My take on burqa bans:

[howard112211]

I posted this in another thread but I think I will repost it as an OP.

There are two possible scenarious for wearing a burqa:

Either the woman made the decision on her own. In this case, any efforts to prevent her from doing so are ultimately an authoritarian act, and therefore inconsistent with Liberalism or the idea of a free society.

OR

She was forced to wear it. Then it is nuts to criminalize her for it, and not the person who forced her to wear it.

Allowing cops to arrest a woman for wearing a burqa, and justifying this with wanting to protect woman's rights, seems to me like making it a crime to be beaten up by one's husband, so that beaten women can be arrested for protection, regardless of the fact that this would victimize her even more.

Something about the idea that cops can stop a woman, subdue her, and force her to remove some piece of clothing, whatever that clothing may be, seems to me to be very contrary to the woman's rights.

We have to make up our minds what is really the issue here: Is the burqa ban a measure to protect women? Then it is a highly ineffective measure that hurts the victim more than it helps. Or is it rather a measure to make others feel more comfortable? In that case, it is ultimately a bigoted measure.

[blondeatlast]

1. True liberation means that I can make the choices and take the chances

i CHOOSE to.

I don't care why the women are wearing the burqas--by force or by choice--criminalizing it isn't liberating them.

[left is right]

4. i haven't kept us with this

so Was this label as a step to liberation or public safety. I once worked with a small troupe of high school clowns (they did parties and stuff). they were not allowed to drive in their makeup because the police would be unable to identify them. they made bank managers extremely worried for fear that they may have been robbers. Although I am positive that none of these Arab women are involved in nefarious actions, it would be possible for some unscrupulous person could disguise themselves in a burka and cause problem for business and governments

[closeupready]

6. But wait, what are you saying here! That because freedom requires constant vigilance,

we need to restrict freedoms?

[hlthe2b]

11. I fall right in the middle on this one... what a dilemma...

1. I don't believe in government dictating clothing choices (with some enforcement latitude for public nudity)

2. Conversely, I don't believe in forcing a woman to wear anything, including a burqa

3. I do believe that covering the face is quite different than wearing a general body covering or head scarf. The latter absolutely are protected. However, there are safety and security issues with full face covering. Banks, for instance do not allow you to enter with sunglasses or face coverings and many don't allow hats of any kind. My DMV, would not even allow me to have my license photo made with a neck scarf accessory that didn't hide anything, nor a hat. Certainly security checks require you to remove them. Further, there are personal safety issues with wearing that would preclude one having any peripheral vision. Even if women don't drive, they are quite vulnerable to pedestrian-car accidents, or to being mugged, given an inability to see who is around you.

4. I have traveled/worked throughout the ME and it is generally handled by female security staff in private areas where they are required to remove their facial coverings. Doing this in most western countries for the rare instances required would be difficult. In the absence of such checks, it would not prevent escaping felons (and men, in general) from escaping detection by wearing. Yet, disguises exist in many forms. So, this argument is countered by the fact that Hollywood-grade masks and disguises can be obtained that would clearly elude detection. So focusing on the burqa under this justification seems a stretch.

5. I firmly believe that full face covering (burqa) is a cultural issue. Every Muslim I ever worked with, who had actually read and studied the Koran confirmed to me that such extreme covering is not called for by Islam and that it stems from Bedouin customs meant to protect women from marauding strangers. Thus, I think it is largely, but not totally a decision pressed, if not enforced by men. There is language that calls for "modesty," but most believe there was never a religious intent on such extreme covering. I certainly support women who make the decision to wear the hijab (headscarf). I do believe women who voluntarily wear the hijab or other body coverings do so to adhere to "modesty" language called for in the Koran. However, there are some women who MAY make even THAT decision for themselves (e.g. to wear a burqa) and I have a real quandary with denying them that choice.

