France debates to ban burqa

And even if you are pretty, please dress before your gymnastics.

If we all went naked all the time, pretty soon it would be considered normal and no one would go "My eyes! My eyes! Bleach!" upon seeing a naked fat person, anymore than we do this for a clothed fat person.

Wait. We do judge clothed fat people that way.

Never mind. Nothing to see here. Just move right along.

Avari wrote:

And the French overwhelmingly believe they were right to pass this law. There's this thing called "laïcité" in France and that you don't have in the USA. You don't work under the same concepts in your country? That's fine, and we're not telling you how you're supposed to run your own schools or your relationships with religion.

Secularism? Well, the idea of it we had once upon a time. *sigh* I honestly can't say that we are a secular society here anymore with the stories about the ten commandments being posted in schools, and Texas' schoolbooks (though to be fair, Texas often pretends it is its own country, I think) and other examples.

Somath Cegem wrote:

"But these are Muslim women, it is part of their religion."

Technically, stoning people to death for criticizing Muhammad under Shira law is part of their religion.

There comes a time when a democratic country has to say "fuck your religion," because religions are undemocratic and full of anachronistic ideas.

I can honestly not figure out why Psy-4 keeps bringing up this 'But fuck guys, Tradition is pushed on you at an early age and isn't a personal choice!' thing. It's not like people cannot ever, no way in hell challenge things they were raised on.

Lysander wrote:

There comes a time when a democratic country has to say "fuck your religion," because religions are undemocratic and full of anachronistic ideas.

Word.

Sometimes, religion (or culture under the name of religion) would have us espouse ideas which are just plain wrong. Case in point = genital mutilation. I'd argue that having women wear a burqua is also one of those ideas.

Verandering wrote:

I can honestly not figure out why Psy-4 keeps bringing up this 'But fuck guys, Tradition is pushed on you at an early age and isn't a personal choice!' thing. It's not like people cannot ever, no way in hell challenge things they were raised on.

Fortunately, this thread is not about people, whom this law does not (immidiately) affect.

This is about those who went along with the tradition of wearing a burqa, with an unknown number of those who accepted that that is the way things should be, an unknown number of people who were intimidated into it by their parents, and no idea if the law does more harm than good, because it either frees them from the religious dogma, or causes outrage because it goes against their beliefs. Which opens another can of worms - when you abandon a belief it is always by choice, but if you stick to it, is it always by choice or because of a lifetime of not knowing differently?

Behold, one of the reasons I want religion gone - it fucks everything up.

I can see banning the forced wearing of the burqa. But what if it's a personal choice? Who is she (or he, as the case may be) hurting by wearing it? I'm not Muslim, nor any other religion, but there have been times when I would have loved to have had a burqa to wear in order to cover my face (like the time I had chicken pox and looked so hideous I couldn't bear to look in a mirror, or the time I had a cyst removed from under my eye and had huge bandage over my eye and still had to go out in public). Would the burqa just be banned in public, or in private, too? If it was banned in private, how would the ban be enforced?

I can see banning things that harm people (like stoning people for any reason, or FGM because of the health problems it causes), but if it's not hurting anybody, who cares? (Yes, I know the argument about a person's ability to hide something under a burqa. Quite frankly, though, you can hide something in a naked body if you're creative enough.)

Lady Anne wrote:

Who is she (or he, as the case may be) hurting by wearing it?

They're playing into a patriarchal tradition which puts men in a position of power and which expects women to take responsibility for male sexuality. That sucks. If a group of men are not adult enough to take responsibility for the own sexuality, it should be them stopping at home or covering themselves up.

Psy-4 wrote:

Fortunately, this thread is not about people, whom this law does not (immidiately) affect.

This is about those who went along with the tradition of wearing a burqa, with an unknown number of those who accepted that that is the way things should be, an unknown number of people who were intimidated into it by their parents, and no idea if the law does more harm than good, because it either frees them from the religious dogma, or causes outrage because it goes against their beliefs. Which opens another can of worms - when you abandon a belief it is always by choice, but if you stick to it, is it always by choice or because of a lifetime of not knowing differently?

A personal choice of ignorance is still a personal choice, Psy-4. I believe that that, no matter how much I may dislike ignorance, is more important than the integrity of the choice. Simply the fact that it is one is enough.

And it's utter bullshit wanting to pollute the water supply for everyone only for a few cases, always is.

Lexin wrote:

They're playing into a patriarchal tradition which puts men in a position of power and which expects women to take responsibility for male sexuality.

Unless I'm wrong, burqa is also a sign of a woman belonging to the man, as she is not allowed to expose herself to anyone other than her husband.

Verandering wrote:

A personal choice of ignorance is still a personal choice, Psy-4. I believe that that, no matter how much I may dislike ignorance, is more important than the integrity of the choice. Simply the fact that it is one is enough.

:law:

I hold to this belief when it is a single isolated case. I get rid of it, when the number of such choices increases to the point of having any significance or influence.

Psy-4 wrote:

Which opens another can of worms - when you abandon a belief it is always by choice, but if you stick to it, is it always by choice or because of a lifetime of not knowing differently?

This is only a "can of worms" if you believe that every religious person either a] is only religious because they grew up that way or b] is totally incapable of examining and questioning their own beliefs and deciding that they do in fact believe what they believe. Otherwise, it's pretty much a non-question.

Lady Anne wrote:

Would the burqa just be banned in public, or in private, too? If it was banned in private, how would the ban be enforced?

