The Student Room Group

The Burqa debate. A veiled woman's views.

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Person1001
Precisely why veiled womens' views need to be heard as the subjects of debate surrounding the veil encompass their lifestyle.

well n, theyre opinions can be heard as citezens but that's about it. We will use intelligence and common sense to determine the effect of burkhas in moderns society and their restrictions, if any to be placed on the issues I mentioned above. Someone saying " I want to do some thing because it makes me feel better about myself etc" is not relevant to a debate on law and society. We may live in a (comparatively )free country but there are rules based on common sense to follow. just because crack makes a crack addict feel good, doesn't mean we allow it throughout society
Reply 81
Original post by rugbyfordinner
well n, theyre opinions can be heard as citezens but that's about it. We will use intelligence and common sense to determine the effect of burkhas in moderns society and their restrictions, if any to be placed on the issues I mentioned above. Someone saying " I want to do some thing because it makes me feel better about myself etc" is not relevant to a debate on law and society. We may live in a (comparatively )free country but there are rules based on common sense to follow. just because crack makes a crack addict feel good, doesn't mean we allow it throughout society


And I'm certain there will be veiled women who work in different services (with "intelligence and common sense") who can offer their own arguments from their own experience. :smile:
Original post by HeavyTeddy
I respect your opinion, if that's the way you feel. I'd also like to clarify that I don't agree with Muslim women who wear the niqab and don't oblige to mandatory security checks. Most scholars would also agree that it is against the Sharia, so yes, I agree with you there. However, even though it may the case that some people believe it deters social interaction, I don't think that's a reason to ban something.


we cant ban something that interferes with social interaction, otherwise wed ban in entirety hoodies, goth make up etc etc that some people consider anti social too. being anti social maybe annoying and interfere with integration - but it isn't necessarily illegal. that is a n issue for the muslim community to deal with itssel- if it truly want to integrate in the west, get respect etc. But there are much bigger issues relateding to burkha veil etc, like people working in nhs, treating patients in the veil? wearing weil in court. a police officer wearing a veil - is it appropriate. there are socres of similar exapmples. these clothings of ritual were not designed for modern life, they were designed for a pre-medival life that was much more simple, less complex etc. Im not saying all the above probs are occurring now - but that's why we are having the debate - to establish the potential issues. My personal opinion- I don't see the sense of earing any such- as you said its only following the opinion of speficic people ie some' scholars' That doesn't translate to a religious obligation - anybody could form a cult and orer follwoers to dress in a certain way. Strictly Islamically speaking, If you are going on about obligation of women to cover up - what about obligation also in islam for women not even to be mixing with men in public - that is ignored (largely ) in western society, so why not dress code too?
(edited 10 years ago)
Reply 83
Original post by Connor Carnegie
There is no way it should be out right banned.

However the debate has thrown up the contradictory nature of our legal system regarding our commitment to equality before the law.

Now I reject the view that the Niqab, Burka or headscarf are religious garments, on the grounds that there is no explicit requirement within the qu'ran for Muslim women to wear them.

They are culturally, now, why are some cultures afforded more freedoms than others within our society? For example a women wearing a niqab or burka is allowed to walk into and make use of a bank but someone wearing a motocycle helmet is not? This is clearly not equality before the law, as Burkas cover as much of your face as motorcycle helmets. Ideally I would like to see laws regarding dress liberalized so people can wear such garments in bank, but there will be equality before the law.

Another example is the allowance of head scarfs in shooping centers, but it is illegal to put your hood up.


Banks and shops have the right to decline veiled customers for security reasons.
Original post by harry_007
Find this debate boring.

So much hoohah over a piece of a cloth.


Let's ignore the rising foodbanks highlighting the inequality in society.

So a large part of Britain cannot afford food to eat and live but this is top priority because a few people don't really like how a woman dresses.

Oh dear.


Just because there are debates on the burka does not mean that other issues are not discussed. It would be pointless for everyone to simply divert all their focus to the aforementioned issues, as we wouldn't make any more progress, it was be an inefficient use of our time with the opportunity cost of discussing other issues being extremely high.

Anyways there has been much made of the increase of use of food banks, the guardian has been pushing the inequality line for a long time ( can you provide some figures).

Anyways, you should accept that your political priories are are not always going to match up with everyone else's. This is a legitimate debate too have, shame you would rather shut it down than take part in it.
Original post by Person1001
And I'm certain there will be veiled women who work in different services (with "intelligence and common sense") who can offer their own arguments from their own experience. :smile:

the dbate has spread into the nhs now, with a pointless costly review being done - hwever it was already shown to the health minister, that there are no known doctors in the nhs that wear a veil or bukha anyway - out fo choice. it does appear frankly that the veil wearing is a culture of the non professional dare I say it, benefit classes of muslims. those professional muslims are far less likely to wear burkhas. In fact it was shown in news that burkha and veil wearing was quite rare in uk even a decade ago - it seems to have become more common than it was in those classes anyway - perhaps as more of a statement making excersise or visible totem, than any religious adherence.
Original post by Person1001
Banks and shops have the right to decline veiled customers for security reasons.


