, if someone is forced to wear it, that should be outlawed.

[Parche]

11. burqa

What is wrong with Delta Burqa?

[justice1]

20. Is it really different from a nun who chooses to wear a habit?

[Coventina]

21. Yes, for a couple of reasons:

1) A nun makes a choice to become a nun (nowadays) at a legal age. It is one choice of MANY that a woman can make

vs.

In a burqa-wearing society, it is expected that EVERY woman will wear the burqa. If they do not, they are bringing "shame" to their family.

2) A burqa completely covers the face, a habit does not.

Completely covering the face is a slap at free and open societies and human communication.

[Ms. Clio]

30. Girls do not begin wearing burqas until puberty, or an age old enough to know what they want

The point is not societies where everyone will be forced to wear one. It's about a society where maybe 10 women in the entire country wear one, and then entirely by choice. If a teenaged girl in Holland is suddenly forced into a burqa against her will, I'm sure she is aware that she has avenues of support and assistance.

This is an unnecessary intrusion of the government into a matter of individual choice, although I am much more persuaded by the safety argument. It's ironic that they were, in fact, originally conceived of as protective devices as a way of dealing with life in a place where raids, particularly raids for women, have been occurring for millennia.

[Katzenjammer]

24. Hurray for the cloggies! Pluralism and a secular social face is the only hope for humanity

If people want to flaunt their holier-than-thou attitude by wearing a garment that probably would have appalled the Prophet (sawa) then they should do it among the like-minded. Committed nudists don't get to publicly express their beliefs by their (lack of) clothing, so why should some group with misogynist attitudes?

[Amused Musings]

32. It is more a question of equality than a libertarian "Do What thou

Will." Many who wear the burqa (or its many laundry sack-esque variations) may not be forced physically (ie the husband/father is holding them down and forcing it on them) but the institutionalization creates "invisible chains" as it were. And no, of course it is different than western society's idea of a "top" (which is a bad analogy anyway because if you have ever been to a european beach or Mardi Gras -I live in New Orleans- you would realize the West is pretty liberal and delightfully decadent) because in most social situations, work, dinner, hanging out or whatever, the clothing covers more or less the same places regardless of men or women. The burqa, on the other hand is quite a lot more. Oh and by the way, did someone here compare muslim women to nuns? Good god, people, talk about freudian slip!

To further this analogy, I think back to a "Savage Love" column I read back a long time ago. This guy was arguing that Santorum was wrong about gay marriage because he mistook the issue as a libertarian cause rather than an equality cause. I think the same applies to this situation.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

33. while i personally think the burka is oppressive , legislating on it is also oppressive

[helderheid]

34. Agreed.

[mondo joe]

52. Agreed. Government has no business dictating what you do with

your own body, IMO.

[Bridget Burke]

35. So the few who wear burqa will be forced to stay inside....

Great--let's make these women even more isolated.

"The cabinet said burqas disturb public order, citizens and safety." Not a word of concern for the women involved. It's just a political game for the xenophobic (among the) Dutch. (Guess that Dutch tolerance has a limit.)

[riderinthestorm]

36. That's the whole point of watching what happens in the Netherlands

The Dutch's famous tolerance seems to have snapped with the assasination of that film director (can't recall his name right now). The overt symbols of Islam like the burqa are actually just tangible symbols for intangibles like the treatment of women in this culture, the placement of religion in a society etc. The dutch director was killed by a Muslim man because he made a film that highlighted the plight of Islamic women in the Netherlands. It's all just beyond ironic and tragic.

This country (and France and the UK) appears to be on the front lines in the cultural/religious battles with Islam. It's fascinating to watch. And it's going to be here in the US very soon imho.

[helderheid]

37. Theo Van Gogh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theo_van_Gogh_%28film_director%29

[riderinthestorm]

40. I believe the murder of Pim Fortuyne also played a role in the current

anti-Islamophobia developing in the Netherlands if I can recall. Thanks for looking up the name of the director. I just couldn't drag it out of my brain and was too lazy to google it.

:hi:

[helderheid]

41. LOL! No problem. I'm sure the murder of Pim Fortuyne is playing a role as well.

[Bridget Burke]

56. Volkert van der Graaf is Muslim?

He killed Pim Fortuyne. And was otherwise known as an Animal Rights Activist.

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

[riderinthestorm]

61. Pim Fortuyne's politics were why he was murdered

His positions (and murder) threw the first spotlight on Muslims, immigration and the role of Islam in Dutch society. His murder brought the issue out into the larger European discussion, splashing his positions on the front page everywhere. It was a very, very big deal for the Dutch iirc and sparked the big debate in the Netherlands.

Theo Van Gogh's murder really fueled the fire though.

[helderheid]

68. see 61

[Katzenjammer]

90. "the cultural/religious battles with Islam"

It's not "with Islam" unless you want to describe battles with pseudo-Xian fundies as being "with Xianity". They're pseudo-Muslims. Muhammad (ah) would not have accepted them as Muslims any more than Jesus thought well of the pseudo-pious Pharisees.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

38. Sounds like something the Taliban would do.

Telling women what they can and cannot wear, that is.

[otherlander]

73. Yup.

[yurbud]

39. CRAP: Now I have to unpack EVERYTHING! what will I wear to smoke pot and visit legal hookers?

[yurbud]

43. I get a perverse satisfaction in seeing Europeans exercise any degree of intolerance like ours

It makes us seem less stupid.

[JCMach1]

64. Racism is a huge problem there right now

-more so then in the U.S.

I saw absolute hostility towards immigrants the last time I was there... Some of it was coming from some of my 'liberal' friends.


-We have problems in the U.S., but Europe has a bigger one right now.

[yurbud]

65. probably because they are getting in-migration for the first time in a thousand or so years.

[magellan]

82. Huh? You're kidding, right?

Europe has seen steady immigration from N. Africa and the middle east for decades.

[readmoreoften]

45. Are they allowed to drive cars while wearing burqas?

What a strange problem.

[RB TexLa]

47. UPDATE: Ban passed White Culture is now safe

Immigration Minister Rita Verdonk will now draw up legislation which will result in the Netherlands, once one of Europe's most easy-going nations, imposing some of the continent's toughest laws against concealing the face.

In recent years the Dutch have lost their reputation for tolerance and pushed through some of Europe's toughest entry and integration laws.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061117/ts_nm/dutch_burqa_ban_dc_1

[helderheid]

49. Sad.

[Bridget Burke]

57. Some Dutch sheltered Jews during the Nazi Occupation.

But others turned them in. (That's what happened to Anne Frank.)

Guess which party is on the rise?

[rockymountaindem]

59. I hardly see this as the same thing

This is a free, democratic country acting on its own free will. It is not a country struggling under the occupation of mudering fascist outsiders where people are all just trying to survive.

Also, nobody's life is at stake as far as the burqa is concerned. Not so with the Nazis.

[elehhhhna]

62. Both things happened to Anne Frank.

I'm ashamed to post this but the Dutch, in large part, ignored the Jews plight until the Nazis started pressing everybody into labor. That really cracked it.

[LostinVA]

53. Good n/t

[helderheid]

85. It hasn't happened yet. They will consider it but it is not law.

[RB TexLa]

88. OK, seemed a bit hard to follow the process

[951-Riverside]

48. Good I'm for it

The burqa represents oppression against women disguised as religion.

[genie_weenie]

54. We need to invade and stop the Evil Dutch Government.

Freedom!

[elehhhhna]

63. I s'pose the nutty Mormon teen-marrying codgers here in the US

should be left alone, too. After all, it's a 14 year old girls choice to be the 10th wife of some geezer, right?

Geez, people.

[helderheid]

87. I'm not sure if this can be compared to pedophilia

[elehhhhna]

89. okay, helderheid, you have the cred -- you lived there...

Question: is it a safety hazard--wearing a blanket over ones head while navigating the streets, walkways, etc. given the auto, tram, bike, scooter and pedestrian traffic? That's the only problem I have with it.

The Dutch "problem" created itself, imo, when the State, in an attempt to be culturally sensitive, elected to ignore certain actions which were crimes under Dutch law.

It's an interesting dichotomy: DU doesn't want women in the ME to be forced to wear them but defends the "right" for immigrants to do so. I doubt that any woman with a "choice" would elect to wear the burka, that's all.

having said all that, I doubt that outlawing the Burka is appropriate.

re: the analogy to pedophilia, polygamist brides are generally over the age of consent--that's true-- and I should have said "18" in my post. The burka & polygamist marriage are analogous to each other when the subject is "brainwashing".

[Odin2005]

69. Good. Western nations shouldn't put up with sexism, "respect for other cultures" be damned.

Cultural Relativism is a bunch of BS used to rationalize opression.

[mondo joe]

71. And telling women what they're allowed to wear or not isn't sexism?

[Odin2005]

74. these women are often forced to wear burkas by thier relatives.

The point is that most women wearing burkas are not doing it because they want to.

[mondo joe]

77. And since you can't read minds to know who is forced and who is not

you have to leave it up to the individual to decide for herself.

[Ms. Clio]

72. What about "Girls Gone Wild?" Is that sexism? It is a premier symbol of oppression

of women in our culture.

Should it be banned?

[Odin2005]

75. Nobody is forcing you to watch it.

Unlike with burkas where the women are forced to wear them by thier relatives.

[Ms. Clio]

76. What gives you the right to decide that those women are being "forced to wear them?"

Do you have any actual evidence to back up that assertion? Holland is a free and open society, and anybody being forced to wear a piece of clothing against her will can presumably contact the proper authorities. Why do you care if some women choose to wear it of their own free will?

Is "Girls Gone Wild" sexism, or not?

[DivinBreuvage]

78. It'd be wonderful if the world lived up to your happy fantasy, Ms. Clio

unfortunately, for a hell of a lot of women and children (and some men too) in "free and open societies" who are forced to suffer things against their will, your presumption that they can simply contact the proper authorities and everything is solved is seldom quite as easy and straightforward as you seem to imagine it to be. What a completely asinine and ridiculous thing for you to say.

[Ms. Clio]

79. Yes, and when that happens, a lot more is going on than being forced to wear a piece of clothing

Like domestic abuse, which is a crime in any "free and open" society, and my point is that it can and should be dealt with on that level. Legislating against wearing a piece of clothing will not change those dynamics in the slightest.

And don't presume to lecture me. The only one who sounds ridiculous is you.

I still want someone to tell me if "Girls Gone Wild" is sexism, or not? And should "good Western nations" ban it forthwith?

[upi402]

80. If we can wear banana hammocks in Muslim countries

then Muslims can wear religious fanatic costumes in the west.

I dunno. I just think religious fanatics suck.

[scrinmaster]

81. It seems

that they're just banning them out in public. I doubt I'd get very far if I wanted to walk around in black pants, a black jacket, and a ski mask. Because the same amount of my body would be showing, just around my eyes.

[magellan]

83. Education, not legislation. (nt)

[WinkyDink]

91. The Dutch would like to remain Dutch, but now they are seeing, as have

other nations seen, the results of empire-building.
If you don't want to be multi-cultural, don't colonize.