I don't think they wear them in private- it's for going outside. A lot of head-scarf wearing women take it off when they get home.
And before someone goes I TOLD YOU THEY WANT TO BE RID OF IT; a lot of people take their "proper" clothes off and change into sweatpants and stuff when they get home, too.

Can we at least all agree that every Persian woman I've ever seen over has been a smoking hottie? 'Cause, that's equivocally true. I'd support any measure that puts them in less clothes.

I don't know what they're feeding them over there, but they need to ship some overseas right away.

Avari wrote:

Bamshalam wrote:

Maximilia wrote:

Although what I meant by the 'that's how they roll' thing is that I honestly don't know if any other laws banning or approving certain things related to culture or religion or fashion or anything like that have been passed in France, or even talked about.

It happens a lot there. There was a huge thing a few years ago about the decision to ban 'religious imagery' and clothing
from students attending public school; a measure that overwhelmingly affected Muslim girls more than any other group because of the hijab. They were (rightfully) pissed about it.

And the French overwhelmingly believe they were right to pass this law. There's this thing called "laïcité" in France and that you don't have in the USA. You don't work under the same concepts in your country? That's fine, and we're not telling you how you're supposed to run your own schools or your relationships with religion.

Similarly, I'm not telling French people- the Muslim girls affected included -how they're supposed to run their schools or relationships with religion. I'm merely pointing out that I think it's bullshit, because I do. You've expressed similar views about American well, anything, so I'm not sure why this sentiment confuses you.

Avari wrote:

I've noticed a few posters seem to have a problem with the idea that not all democratic countries are the same, don't have the same history, don't live under the same concepts, and don't intend to. The fact these countries are not, for example, an American-style democracy doesn't mean they're freedom-hating, dictatorships, amazing as that may seem.

Expressing distaste with the way France treats its increasingly marginalized minority groups isn't a case of not grasping that democratic countries are different. I know that full well and said that earlier in the thread.

Sara wrote:

And before someone goes I TOLD YOU THEY WANT TO
BE RID OF IT; a lot of people take their "proper" clothes off and
change into sweatpants and stuff when they get home, too.

Who? :suspect:

Taking off a burqua when in your house is like taking off your jacket when you go inside. You equate taking off a burqua to take off your jacket and putting on a different jacket.

Bammy wrote:

You've expressed similar views about American well, anything, so I'm not sure why this sentiment confuses you.

THANK YOU!

Everywhere you turn there's someone from another country telling Americans how to run their shit. Learn to deal.

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Sara wrote:

And before someone goes I TOLD YOU THEY WANT TO
BE RID OF IT; a lot of people take their "proper" clothes off and
change into sweatpants and stuff when they get home, too.

Who? :suspect:

There was a conversation about it on the House. I only remember Kittenmommy, but there were several people saying they liked to change into comfy clothes immediately.

Quote :

Taking off a burqua when in your house is like taking off your jacket when you go inside. You equate taking off a burqua to take off your jacket and putting on a different jacket.

Ok, so my comparison has its limits. You get my point, though, yes? PM me if you don't, I'll explain it again.

grmblfjx wrote:

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Taking off a burqua when in your house is like taking off your jacket when you go inside. You equate taking off a burqua to take off your jacket and putting on a different jacket.

Ok, so my comparison has its limits. You get my point, though, yes? PM me if you don't, I'll explain it again.

Actually, this isn't really a limit. People sometimes have done exactly that. Smoking jackets are one example.

HA HA MIKEY EAT YOUR WORDS

Grumbles is right again! :>

MIKEY EATS WORDS AND SHITS AMERICAN FLAGS

Lexin wrote:

Lysander wrote:

There comes a time when a democratic country has to say "fuck your religion," because religions are undemocratic and full of anachronistic ideas.

Word.

Sometimes, religion (or culture under the name of religion) would have us espouse ideas which are just plain wrong. Case in point = genital mutilation. I'd argue that having women wear a burqua is also one of those ideas.

What if a woman chose to dress in that manner for reasons having nothing to do with religion? Would that automatically make it "better"? Also, how can you gauge, for certain, that every woman who wears a burqa is being harmed by it?

It's important, yes, to look at the societal context. The reality is, women in Islam are often coerced and pressured into conforming to certain standards, of which the burqa is a more extreme example. I think that it is important for countries to safeguard people's rights and help create an environment where people can choose.

But there's not choice, here. Under a law like this, a woman still has no real right when it comes to what she can wear. It's targeting a specific choice and practice--not the attitudes.

It would be like banning forms of consensual genital modification because of concerns about genital mutilation.

Also, I really don't think that this law has as much to do about protecting women as it does forcing women to comply with another set of societal standards.

anangrychocobo wrote:

MIKEY EATS WORDS AND SHITS AMERICAN FLAGS

I'm so glad you're here, f'real real.

DeeDee wrote:

Also, I really don't think that this law has as much to
do about protecting women as it does forcing women to comply with
another set of societal standards.

Fucking this.

DeeDee wrote:

What if a woman chose to dress in that manner for reasons having nothing to do with religion? Would that automatically make it "better"?

No better than stoning someone to death for reasons having nothing to do with religion would be better. It's really inappropriate to bring religion into this at all, because saying that the burqa is required to practice Islam is like saying that skipping meat on Fridays is required to practice Christianity.

Quote :

It's important, yes, to look at the societal context. The reality is, women in Islam are often coerced and pressured into conforming to certain standards, of which the burqa is a more extreme example. I think that it is important for countries to safeguard people's rights and help create an environment where people can choose.

But there's not choice, here.

Except for all the other choices.

...Did you really just compare wearing a garment to stoning someone to death?