Do you have evidence, my point stands with the shopping center example.
Reply 87
Original post by Person1001
Banks and shops have the right to decline veiled customers for security reasons.

but they wouldn't because they are scared of the backlash they'll receive. I mean look at what happened to the college that banned it for security reasons, look at the court that banned it for security reasons they all did a U turn after criticism and backlash saying they were racist islamophobic ect.
Reply 88
Original post by Connor Carnegie
Just because there are debates on the burka does not mean that other issues are not discussed. It would be pointless for everyone to simply divert all their focus to the aforementioned issues, as we wouldn't make any more progress, it was be an inefficient use of our time with the opportunity cost of discussing other issues being extremely high.

Anyways there has been much made of the increase of use of food banks, the guardian has been pushing the inequality line for a long time ( can you provide some figures).

Anyways, you should accept that your political priories are are not always going to match up with everyone else's. This is a legitimate debate too have, shame you would rather shut it down than take part in it.



If you think it's a legitimate, then you are debating with the wrong person. I can do as I please. I can decide what is a priority or not in UK society just as much as you can.
I don't understand this 'oppression' point because it seems teleological, particularly the "they're oppressed without knowing it" variant that can be applied to absolutely anything. I'm wearing clothes because I'm oppressed, I'm speaking English because I'm oppressed, people smoke because they're oppressed, people go clubbing because they're oppressed, etc.? I was unaware there was a universal purpose in life upon which the niqab incontestably impinges. If the wearers are made aware of the alternatives and still choose to adorn the niqab, why is there still a problem? Not wanting to do something personally does not mean everyone who engages in the activity is coerced into doing so (then again, it can be argued that all forms of socialisation are coercive processes).
Reply 90
Original post by chococoatedlemons
okay. So an oppressed person says they're not oppressed. Would you believe a woman who exhibits all the signs of being a victim of domestic violence when she claims she has a perfect relationship? No, because the signs of oppression are all there. Just like the burqa - the ultimate sign of a victim blaming, oppressive culture.


PRSOM. :frown:
Well, personally, I think, living in the UK where freedom of expression is a civil liberty, anyone and everyone should be able to express their religious beliefs, even if that does include wearing the Burqa, however, in airports, I do believe that women should remove their burqas so they can be identified and obviously checked like every other ordinary person...
Reply 92
Original post by rugbyfordinner
the dbate has spread into the nhs now, with a pointless costly review being done - hwever it was already shown to the health minister, that there are no known doctors in the nhs that wear a veil or bukha anyway - out fo choice. it does appear frankly that the veil wearing is a culture of the non professional dare I say it, benefit classes of muslims. those professional muslims are far less likely to wear burkhas. In fact it was shown in news that burkha and veil wearing was quite rare in uk even a decade ago - it seems to have become more common than it was in those classes anyway - perhaps as more of a statement making excersise or visible totem, than any religious adherence.


For whatever profession a veiled woman works in where there is a contention that covering herself significantly obstructs her capacity to work should be addressed for debate. And a veiled woman's views who works in that profession should be heard.

With regards to your second point, I think we should be careful when saying there may be a 'statement' that some veiled women are making - particularly one where we assume that a veiled woman may seem to choose to live a more degraded life. It is more nuanced than that: A veiled woman may choose to live a life like a 'nun' where she chooses to spend more time in worship as opposed to wishing to live a life like a banker or a teacher or she might choose to live as a housewife.

We should even respect the right for a veiled woman to not enter a career she may have dreamed of going into but put her piety before the dunya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunya)
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Lady Comstock
What would your thoughts be if a group of African Americans walked around in rags and dangling chains in a hypothetical cultural practice descending from the slave trade? Or if a group of Jews decided to walk around with a yellow Star of David badge? Regardless of choice, would you not think it was an act of self-oppression?
What is being oppressed? If they are aware of the alternatives and still wish to engage in those practices, I don't see what the problem is.
Reply 94
Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons
Okay. So an oppressed person says they're not oppressed. Would you believe a woman who exhibits all the signs of being a victim of domestic violence when she claims she has a perfect relationship? No, because the signs of oppression are all there. Just like the burqa - the ultimate sign of a victim blaming, oppressive culture.