6. So, I am damned right in the middle, believing that for security and personal safety reasons that restriction against full facial covering (burqa) while making no restrictions on other forms of covering is, from a western view a "reasonable" compromise, if there is such a thing. However, on the opposite side, this compromise likewise means government stepping in to take away some personal freedoms and in this case, one that is gender-associated. That bothers me, even if by doing so, they are also sending a message to men who might seek to dominate women by likewise enforcing their wear.

Whew... France is going to be quite the test case. I'll leave it at that. :shrug:

[blondeatlast]

14. I appreciate that completely. The fact that France is summarily

trying to suppress the Roma bothers me as well, as well as the fact that they've banned other "clothing" of a religious nature (for instance, large crosses and such) bugs me too.

In the end, I have to go with opposing making it a crime--but that doesn't mean I don't understand the concerns of many.

[closeupready]

2. I agree with you, and as I said on the other thread,

people here generally seem to approve of prostitution, even though the prostitute is likely to have been coerced into prostitution by sex trafficking ("who knows/who cares? not my problem, I just enjoy paying for sex, hehe!"), and disapprove of women who wear the burka, despite the fact that - as most will say - the women are wearing it not out of choice, but because they have been coerced - by their husbands!

Fucked-up logic, IMO, but what can I say. A lot of youngsters here, in college, who need to grow up? Who will grow up eventually, hopefully?

[EFerrari]

18. I see what you're saying but still can't agree.

Criminalizing sex workers isolates women and has public health consequences.

The burka is a cultural instrument of isolation and control. (More than 80% of human communication is visual, remember?) Women in France still have the option to wear the hijab. The very few who choose (or, for whom it is chosen) to continue to wear the burka will not get re-enforcement from the culture and so, their daughters will be less likely to be subjected to it.

[Ian David]

3. You missed option three.

This is an attempt to "punish" Muslims for arresting westerners who violate their rules and customs while in Muslim countries.

I predict that the repeal of this law will be used as a bargaining tool to get French citizens out of middle eastern prisons who have been arrested for things like consuming alcohol or immodest dress.

[blondeatlast]

7. I think you give Sarkozy way too much credit. If he weren't

wholesale booting Roma out of the country, I'd buy your take--but I'm calling this utter racist pandering to the worst elements of the French.

You know, kinda like Newt Gingrich would do it here.

[Ian David]

10. I agree with you, but I'm also willing to bet option three fits somewhere in the formula. n/t

[blondeatlast]

12. True--I replied while not fully recovered from a mild hypoglycemia

and kinda ignored your last sentence. My apologies.

[L0oniX]

5. If I wear a burka on my ass, is it as bad as burning a Quran?

[cherokeeprogressive]

9. Only if it has a picture of Mo tipping a cold one on it. n/t

[KittyWampus]

8. Burqas are not clothing. They are a full body mask.

[cali]

13. it's not solely a Burqa ban

[howard112211]

17. I think there is some value in discussing this issue also in general terms

independent of the specifics of the French law. The word "burqa ban" has been around for a while as a concept, also in the US, and it is this concept that I like to address.

[EFerrari]

15. It is an authoritarian act.

And it may make others more comfortable.

There are a number of cultural practices that are a net negative for the quality of life for women for which you could make the same argument, like foot binding for example, female genital cutting and forced marriage.

I know a lot of people hate this ban but it seems to me to be one of the very rare times when it's appropriate for civil authorities to step in.

[RZM]

16. I think a good deal of this has to do with the issue of what it means to be French

This is a common question in every place with a substantial immigrant population. What exactly is a French identity and how far do immigrants need to go to adopt it? I think many in France believe that the burqa just isn't compatible with French culture for a variety of reasons, of which its relationship to women's rights issues is just one.

I don't know where I would come down on this question in the United States. Most likely I would grudgingly oppose an all-out ban on the burqa here. But if the French are able to come to a consensus that the burqa does not have a place in contemporary France, that's their business I guess.

[damntexdem]

19. A burqa ban is a violatioh of civil/religious rights.

A requirement to be able to be ID'd at certain points can be handled without a general ban.