So even if someone says they don't feel oppressed you feel that it's your moral obligation to think for them instead? I don't think the Burqa should be allowed in public places/places which require identifiable features, but to say that you know a person better than themselves is sheer arrogance.
Reply 95
Original post by Lady Comstock
What would your thoughts be if a group of African Americans walked around in rags and dangling chains in a hypothetical cultural practice descending from the slave trade? Or if a group of Jews decided to walk around with a yellow Star of David badge? Regardless of choice, would you not think it was an act of self-oppression?

how is that self oppression. So would western women who dress very reveling be self oppression because they are making them selves sex objects. If that's the case can't everything be self oppression. Y is it not possible for people to do something because they want to. there are some non Muslim white western women who choose to wear the hijab, are they oppressed too. A lot of people in this country think they live a holier than thou and just because people in different countries choose to live a different lifestyle they are oppressed.
Reply 96
Original post by Amanbabbar./
Well, personally, I think, living in the UK where freedom of expression is a civil liberty, anyone and everyone should be able to express their religious beliefs, even if that does include wearing the Burqa, however, in airports, I do believe that women should remove their burqas so they can be identified and obviously checked like every other ordinary person...

freedom is the right way forward, Saudi Arabia is oppressive it forces women to do things against their will, France is the exact same, both countries victimize the women by dictating what they can and cannot wear.

I am not a woman, but a proud feminist.
Original post by rugbyfordinner
we cant ban something that interferes with social interaction, otherwise wed ban in entirety hoodies, goth make up etc etc that some people consider anti social too. being anti social maybe annoying and interfere with integration - but it isn't necessarily illegal. that is a n issue for the muslim community to deal with itssel- if it truly want to integrate in the west, get respect etc. But there are much bigger issues relateding to burkha veil etc, like people working in nhs, treating patients in the veil? wearing weil in court. a police officer wearing a veil - is it appropriate. there are socres of similar exapmples. these clothings of ritual were not designed for modern life, they were designed for a pre-medival life that was much more simple, less complex etc. Im not saying all the above probs are occurring now - but that's why we are having the debate - to establish the potential issues. My personal opinion- I don't see the sense of earing any such- as you said its only following the opinion of speficic people ie some' scholars' That doesn't translate to a religious obligation - anybody could form a cult and orer follwoers to dress in a certain way. Strictly Islamically speaking, If you are going on about obligation of women to cover up - what about obligation also in islam for women not even to be mixing with men in public - that is ignored (largely ) in western society, so why not dress code too?


I've already covered the issue of security and in places where it's neccesary for the face to be seen then, Islam would agree with you and most women who wear the veil would be happy to oblige. I think the link between the burqa being for pre-medieval times is tenuous and baseless. In fact, the woman who wrote the article is an example that a woman is capable of working as a molecular geneticist (I think it was) whilst wearing the Niqab.

It may be your personal opinion about something but that does not mean that anything should be discouraged or banned because you don't like it, that would be to oppress an individual. On the note of free mixing, it has nothing to do with the issue at hand and even if Muslims "ignore" it that doesn't mean we should abandon other aspects of our religion just to integrate. Even then, Muslims have no choice but to free mix- it's absolutely unavoidable (essentially we don't have a say and the majority of us are fine with that because we recognise that it'd be imposing our beliefs onto others who do not share our faith- which is completely wrong).
Original post by Lady Comstock
Well, it would almost be an act of symbolic self-flagellation which should surely be discouraged?
In my opinion, those practices were oppressive because there was not an alternative; they had to walk around in rags and chains/Stars of David whether they wanted to or not. The "self-" part is important: for whatever reason, they choose to engage in those practices voluntarily, so I believe they should be allowed to continue to do so.

There are recurring posts on this site by far-right people declaring Europeans have been brainwashed by left-wing propaganda and are orchestrating their own genocide by being in support of liberalism, multiculturalism, secularism, globalisation, etc. Conspiracy theorists may believe those who indulge in mainstream media are mindless drones who have been moulded by the Illuminati. Postgenderists might argue those who identify as male and female are oppressed into conforming to specific identity categories. I imagine there are communities of Amish people or Luddites who believe we are oppressed by using technology. I'm aware of the alternatives, but I still choose to engage in certain practices and hold certain values.

I accept that as somebody with an ideology, you would prefer other people to live their lives in a way that you consider to be the best way of doing things (thus, discouraging something like wearing a niqab). However, I don't accept the arguable contention (the connotations and reasons for engaging in a practice will vary) that it necessarily constitutes symbolic self-flagellation as sufficient warrant for a state-sanctioned ban. There is still the problem that anything can fall under the "X is oppressed by Y, but they're unaware of it" argument.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Amanbabbar./
Well, personally, I think, living in the UK where freedom of expression is a civil liberty, anyone and everyone should be able to express their religious beliefs, even if that does include wearing the Burqa, however, in airports, I do believe that women should remove their burqas so they can be identified and obviously checked like every other ordinary person...


If you care about civil liberties you should look at the liberal democrats, they are head and shoulders above labour and the conservatives which are authoritarian parties. Stronger Economy Fairer Society, vote Liberal Democrat.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending